---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "John Ashworth" <[email protected]> Date: 16 Jul 2013 17:52 Subject: [sudan-john-ashworth] Telling countries they're the worst in the world doesn't help To: "Group" <[email protected]>
Telling countries they're the worst in the world doesn't really help them Ranking fragile states is pointless: citizens in countries like South Sudan are better placed to address weakness than outsiders Claire Leigh | Guardian Monday 15 July 2013 The west seems to be obsessed with ranking things. Whether it's Mark Owen's top 20 hits, the Forbes rich list or the 100 greatest Britons, success is apparently relative rather than absolute. But the urge to order things does not stop with pop culture and celebrities. In development, it extends to ranking countries, and not usually by their successes but by their failings. The human development index, the global peace index, the failed states index; time and again mainly northern-based organisations feel at liberty to opine about the progress of nations. The countries with the worst rankings in these indices undoubtedly have serious challenges they need to confront. The pseudo-scientific concoctions that underpin many development indices contain elements of truth, and the countries ranked as most failed have every reason to take a long hard look at themselves. But many of them are already doing just that. Eighteen of the countries that regularly appear at the bottom of development indices have voluntarily signed up as members of the g7+ group of fragile states. The g7+ acts as a sort of self-help group for fragile governments and a forum for peer learning between conflict-affected states. It advocates a new approach to building resilient relationships between states and societies. Governments in the g7+ share three insights: first, that each fragile state is unique, making comparisons not only unhelpful but a bit pointless. Success for people living in fragile states is absolute, not relative; second, that the people best able to assess and address the reasons for a country's fragility are the citizens of that country; and third, that external assessments can ignore important early signs of progress, destroying citizen confidence and killing off progress. In other words, the opinions of those working in development matter, but not always in the way we think. The g7+'s "country-owned, country-led" approach to peacebuilding and statebuilding is innovative. It runs counter to the assumption underlying the many indices churned out each year; that the most troubled countries are both knowable and comparable by outsiders. One of the pillars of this country-led approach to tackling fragility is self-assessment that brings together stakeholders from government, political parties, civil society groups and the private sector to discuss progress in five areas; political legitimacy, security, justice, economic foundations and public services. Participants undertaking fragility assessments agree their own ratings, along a spectrum that acknowledges stepwise progress even in its earliest stages. The assessments are a cornerstone of the new deal for engagement in fragile states (pdf), and are intended to provide the basis for choosing development priorities, planning and co-operation with international actors. Fragility assessments have already been conducted in five countries.South Sudan has conducted a wide-ranging consultation, the results of which are publicly available (pdf). This has resulted in a frank and honest analysis of its weaknesses and where it needs to do better, alongside areas of genuine progress. For example, the report says: "Political and civil service appointments are often perceived to be based on tribal relations, rather than qualification or merit." The findings are at a degree of granularity that only consultation with the real experts – the citizens of South Sudan – could provide. For example, the assessment found: "Popular involvement in the review of the transitional constitution has so far been limited, as the national constitutional review commission is yet to begin its consultative process." And, crucially, as opposed to the impotent prognosis of many development indices, the assessment actually marries all of these problems with practical solutions. What's more, these are often country-specific responses using local and traditional mechanisms that would be less likely to grace the pages of donor reports; the use and empowerment of customary judicial processes, for example. Sierra Leone (pdf), the Democratic Republic of Congo and Timor-Leste(pdf) have conducted similar exercises, with Somalia soon to follow(pdf). If the purpose of annual development indices is to put countries on the proverbial naughty step every year, then the reality is that many countries are already doing this and making positive moves to address their weaknesses. Acknowledging and encouraging these moves is a way to reinforce progress. Ignoring and dismissing them, as many development ranking exercises tend to, may do just the opposite. • Claire Leigh is a research fellow at the Overseas Development Institute, working on fragile states, statebuilding and governance. ODI supports the g7+ through the budget strengthening initiative http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2013/jul/15/fragile-states-south-sudan END ______________________ John Ashworth Sudan, South Sudan Advisor [email protected] +254 725 926 297 (Kenya mobile) +211 919 695 362 (South Sudan mobile) +27 79 832 8834 (South Africa mobile) +44 750 304 1790 (UK/international) +88 216 4334 0735 (Thuraya satphone) PO Box 52002 - 00200, Nairobi, Kenya This is a personal e-mail address and the contents do not necessarily reflect the views of any organisation -- -- The content of this message does not necessarily reflect John Ashworth's views. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, John Ashworth is not the author of the content and the source is always cited. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sudan-john-ashworth" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.co.za/group/sudan-john-ashworth --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sudan-john-ashworth" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "South Sudan Info - The Kob" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14oqDJgGZKkYhFx6rnEMBS-tyeLethLsOB2OmrN0hipatVA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
