Document Library

Key Text Fragile States: Defining Difficult Environments for Poverty Reduction

Author: M Moreno Torres and M Anderson
Date: 2004
Size: 34 pages (318KB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

Fragile states take many forms. What is the most useful way of defining them? This paper, by UK Government's Department for International Development (DFID), adopts a definition of 'difficult environments' grounded in the role of the state in development effectiveness. The definition is both linked to the wider debate about fragile states and at the same time focuses the challenge on donor-recipient relationships for poverty reduction.

In recent years there has been a growing concern over the impact of weak or ineffective states. State effectiveness is important for growth and human development. It is also important for aid effectiveness. The range of problems associated with weak or ineffective states is broad and includes poverty, conflict and humanitarian crises, human rights violations, global security threats and weakened international systems. Difficult environments are defined as "those areas where the state is unable or unwilling to harness domestic and international resources effectively for poverty reduction."

The difficult environments definitional approach to state fragility looks specifically at the challenges for development and poverty reduction. It is firmly located in the so-called Monterrey model of development, which calls for better international partnerships to resolve today's global human development challenges. The key challenge highlighted by this definition is how to make development aid effective in places that lack basic levels of state capacity and commitment to poverty reduction. 'Capacity' means the core features that most strongly influence the state's ability to mobilise and use resources for poverty reduction.

When assessing the willingness of a state to engage in partnerships for poverty reduction, there are two closely related notions. First, an explicit political commitment to policies aimed at promoting human welfare should be reflected in actions and outcomes. Second, there should be an inclusive approach that does not exclude particular social groups from the benefits of development. Based on these two key concepts, there are four broad types of environments:

The 'Monterrey' cases of strong capacity and reasonable political will.
The 'weak but willing' category where government capacity is an obstacle to implementing policy.
The 'strong but unresponsive' states where state capacity is directed to achieving development goals.
The 'weak-weak' cases where both state capacity and political will are lacking.

Real cases will be mixes of these stylised types and a typology does not substitute for context specific political analysis. In real cases, an awareness of political cycles and the linkages between political, social and economic institutions can be key issues for donors. Different types of difficult environments will warrant different policies and approaches but overall:

A typology may help point out distinguishing features.
Where governments are lacking in either capacity or political will, or both, traditional aid partnerships will be more difficult to sustain.
Aid effectiveness in those environments may depend on different donor instruments and policies.
Discerning the most important elements of state effectiveness is the first step in setting out more effective donor engagement strategies.

Access full text: available online

Source: Moreno-Torres, M. & Anderson, M., 2004, ‘Fragile States: Defining Difficult Environments for Poverty Reduction’, Department for International Development (DFID), United Kingdom
Author: Magui Moreno Torres , m-moreno-torres@dfid.gov.uk
Department for International Development (DFID), http://www.dfid.gov.uk