Chapter 6 - Service delivery in fragile contexts

Sector strategies

Security and justice as basic services

Security and justice are both core state functions and essential services or ‘public goods’, often described as prerequisites for development. Restoring or building effective and reliable justice systems in post-conflict and fragile states is widely argued to be essential for preventing a renewal of violence. In fragile contexts, security and justice systems are often weakly institutionalised and frequently provided by non-state actors. Recent policy analysis has encouraged donors to support the state in engaging positively with non-state security and justice providers, and to draw on their strengths as legitimate actors at the community level.

Ball, N., Scheye, E. and Van de Goor, L., 2008, 'From Project to Program: Effective Programming for Security and Justice', Netherlands Institute of International Relations (Clingendael), The Hague  
Security and justice activities in fragile states involve considerable risk. In such environments, what is the way forward for reform? This report looks at security system reform (SSR) in fragile ‘post-conflict’ and fragile ‘rebuilding’ states. It suggests that donors should provide support in three linked stages, which would enable immediate needs to be met while longer-term programming is developed. An iterative approach would strengthen the relationship between state and non-state service providers and service users.
Access full text: available online

OECD, 2007, 'OECD DAC Handbook on Security Sector Reform: Supporting Security and Justice', OECD, Paris
How can the gap between policy and practice on Security Sector Reform (SSR) be closed? This handbook provides guidance on how to operationalise its guidelines on SSR. Addressing the challenges faced by all citizens to achieve personal safety, security and access to justice should be the key determining factor in evaluating the success or otherwise of donor support programmes.
Access full text: available online

Baker, B. and Scheye, E., 2007, 'Multi-Layered Justice and Security Delivery in Post-Conflict and Fragile States' Conflict, Security and Development, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 503-528
What is wrong with a state-centric approach to Security Sector Reform? This paper examines the value of an alternative approach to SSR policy, namely a multi-layered one in post-conflict and fragile state environments. It argues that there is a state-centric bias in current SSR policy and practice. This contradicts development principles of a ‘people-centred, locally owned’ approach in post-conflict and fragile state contexts. A more realistic and operationally sound method of attaining state-building and strengthening state capacities is imperative. Access full text: available online
Access full text: available online

Manning, D., 2010, ‘Supporting Stability and Justice: A case study of NGO legal services in post-conflict Bosnia-Herzegovina’ in Legal Empowerment: Practitioners’ Perspectives, S. Golub (ed.), International Development Law Organization, Rome
The international community struggles with the challenge of repairing the harms that haunt post-conflict societies, including restoring the homes, property and well-being of traumatised populations. The work of Vasa Prava, a non-governmental organisation in Bosnia-Herzegovina which provides legal services to the displaced and disadvantaged, constitutes a case study of success in a difficult context.
Access full text: available online

Further resources on security sector reform in conflict-affected and fragile states is available on the website of the Global Facilitation Network for Security Sector Reform. Further resources on justice in conflict-affected and fragile states can be found in the GSDRC’s justice guide.

Health in fragile contexts

Fragile environments are often characterised by weak and disrupted health systems. Health system strengthening (HSS) initiatives in fragile states typically aim not only to support the achievement of the health MDGs and national health targets but also to ensure that the delivery of national health services takes place in an equitable, accountable and sustainable manner despite the very difficult, often conflict-affected, contexts. Health systems strengthening is often co-ordinated through a Basic Package of Health Services, as recently demonstrated in Afghanistan.

Health and Fragile States Network, 2009, ‘Health Systems Strengthening in Fragile Contexts: A Report on Good Practices & New Approaches’,  Report funded by DFID
What are the best approaches to strengthening health systems in fragile states? This report surveys current health strategies in an attempt to test the feasibility of health system strengthening in fragile contexts and to shed light on emerging ‘good practices’ and challenges for health issues in these environments. Its findings suggest that while there is great diversity in the approaches taken to strengthen health systems, successful interventions share common elements of community integration, partnership, and long time horizons.
Access full text: available online

Oswald, S., and Clewett, J., 2007, ‘Delivering Health Services in Fragile States and Difficult Environments: 13 Key Principles’, Health Unlimited, London
What is needed to extend appropriate, effective healthcare to the under-served in fragile states and difficult environments? This paper argues that flexibility, understanding of a given context, the establishment of trust, and long-term commitment are key to improving health outcomes. Based on decades of experience of delivering healthcare to marginalised groups, this paper outlines 13 key principles aimed at policy makers and implementers. Case studies are drawn from six countries with large under-served populations (Burma/Myanmar, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Peru and Somaliland), but the results are applicable to all communities.
Access full text: available online

K Ranson et al, 2007, ‘Promoting Health Equity in Conflict-affected Fragile States’, prepared for the Health Systems Knowledge Network, Commission on Social Determinants and Health, World Health Organization, Geneva
What are the main factors that threaten health equity and health care equity in conflict-affected fragile states? What strategies can reduce the impact of these factors? This paper examines the impact of conflict and state fragility on health equity. It identifies the key drivers of health inequity in conflict-affected states, as well as some useful strategies for addressing equity in conflict and post-conflict settings.
Access full text: available online

Further resources

• DFID Health Resource Centre
• Health Systems 20/20: Health Systems 20/20 is engaging in work with USAID missions and other partners to support reconstruction and development in post conflict or otherwise fragile states.
• Health and Fragile States Network
• HLSP Institute: Health systems in fragile states
• Eldis: Health and fragile states dossier

Education in fragile contexts

It is estimated that fragile states account for over half of all children out of school in the world (International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP), 2009). In fragile contexts, education provides opportunities to increase social and economic stability and is vital for achieving economic growth and recovery, reducing poverty, and improving health, living conditions and livelihoods. But many agencies argue education is not being prioritised in humanitarian and development aid, and that donors are not living up to the promise of Education for All.

UNESCO, 2011, 'The Hidden Crisis: Armed Conflict and Education - Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2011', UNESCO
To what extent are the goals of Education for All being achieved in countries affected by armed conflict? This report shows that there is not only a lack of provision of education but also a failure to protect education systems and their students, and to devote sufficient funds to education in reconstruction and peacebuilding programmes. It argues that educational challenges in conflict-affected states are largely unreported, and that education in such contexts merits a far more central place on the international development agenda.
Access full text: available online

Save the Children, 2009, ‘Last in Line, Last in School: How Donors are Failing Children in Conflict-affected Fragile states, Save the Children, London
What are the recent trends in donor support for education for children living in conflict-affected fragile states (CAFS) and those caught up in emergencies? This third annual Last in Line, Last in School report finds that although donors have increased their focus on meeting the education needs of children in these countries and situations, there is still a long way to go. If trends continue, CAFS will not receive the levels of basic education aid needed to achieve the education Millennium Development Goal of universal primary education (UPE) until 2034.
Access full text: available online 

Rose, P. and Greeley, M., 2006, 'Education in Fragile States: Capturing Lessons and Identifying Good Practice', prepared for the DAC Fragile States Group Service Delivery Workstream Sub-Team for Education Services, Centre for International Education, University of Sussex, Brighton
This paper looks at how development assistance in fragile states can enhance access to education for the poor and vulnerable, improve governance and increase aid effectiveness. It recommends strengthening the evidence base, principles, monitoring and evaluation, and co-ordination of work in this area.
Access full text: available online 

Berry, C., 2009, 'A Framework for Assessing the Effectiveness of the Delivery of Education Aid in Fragile States', Journal of Education for International Development, Volume 4, Number 1, pp.1-12
How can the effectiveness of education aid in fragile states be assessed and improved? This paper presents an assessment framework based on OECD principles of co-ordination, state-building and 'do no harm'. The framework is applied to four approaches to education aid (sector-wide approaches, trust funds, social funds, and UN-led approaches). No single approach will provide all the answers. Planning structures that include a wide range of stakeholders are particularly important in fragile state contexts.
Access full text: available online

Miller-Grandvaux, Y., 2009, ‘Education and Fragility: A New Framework’, Journal of Education for International Development, 4:1
The Education and Fragility Framework positions education at the center of four key areas of influence related to economic, governance, security and social domains. Education is viewed within the context of specific root causes of fragility or conflict such as organised violence, corruption, exclusion and elitism, transitional dynamics, insufficient capacity and public disengagement. Each of these issues can be addressed through education. In all cases, the premise is that if education can contribute to a given driver of fragility, it can also contribute to finding its remedy and thus to promoting stability.
Access full text: available online

International Institute for Educational Planning, 2011, ‘Understanding Education's Role in Fragility – Synthesis of Four Situational Analyses of Education and Fragility: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, Liberia’, IIEP Research Paper, INEE Working Group on Education and Fragility, UNESCO/IIEP, Paris
This report finds that education can have both negative and positive impacts on fragility. Education planning needs to consider these potential impacts. Education programming can mitigate fragility by; strengthening the education system itself; improving the capacity of individuals and groups to cope with fragility; and targeting the context of fragility (such as by promoting nation-building and good citizenship).
Access full text: available online

Sigsgaard, M., ed., 2011, ‘On the Road to Resilience: Capacity Development with the Ministry of Education in Afghanistan’, Education in Emergencies and Reconstruction, UNESCO/IIEP, Paris
This book documents lessons learned in building education planning capacity in Afghanistan during the past ten years. It includes case studies of capacity development partnerships between Afghanistan’s Ministry of Education and a number of education partners.
Access full text: available online

Further resources

• International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP) resources on education in emergencies and reconstruction.
• Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies
• International Institute for Educational Planning

Water and sanitation in fragile contexts

Fragile states are often unable to provide water services to the majority of their people, especially the poor. Many argue the water sector is a good entry point for state-building activities in fragile states, since it is non-ideological and generally in high demand. Much of the literature encourages donors to balance short-term (humanitarian) with medium to long-term support, and to develop the capacity of the state to undertake a supervisory and regulatory role regarding small, non-state providers of water and sanitation services.

Plummer, J., and Slaymaker, T., 2007, ‘Rethinking Governance in Water Services, Annex A: Key Issues: A Thinkpiece for DFID Policy Division’, DFID, London 
Access full text: available online

Welle, K., 2008, ‘Improving the Provision of Basic Services for the Poor in Fragile Environments: Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene’, International Literature Review’, Overseas Development Institute, London
How can donors and partner governments best support the provision of water, sanitation and hygiene in fragile environments? This literature review is one of three sectoral reports from the Overseas Development Institute on service delivery in fragile states. It confirms that water supply service delivery in fragile states remains limited. Documentation on sanitation and hygiene issues in these environments is virtually non-existent. The water sector is a good entry point for state-building, but approaches depend on the type and context of state fragility.
Access full text: available online

New additions