Search results

Introduction: The view from below -- Below the surface -- Self-understandings versus power -- The dilemma of migration -- Sites for building bridges -- The plague of politics -- Implications for Eurasia

Qualitative studies featuring in-depth research have recently pushed back against characterizations of citizens in post-conflict Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH) as passive. After mobilizations in 2014, how do citizens in BiH engage in public action, and what factors explain their public participation? This article uses data from an original, nationally representative survey to depict civic engagement and investigate the proposition that citizens engage in civic action when these efforts address their primary concerns—everyday social problems, rather than abstract political ideals. In addition, this article draws on interviews to probe whether civic activists incorporate citizens' priority concerns in developing strategies for increasing public participation in their work. It finds that most citizens cite their motivation for civic action as tackling concrete everyday problems and helping those in need. Statistical analysis indicates that while the segment of the population that supports civic engagement on conservative values is small, this portion is more likely than the larger portion supporting civic engagement on intractable socio-economic problems to take action. Interviews with civic activists point not only to their efforts to engage citizens by acknowledging their concerns but also to challenges in connecting with citizens. This systematic investigation depicts the nuances of and contradictions in citizen participation in BiH. Citizens engage at modest levels and are often motivated by the norm of helping those vulnerable and addressing everyday problems. However, the small segment of the population concerned about conservative values is more effectively mobilized than a large segment prioritizing socio-economic concerns.

Why has international investment into reforming local governance in post‐conflict societies produced mixed results? Drawing on new institutionalism, the authors expect reform outcomes, even of comprehensive assistance, to be shaped by the interaction between new and old rules, an interaction mediated by local elites. This expectation is explored in three pairs of comparable municipalities in Bosnia‐Herzegovina. Using data collected through field research and an original index of local government performance, we find that most municipalities achieved incremental improvements in performance between 2005 and 2010. Differences can be explained by the varying endurance of old informal rules that antagonistically coexist with and undermine internationally proposed rules, as well as by the varying strength of local opponents of reform. The implication is that more effective promotion of local government performance requires more attention to and a long‐term approach to minimizing the constraints posed by informal rules and local actors opposed to reform.