IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/diebps/102010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

State fragility indices: potentials, messages and limitations

Author

Listed:
  • Ziaja, Sebastian
  • Fabra, Javier

Abstract

Measuring state fragility across countries may at first sight seem a purely academic exercise. Yet, the measurementof fragility is a prerequisite for adequately dealing with fragile states in the first place. Decision makers and development practitioners have come to acknowledge that effectively reducing poverty is not possible without “fixing” fragile states. Fragile states lack core state functions, most importantly the maintenance of security and basic administration. In such a deficient environment, international donors do not encounter capable governments – the most important partners to implement development-oriented reforms. Certain aid instruments are assumed to be less effective under these circumstances, and some actors argue that standard development approaches do not work well in fragile states. Fragility indices could be of use for development policy as a tool for • determining which countries need a different aid approach; • monitoring larger trends of global political stability; • evaluating the overall impact of development aid; • and for investigating the dynamics of state fragility. All of these applications could make aid to fragile countries more efficient. While most of today’s knowledge on state fragility is based on case studies, quantitative approaches could generate more generalizable findings to inform future policies. The applications listed above – especially the latter two, which refer to the causes and consequences of state fragility – presuppose very precise easurements. So what can the currently available indices tell us? All of them try to identify the most fragile countries, and they agree in many cases, including Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan. These countries do not come as a surprise, however. Indices would have to incorporate other features – especially a high degree of precision regarding the distinction of the remaining countries – should they aspire to provide an added value compared with ad-hoc classifications based on common sense. Upon closer examination, one also finds differences in how indices classify certain countries. They do not agree on cases such as Cuba and North Korea, both authoritarian but reasonably capable states. The indices' discrepancy brings forward a fundamental question regarding the nature of authoritarian states: Must repressive but stable regimes be considered fragile, just because it is assumed that, in the long run, they will not be able to accommodate social demands as democracies can? We argue that such a classification obscures more than it clarifies and that ‘fragile’ should refer only to countries with incapable governments that are likely to break down soon. This briefing paper gives a short summary of the messages that current fragility indices convey, portrays their limitations and delineates how development cooperation could better exploit their potential. It shows how current indices can be applied, and how both policy makers and researchers can contribute to improving future indices for ultimately supporting development in fragile states.

Suggested Citation

  • Ziaja, Sebastian & Fabra, Javier, 2010. "State fragility indices: potentials, messages and limitations," Briefing Papers 10/2010, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:diebps:102010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/199656/1/die-bp-2010-10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nelli Babayan, 2016. "A Global Trend EU-style: Democracy Promotion in ‘Fragile’ and Conflict-Affected South Caucasus," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 7(2), pages 217-226, May.
    2. IACOBUTA Andreea-Oana & ASANDULUI Mircea & TIGANAS Claudiu-Gabriel, 2015. "Institutional Environment, Initial Conditions And State Fragility In Post-Communist Countries," Revista Economica, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 67(4), pages 63-77.
    3. Francisco Gutiérrez Sanín & Diana Buitrago & Andrea González, 2013. "Aggregating Political Dimensions: Of the Feasibility of Political Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 305-326, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:diebps:102010. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ditubde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.