Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

State-Building in Fragile States: An Assessment Toolkit.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "State-Building in Fragile States: An Assessment Toolkit."— Presentation transcript:

1 State-Building in Fragile States: An Assessment Toolkit

2 CONTEXT  Ongoing, increased challenge of state fragility  WDR 2011 has moved the consensus and knowledge on the role of donors in FCS forward, BUT  Challenges of operationalization and persisting weaknesses in donor approaches to state-building:   Toolkit on State-Building in Fragile States: ◦ Overarching 'Guidance Note’ ◦ Interactive E-Tool (excel-based) ◦ 'How To' Note on how to use the Tool ◦ Set of 'State Building at a Glance' indicators, ◦ Working / background paper reviewing literature underpinning the approach 2

3 Toolkit on State-Building in Fragile States  Offers country and donor teams: ◦A common ‘language’ or framework for approaching/ understanding fundamental state-building issues ◦A structured and guided process for collectively an consistently discussing and assessing state-building challenges and their implications for country programming  Toolkit CAN: ◦Help teams arrive at a common understanding on state- building challenges and implications for country programming ◦Help ‘surface’ some of the difficult state-building challenges that often are passed over ◦Help identify areas for further in-depth investigation (via PEA and other analytical instruments/ approaches)  Toolkit CANNOT provide definitive answers (if you find X, then do Y) 3

4 4 Overview - Conceptual framework 1.Social and Political Context: Nature and Context of Fragility 2.3 core dimensions/ characteristics of functioning states and institutions: Authority, Capacity, Legitimacy (ACL) 3.4 ‘domains’ where these dimensions play out: constitutive/survival domains (security, political/ government), and output/expected domains (economic, social service delivery) 4.A myriad of institutions that contribute to outcomes in the four domains  Each institution will have its own authority-capacity-legitimacy (ACL) challenges

5 5 THE ACL FRAMEWORK – CORE CONCEPTS Effective Public Authority Authority (A) : The ability of the state to govern its territory effectively, reach all citizens regardless of their location, maintain law and order and protect citizens from predation and violence. It is the ability of the laws and rules of the state to trump all other laws and rules. Capacity (C) : The ability of the state to deliver goods and services, procure goods and services, design and implement policies, build infrastructure, collect revenue, dispense justice, and maintain a conducive environment for the private sector. Legitimacy (L): Whether citizens feel the government has the right to govern – and whether they trust the government. (Both performance and process matter)

6 Macro-/Structural Level Specific Institutions & Organizations 4. INSTITUTIONAL & ORGANIZATIONAL ASSESSMENT 3. DOMAIN LEVEL ASSESSMENT 2. STRATEGIC LEVEL ASSESSMENT 1. SOCIAL & POLITICAL CONTEXT AUTHORITY (A) CAPACITY (C) LEGITIMACY (L) SECURITY POL/ GVT ECONOMIC SOC/ SERV DEL. A C L SECURITY INSTIT. 1. Core security instit. 2. Justice instit. 3. Etc. POL/ GVT. INSTIT. Structural Causes of Fragility Elite and social cleavages Political settlement, political system and social contract

7 7 Over view – State-Building Assessment Tool (SBAT) Excel-based Tool guides teams step by step through the assessment process Each step includes questions or ‘prompts’ to help teams: ◦Assess the ACL of the state or of key institutions at the respective level and identify state-building needs based on this assessment ◦Assess what the government, the Bank, and the international community are doing to address these needs ◦Identify the implications of the assessment for the Bank’s portfolio in terms of risks, priorities and next steps

8 4. INSTITUTIONAL & ORGANIZATIONAL ASSESSMENT 3. DOMAIN LEVEL ASSESSMENT AnalysisPractice 4. OPERATIONAL IMPLICATIONS 3. STRATEGIC & OPERATIONAL IMPLICATIONS 2. STRATEGIC & OPERATIONAL IMPLICATIONS State-Building Implications Implications for the Bank portfolio and partnerships Risk implications State-Building Implications Implications for the Bank portfolio and partnerships Risk implications Prioritization Implications for the Bank portfolio and partnerships Risk implications Prioritization Macro-/Structural Level Specific Institutions & Organizations 2. STRATEGIC LEVEL ASSESSMENT 1. SOCIAL & POLITICAL CONTEXT AUTHORITY (A) CAPACITY (C) LEGITIMACY (L) SECURITY POL/ GVT ECONOMIC SOC/ SERV DEL. A C L SECURITY INSTIT. 1. Core security instit. 2. Justice instit. 3. Etc. POL/ GVT. INSTIT. Structural Causes of Fragility Elite and social cleavages Political settlement, political system and social contract

9 9 How to use the SBAT Team-based assessment and planning tool  workshop of 1 to 4 days (depending on version used) Needs: ◦Team contact person + facilitator for planning, conducting and following up on the workshop ◦Ideally: work in groups of max 5-6 people ◦Laptop(s) + Projector(s)

10 10 Purpose and Options for Customization The SBAT is best used to inform the development of country strategies in FCS (ISNs or CASs), but it can be ‘customized’ to meet a variety of needs. E.g.: 1.Joint donor assessments. 2.Focus on a specific sector or domain. 3.Use for sub-national authorities. 4.Use with government and/ or civil society representatives. 5.Use in other low- and middle-income countries.

11 11 Conclusion Not just ‘another’ analytical tool:  ◦Focuses more directly on the state and what the Bank and its partners can do to strengthen it ◦Takes a systematic approach of linking different levels of assessment:  From the macro-/ strategic level to individual institutions and organizations  From analysis to strategic and operational implications ◦Offers a conceptual framework or a ‘common language’ on state- building. ◦Generates a common team-based experience of linking analysis to operational implications ◦Can 'surface' many of the difficult issues and diverse viewpoints about state-building that often are left unnoticed ◦Offers (some) suggestions for strategic and operational choices for supporting state-building Structured guidance for systematic team discussion of state-building challenges and implications

12 The SBAT in detail

13 13 Step 1. Assess the Social and Political Context To understand to nature and the causes of fragility 1.Structural Causes – e.g. ethnic or religious divisions, economic inequality 2.Elite cleavages 3.Social cleavages/ social cohesion 4.Political Settlement/ Political System 5.Social Contract/ Citizen-State Relations ◦Reflection of key drivers of fragility in the four domains of governance ◦Key issues, risks and expected evolution over time Sets the stage for considering the state and its institutions with their overall socio-political context

14 14 TAB 1: POLITICAL & SOCIAL CONTEXT OVERALL NATURE AND CAUSES OF STATE FRAGILITY KEY ISSUES - DRIVERS OF FRAGILITY KEY RISKS - POTENTIAL "STRESSES"/"TRIGGERS" CURRENT STATUSEXPECTED TRENDS Structural causes of fragility What is/ are the fundamental cause(s) of fragility (e.g. economic/ religious/ territorial disputes etc.)? What (kind of) events, changes in key variables etc. could exacerbate these causes and lead to the (re-)emergence of conflict? How likely are they? How 'severe' are these structural causes? How do you expect these causes to evolve over time ? Insert Assessment Here Critical/ Moderate/ Mild/ N/A Select one option Improving/No change/Worsening? Select one option Elite cleavages Who are the key elite groups and what is their power basis? How do they bargain with each other? How credible are their agreements; is there an 'elite pact'/ 'political settlement'? How are rents, power, resources etc. distributed? What (kind of) events, changes in key variables etc. could exacerbate these causes and lead to the (re-)emergence of conflict? How likely are they? How severe are elite cleavages? How do you expect these cleavages to evolve over time ? Insert Assessment Here Critical/ Moderate/ Mild/ N/A Select one option Improving/No change/Worsening? Select one option Societal cleavages/ Social Cohesion What/ who are the key social groups (e.g. ethnic religious etc.)? What is the relationship between them/ how do they relate to each other? Are some groups sistematically excluded/ marginalized? What (kind of) events, changes in key variables etc. could exacerbate these causes and lead to the (re-)emergence of conflict? How likely are they? How severe are social cleavages? How do you expect these cleavages to evolve over time ? Insert Assessment Here Critical/ Moderate/ Mild/ N/A Select one option Improving/No change/Worsening? Select one option 'Political Settlement'/ Political System How robust is the political settlement? (How) Is it institutionalized through the political system? (How) does the political system mitigate or reinforce/ amplify elite and social divisions? What (kind of) events, changes in key variables etc. could exacerbate these causes and lead to the (re-)emergence of conflict? How likely are they? How robust is the political settlement? How do you expect the [robustness of ] the political settlement - as embedded in the political system - to evolve over time? Insert Assessment Here Strong/Medium/ Weak? Select one option Improving/No change/Worsening? Select one option 'Social Contract'/ Citizen-State Relations What is the relationship between citizens and the state? (How) can citizens articulate their expectations and (how) responsive is the state to these expectations? How institutionalized is this relationship through the political system? What (kind of) events, changes in key variables etc. could exacerbate these causes and lead to the (re-)emergence of conflict? How likely are they? How robust is the social contract? How do you expect citizen-state relations to evolve over time? Insert Assessment Here Strong/Medium/ Weak? Select one option Improving/No change/Worsening? Select one option Conclusion/ Summary Based on the above, what are the key issues arising from your consideration of the nature and causes of fragility? What are the most likely key risks/ potential stresses? How severe is fragility ? How do you expect this fragility to evolve over time? Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 2] High Fragility/ Medium Fragility/ Low Fragility? Select one option Increasing Fragility/No Change/Decreasing Fragility? Select one option

15 15 CAUSES & NATURE OF SECTORAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAGILITY KEY ISSUES - DRIVERS OF FRAGILITYKEY INSTITUTIONS KEY RISKS - POTENTIAL "STRESSES"/"TRIGGERS" Security system/ institutions How are the drivers of fragility, including elite and social cleavages reflected in the security sector? What are the key institutions "to watch" in the security sector - which ones are the most important for state fragility or resilience? Do they have the capacity to mitigate these drivers of fragility or do they reflect/ exacerbate them? What (kind of) events, changes in key variables etc. could undermine institutional stability in this sector? How likely are they? Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.1] Political/ Gvt System/ Institutions How are the drivers of fragility, including elite and social cleavages reflected in the political/ government sector? What are the key institutions "to watch" in the political/ gvt sector - which ones are the most important for state fragility or resilience? Do they have the capacity to mitigate these drivers of fragility or do they reflect/ exacerbate them? What (kind of) events, changes in key variables etc. could undermine institutional stability in this sector? How likely are they? Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.2] Economic System/ Institutions How are the drivers of fragility, including elite and social cleavages reflected in the economic sector? What are the key institutions "to watch"? Do they have the capacity to mitigate these stresses or do they reflect/ exacerbate them? What are the key institutions "to watch" in the economic sector - which ones are the most important for state fragility or resilience? Do they have the capacity to mitigate these drivers of fragility or do they reflect/ exacerbate them? What (kind of) events, changes in key variables etc. could undermine institutional stability in this sector? How likely are they? Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.3] Service delivery system/ Institutions How are the drivers of fragility, including elite and social cleavages reflected in the service delivery sector? What are the key institutions "to watch"? Do they have the capacity to mitigate these stresses or do they reflect/ exacerbate them? What are the key institutions "to watch" in the security sector - which ones are the most important for state fragility or resilience? Do they have the capacity to mitigate these drivers of fragility or do they reflect/ exacerbate them? What (kind of) events, changes in key variables etc. could undermine institutional stability in this sector? How likely are they? Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.4]

16 16 Step 2. Strategic/ Overall Country-Level Assessment To get an overall picture of the state’s authority, capacity and legitimacy ◦‘Flags’ issues for further assessment at the next stages ◦Can highlight some macro-level risks and strategic implications for teams  E.g. if the state has high legitimacy due to political inclusion, but low capacity to deliver services that are increasingly demanded by the population, then ‘flag’ building capacity for service delivery as a key issue to keep in mind for the following steps.

17 17 TAB 2: OVERALL STRATEGIC LEVEL ASSESSMENT POLITICAL AND SOCIAL CONTEXT: ROOTS OF FRAGILITY KEY ISSUESKEY RISKSCURRENT STATUSEXPECTED TRENDS Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 2] High Fragility/ Medium Fragility/ Low Fragility? Select one option Increasing Fragility/No Change/Decreasing Fragility? Select one option ANALYTICAL INPUTS STATEBUILDING ASSESSMENTHIGH-LEVEL STRATEGIC & OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT & IMPLICATIONS AUTHORITY [A] CAPACITY/EFFECTIVENE SS [C] LEGITIMACY [L] STATE FRAGILITY/ RESILIENCE GOVERNMEN T PRIORITIES CURRENT WB PORTFOLIO OTHER DONOR/ INTERNATION AL PORTFOLIO RISKSNEXT STEPS What analytical products are available/ planned/ needed for this assessment (e.g. PEAs, CAFs/ CSAs etc)? Q. Considering your assessment of the roots of fragility, to what extent is the state able to govern its territory effectively, reach all citizens regardless of their location, maintain law and order and protect citizens from predation and violence? Do the laws and rules of the state trump all other laws and rules? Q. Considering your assessment of the roots of fragility, to what extent is the state able to deliver goods and services, procure goods and services, design and implement policies, build infrastructure, collect revenue, dispense justice, and maintain a conducive environment for the private sector? Q. Considering your assessment of the roots of fragility, to what extent do citizens feel that the government has the right to govern? Do they trust the government? Based on this ACL assessment, what are the key issues for state- building? How/ to what extent does the gvt address these issues? How/ to what extent does the current WB portfolio address these issues ? How/ to what extent do the other donors' and international partners' portfolio(s) address these issues? What are the implications of this assessment for (country) risks idenitifed (e.g. in the ORAF)? What can your team do to address the state-building issues identified here? (eg: through WB portfolio, partnerships with other donors, dialogue with the government, etc)? High/Medium/Low? Select one option Rising/Stable/Falling? Select one option Insert List HereInsert Assessment Here

18 18 Step 3. Domain Level Assessment ‘Disaggregating’ ACL in the four domains of governance (security, political/ gvt., economic, and social/ service delivery) - Helps to: ◦See in which domain and dimension the state performs better or worse  Suggestions for indicators to help assess the state’s authority, capacity and legitimacy in each domain ◦  get a more disaggregated picture of ‘meso-level’ challenges and implications for country programming ◦  assign priorities to each domain (if possible/ desired) ◦Identify sector-level risks and priorities Some suggestions for strategic/ operational options to consider in each domain + further literature included in toolbox

19 19 TAB 3: STATE DOMAIN LEVEL ASSESSMENT Click Here to Go to Tab 5.1: Country Snapshot Sheet To see indicators suggested for each cell of the State-Building Assessment below, please see FCS, State- building at a Glance Sheet or refer to to Indicators Spreadsheet in Toolkit Click Here to Go to Tab 5.2: Country Summary Sheet Click Here to Go to Tab 6: State Domains - Operational Suggestions & Sources ANALYTICAL INPUTS STATEBUILDING ASSESSMENTSTRATEGIC & OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT & IMPLICATIONS AUTHORITY [A] CAPACITY/EFFECTI VENESS [C] LEGITIMACY [L] STATE FRAGILITY/RESILIE NCE GOVERNMEN T PRIORITIES CURRENT WB PORTFOLIO OTHER DONOR/ INT'NATIONAL PORTFOLIO RISKSNEXT STEPS Constitutive Domains/ Survival Functions SECURITY What analytical products are available/ planned/ needed for this assessment (e.g. PEA, CSA, CFA)? Does the state's monopoly of force extend over the entire territory/ all people living within its borders? Does the state have a monopoly of force to the extent that there is limited crime or armed conflict? Is the way in which the state delivers security perceived as legitimate? Is the state perceived as the only legitimate source of security? Based on this ACL assessment, what are the key issues for state-building in the security domain? How/ to what extent does the gvt address these issues? How/ to what extent does the current WB portfolio address these issues ? How/ to what extent do the other donors' and international partners' portfolio(s) address these issues? What are the implications of this assessment for (country or sector) risks idenitifed (e.g. in the ORAF)? What are the next steps for your team to strengthen this domain (eg: through WB portfolio, partnerships with other donors etc)? MediumLowMedium Rising Falling 1st priority Addresses partially Does not address Addresses partially High risk2nd priority Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.1] POLITICAL/ GOVERNMENT What analytical products are available for this assessment (e.g. PE analyses, previous CAS, ISN, etc)? Are people loyal to the state over other groups? Is this loyalty based on a shared sense of national identity? Do people recognize the authority of the government currently in power? How effective are core government systems (executive/ the legislative or similar/ the judiciary) at making and enforcing decisions? Is the way government makes and enforces decisions perceived as legitimate? Based on this ACL assessment, what are the key issues for state-building? How/ to what extent does the gvt address these issues? How/ to what extent does the current WB portfolio address these issues ? How/ to what extent do the other donors' and international partners' portfolio(s) address these issues? What are the implications of this assessment for (country or sector) risks idenitifed (e.g. in the ORAF)? What are the next steps for your team to strengthen this domain (eg: through WB portfolio, partnerships with other donors etc)? Low Medium Rising Stable 2nd priority Addresses partially Addresses to a large degree Substantial risk1st priority Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.2]

20 20 Step 4. INSTITUTIONAL assessment List of ‘typical’ institutions for each domain: ◦Prompts to determine ACL of the listed institutions ◦Option to add country-specific institutions that are not listed  generic questions that can be applied/ adapted to any institution Helps to: ◦Identify key institutions and their strengths and weaknesses in terms of ACL ◦  assign priorities and develop more fine-grained, ‘micro-level’ operational options/ implications for country programming Some general suggestions on strengthening ACL of institutions ◦e.g. align de jure and de facto authority, build capacity of organizations not just individuals etc.

21 21 TAB 4.2 POLITICAL/GOVERNMENT: INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL ASSESSMENT Click Here to Go to Tab 5.1: Country Snapshot Sheet POLITICAL AND SOCIAL CONTEXT: SECTOR-LEVEL FRAGILITY Click Here to Go to Tab 5.2: Country Summary Sheet KEY ISSUESKEY INSTITUTIONSKEY RISKS Click Here to Go to Tab 6: State Domains - Operational Suggestions & Sources Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.2] GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENTSTRATEGIC & OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT & IMPLICATIONS AUTHORITY [A] CAPACITY/EFFECTIVENE SS [C] LEGITIMACY [L] INSTITUTIONAL FRAGILITY/RESI LIENCE GOVERNMENT PRIORITIES CURRENT WB PORTFOLIO OTHER DONOR PORTFOLIO RISKSNEXT STEPS Political/ Gvt. Domain Low Medium 2nd priority Addresses partially Addresses to a large degree Substantial risk1st priority Rising Stable Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.2] Executive Institutions - Public Financial Management How much de jure and de facto authority do PFM institutions have? How far does this authority extend? What percentage of national resource flows do such institutions control? How much capacity do PFM institutions have to fulfill (basic) PFM functions? Where are the most severe capacity constraints (e.g. lack of qualified staff, lack of organizational structures, lack of authorizing legislation, lack of/ misaligned incentives)? How much trust do citizens/ various social groups/ key elites have in the state about the level and distribution of public expenditures and the sources/ composition of revenues? Do people have trust in the most visible revenue collection, budget preparation and execution institutions? Based on this assessment, what are the key issues for strenghtening this/ these institution(s)? How/ to what extent does the government address these issues? How/ to what extent does the current WB portfolio address these issues ? How/ to what extent do the other donors' and international partners' portfolio(s) address these issues? What are the implications of this assessment for (esp. implementing agency) risks idenitifed (e.g. in the ORAF)? What are the next steps/ specific actions for your team to strengthen this institution? MediumHighLow StableFallingRising1st priority Addresses partially Addresses to a large degree Does not addressSubstantial risk1st priority Insert Relevant Institutions Here Insert Assessment Here Civil Service/General Public Administration Institutions How far does the civil service/ public administration extend over the entire territory? How much authority does it have? How much capacity does the civil service have in terms of human and financial resources, organizational structures, legislative framework, incentive structure etc. to fulfill its functions? How much trust do citizens have in the civil service/ public servants/ public administration? Is the lack of trust due to an inability to make and enforce decisions, corruption, lack of representation/ inclusion etc.? Based on this assessment, what are the key issues for strenghtening this/ these institution(s)? How/ to what extent does the government address these issues? How/ to what extent does the current WB portfolio address these issues ? How/ to what extent do the other donors' and international partners' portfolio(s) address these issues? What are the implications of this assessment for (esp. implementing agency) risks idenitifed (e.g. in the ORAF)? What are the next steps/ specific actions for your team to strengthen this institution? LowMediumHigh Rising Falling2nd priorityDoes not address Addresses to a large degree Addresses partially Low risk1st priority Insert Relevant Institutions Here Insert Assessment Here

22 22 Step 5: Country Snapshot and Summary To get an overall – integrated – picture of the assessment and the implications ◦Snapshot: all color-based ratings ◦Summary: text for key issues for state stability and resilience and next steps for the Bank Review: ◦Quick ‘glimpse’ of key challenges, priorities, next steps etc. ◦Ensure consistency – revisit assessments where necessary

23 TAB 5.1 COUNTRY SNAPSHOT[INSERT COUNTRY NAME HERE] * This sheet provides a quick snapshot of the state-building & fragility assessment completed by using this tool in the previous tabs. For more detailed information for each level of the state-building assessment, please refer to the respective tabs. POLITICAL AND SOCIAL CONTEXT: NATURE AND CAUSES OF FRAGILITY KEY ISSUESKEY RISKSCURRENT STATUSEXPECTED TRENDS Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 2] Medium FragilityIncreasing Fragility OVERALL STRATEGIC LEVEL OVERALL STRATEGIC LEVEL STATEBUILDING ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY [A] CAPACITY/EFFECTIVENES S [C] LEGITIMACY [L] MediumLowHigh FallingRisingFalling SECURITY DOMAIN AND INSTITUTIONS STATEBUILDING ASSESSMENTSTRATEGIC & OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT & IMPLICATIONS AUTHORITY [A] CAPACITY/EFFECTIVENES S [C] LEGITIMACY [L] STATE FRAGILITY/RESILIENC E GOVERNMENT PRIORITIES CURRENT WB PORTFOLIO OTHER DONOR/ INT'NATIONAL PORTFOLIO RISKSNEXT STEPS MediumLowMedium 1st priorityAddresses partiallyDoes not addressAddresses partiallyHigh risk2nd priority Rising Falling Core Security Institutions (e.g. military, police, etc) Medium Low 1st priorityAddresses partiallyN/AAddresses partiallyHigh riskN/A MilitaryStableRisingFalling Justice & Rule of Law Institutions LowMediumLow 1st priorityAddresses partiallyAddresses to a large degreeAddresses partiallySubstantial risk1st priority JudiciaryRisingStableRising Management and Oversight Bodies Low 2nd priorityDoes not addressN/ADoes not addressHigh riskN/A Ntl Security CouncilStableRisingStable Security-related PFM Institutions LowMediumLow 3rd priorityAddresses partiallyAddresses to a large degreeDoes not addressMedium risk2nd priority MoFRisingStableRising Local authorities; Civil Society Institions Low 4th priorityDoes not addressAddresses partiallyAddresses to a large degreeMedium risk3rd priority HR NGOsStableRisingStable Other Relevant InstitutionsMediumLowHigh 3rd priorityAddresses to a large degreeN/ADoes not addressLow riskN/A PoliceRisingStableFalling

24 24 TAB 5.2 COUNTRY SNAPSHOT[INSERT COUNTRY NAME HERE] * This sheet provides a quick snapshot of the state-building & fragility assessment completed by using this tool in the previous tabs. For more detailed information for each level of the state-building assessment, please refer to the respective tabs. POLITICAL AND SOCIAL CONTEXT: ROOTS OF FRAGILITY KEY ISSUESKEY RISKSCURRENT STATUSEXPECTED TRENDS Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 2] Medium FragilityIncreasing Fragility OVERALL STRATEGIC LEVEL STATEBUILDING ASSESSMENTSTRATEGIC & OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT & IMPLICATIONS OVERALL STRATEGIC LEVEL AUTHORITY [A] CAPACITY/EFFECTIVENESS [C] LEGITIMACY [L] STATE FRAGILITY/RESILIENCE DEGREE OF RISKNEXT STEPS MediumLowHigh Insert Assessment Here FallingRisingFalling STATE DOMAIN LEVEL STATEBUILDING ASSESSMENTSTRATEGIC & OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT & IMPLICATIONS STATE DOMAIN LEVEL AUTHORITY [A] CAPACITY/EFFECTIVENESS [C] LEGITIMACY [L] STATE FRAGILITY/RESILIENCE DEGREE OF RISKNEXT STEPS RECOMMENDED PRIORITY LEVEL FOR NEXT STEPS SECURITY MediumLowMedium Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.1] High risk Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.1] 2nd prioritySECURITY Rising Falling POLITICAL/ GOVERNMENT Low Medium Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.2] Substantial risk Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.2] 1st priority POLITICAL/ GOVERNMENT Rising Stable ECONOMIC MediumLowMedium Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.3] Substantial risk Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.3] 3rd priorityECONOMIC StableRising SOCIAL/SERVICE DELIVERY MediumLowStable Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.4] Low risk Insert Assessment Here [Copied to Tab 4.4] 2nd priority SOCIAL/SERVIC E DELIVERY Rising Stable INSTITUTIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL STATEBUILDING ASSESSMENTSTRATEGIC & OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT & IMPLICATIONS INSTITUTIONAL AND ORGANIZATION AL LEVEL SECURITY INSTITUTIONSAUTHORITY [A] CAPACITY/EFFECTIVENESS [C] LEGITIMACY [L] STATE FRAGILITY/RESILIENCE DEGREE OF RISKNEXT STEPS RECOMMENDED PRIORITY LEVEL FOR NEXT STEPS SECURITY INSTITUTIONS Core Security Institutions (e.g. military, police, etc) Medium Low Insert Assessment Here High risk Insert Assessment Here N/A Core Security Institutions (e.g. military, police, etc) MilitaryStableRisingFalling Insert Assessment Here Justice & Rule of Law Institutions LowMediumLow Insert Assessment Here Substantial risk Insert Assessment Here 1st priority Justice & Rule of Law Institutions JudiciaryRisingStableRising Insert Assessment Here


Download ppt "State-Building in Fragile States: An Assessment Toolkit."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google