Security and development

We would like to inform you that your article entitled " Towards a Planning Framework for Philippine Regional Development and Security " submitted to the Journal in Urban and Regional Planning (JURP) has been reviewed, and the article was evaluated using the following criteria: Criteria Description of Rating Scale Rating

This paper argues that development is about the human person. It is an overall process and not a one-sided affair. Man cannot claim to be developed when his life is insecure. Guaranteeing the socioeconomic and political wellbeing of citizens is the greatest assurance of attaining security for the state or society. Therefore, there is no amount of security consciousness, orientation, provision of security gadgets or even massive investment on security that will make us 'secure' until there is justice, equity, fair play, and adequate attention to the less privilege in society, Nigeria and indeed, African countries will never know peace and the pace of economic development will remain at a snail pace. In the light of the above, the paper recommends that; education be made compulsory and free from primary up to the University level. It is shameful for Nigeria that the level of literacy and awareness is declining even in the twenty first century, due to rising inflation and high cost of acquiring education. Second, gainful employment opportunity be created so as to engage the millions of unemployed youths who have become restless. If this is not done, certainly, the incidence of espionage, armed robbery, arson, pipeline vandals, drug peddling, piracy, cultism, kidnapping, assassination, murder, examination malpractices, bunkering, terrorism, and other crimes will continue to bedeviled the Nigerian nation. The research questions are; what could be done to curb the insecurity situation in Nigeria? How can Nigeria join the league of technologically advanced countries? How can the level of socioeconomic welfare of the citizens be improved? The paper would rely on primary and secondary sources in research.

Agile software development has gained a lot of popularity in the software industry due to its iterative and incremental approach as well as user involvement. Agile has also been criticized due to lack of its ability to deliver secure software. In this paper, extensive literature has been performed, in order to highlight the existing security issues in agile software development. Majority of challenges reported in literature, occurred due to lack of involvement of security expert. Improving security of a software system without damaging the real essence of Agile can achieved with the continuous involvement of security engineer throughout development lifecycle with its defined role and responsibilities.

The 20th anniversary of the publication of the first Human Development Report (HDR) seems an appropriate time to reflect on the success of the 'human development'paradigm in redefining development in an age characterised until recently by an untrammelled commitment on the part of the principal institutions governing the international political economy to furthering the goals of capital accumulation along neoliberal lines.

Seit den 1990er Jahren durchläuft Entwicklungspolitik eine Wandlung. Die Frage bewaffneter Konflikte und Kriege in den Peripherien hat »Nachhaltigkeit« als neue und zentrale Problemstellung abgelöst. Dieser Prozess verläuft nicht bei allen Akteuren gleich. Vielmehr werden spezifische Rationalitäten von Steuerung sichtbar, die sich mit dem Foucault'schen Begriff der Gouvernementalität fassen lassen.
In einem Vergleich der entwicklungspolitischen Praxis der USA und Deutschlands arbeitet diese Studie die Unterschiedlichkeiten der Konzepte und institutionellen Ausrichtungen heraus und analysiert deren Implementierung in Sri Lanka.

This book examines the management of state fragility and the practices and impacts of quantification over relations of power in international politics.

By looking at how the merging of conflict and development issues in the fragile states agenda has been fed by and has fed the authority of ever-perfectible numbers, the book offers an approach to address the difficulty in dealing with profound inequality without presuming domination. It discusses the so-called security-development nexus against the background of an increasingly important debate over the role of numbers in politics. How much social experimentation should numbers allow? How much can they tell us about politics in a time of indirect political struggles? The book shows that there is little chance that policy-makers and academics can escape dealing with numbers and there is much to be gained by understanding how complex statistics become authoritative and widespread even when the correlations and the very knowledge they offer is knowingly imperfect and temporary.

Resumen: Este capítulo examina la Agenda 2030 para el desarrollo sostenible como norma multilateral, atendiendo a su naturaleza, legitimidad y eficacia para la gobernanza del desarrollo global. A continuación, analiza las metas específicas de paz, seguridad y buen gobierno del ODS 16 y su interacción con otras metas de desarrollo sostenible a la luz de la noción de «paz positiva», utilizando el concepto y los indicadores del «ODS 16 plus» (ODS16+). En ese marco, se plantea una concepción de seguridad derivada de sus metas para alcanzar sociedades pacíficas, justas e inclusivas. El capítulo, por último, examina los problemas de seguimiento y medición derivados de los indicadores propuestos por el ODS16+.

Abstract: This chapter examines the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development as a multilateral norm, considering its nature, legitimacy, and effectiveness for the governance of global development. Next, it analyzes the specific goals of peace, security and good governance of SDG16 and its interaction with other sustainable development goals in the light of the notion of «positive peace», using the concept and indicators of «SDG16 plus» (SDG16+). In this framework, the chapter proposes a conception of security derived from its goals in order to achieve peaceful, just and inclusive societies. The chapter, finally, examines the follow up and measurement problems derived from the indicators proposed by SDG16+.

The need to enhance the coherence of EU security and development policies is stressed in numerous EU policy declarations.This article analyses this commitment against the background of the legal architecture of EU foreign policy.This demonstrates that the political simplicity with which this commitment is often put forward tends to hide the complexity of this undertaking in an external action system that submits the policy fields of development cooperation and the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) to different rules and procedures.While the EU institutions have increasingly targeted development and security policies at the mutual challenges of insecurity and poverty, the lack of a shared and comprehensive strategy leads to significant improvisation. On the one hand, the ad hoc replies to this commitment have resulted in the development of a particularly fragmented EU toolbox to deal with these challenges. On the other hand, this raises important questions regarding the choice of appropriate legal bases for the
various policy initiatives that span the security-development nexus. It is argued that the Lisbon Treaty, by interlinking the CFSP and development cooperation both constitutionally and
institutionally, creates significant opportunities that, combined with the necessary political will, allow the EU to move beyond its ad hoc approach.

The European Union (EU) aspires to become a truly comprehensive international security actor, utilising coherently different kinds of instruments at its disposal. To this end, Lisbon Treaty reforms aim to equip EU policy with a stronger sense of strategic direction, by bringing external assistance instruments of the EU under the guidance of the High Representative. However, pursuing the norm of a more holistic, strategic international security policy, has arguably threatened a key norm contributing to the EU’s normative identity, namely the apolitical character of its aid. This article explores the friction between these two norms in the EU’s international policy, particularly in the context of the arrangements concerning the European External Action Service. Further, this article argues that the gradual move towards a more strategic deployment of the EU’s external assistance are inevitable, as it reflects the strategic principles defined by the EU in the last decade.

This publication summarises the discussions in the 1st Conference on State Fragility, held on the 25th June 2019 in Lisbon and co-organised by the Lisbon Club and the g7+. The sessions focused on the challenges faced by conflict-affected and fragile countries, particularly regarding the effective management and governance of natural resources.

The nexus between security and development, so central to debates about global governance and aid policies today, at national and international fora, has a colonial genealogy. The politics and policies of late European colonialism, in Africa and elsewhere, were marked by various modalities of repressive developmentalism, of historical manifestations of developmentalisation of idioms and repertoires of security and securitization of languages and programmes of development. Social and economic reasoning, namely the desired promotion of economic productivism, became crucial to securitarian ponderations arising in contexts marked by more or less violent trajectories of imperial and colonial disengagement; social engineering and developmental drives became shaped by coercive purposes and repertoires. As a consequence, the rationales and techniques of development and welfare, on one hand, and of social control and repression, on the other, merged frequently, influencing the ways in which the late colonial states coped with the mounting challenges to their longstanding rule. This cross-fertilization was significant at many levels, entailing diverse " epistemic communities " and institutions, imperial, interimperial, and international. Knowledge, including of a disciplinary nature, was produced and transferred, within and between colonial empires; doctrines, models and policies – of welfare, of development, of settlement and resettlement, of social change and control – circulated globally, and were also nationalized. Particular projects experimented, and aimed to perfect, specific combinations of repressive developmentalism, with the aim to secure development, enhance security and strengthen political legitimacies, at home and abroad, in the context of a global decolonization momentum. Using a comparative framework, which focuses on a number of instances of development of security in late colonialism in Angola, Kenya, the Belgian Congo and Algeria, this lecture aims to demonstrate the need for an entangled history of development (including welfare) and security, not only to understand the transformative dynamics of late colonialism and decolonization, but also to appreciate how they still reverberate today.

This article examines governmental development interventions and their local-level implications for access to and authority over resources, using a framework of assemblage practices (Li 2007) as an analytical strategy in a mixed-methods study in Jharkhand’s West Singhbhum. This insurgency-affected district, populated by the Ho tribe, has India’s largest iron deposits. It hosts the Saranda Action Plan (SAP), a controversial intervention that exemplifies how India’s government elides development with security in resource-conflict regions. SAP aims to bring security and development to mineral-rich Saranda forest division, but has been widely critiqued for its failure to deliver community-oriented development, while the security agenda paves the way for mining concessions. Meanwhile, neighbouring Sadar Chaibasa division, with comparable development issues but less minerals, is treated indifferently. Based on secondary research in Saranda and empirical work in Sadar Chaibasa’s forest villages, this article untangles the practices through which governmental development interventions construct inequitable resource access locally in both extreme and ordinary cases. It argues that seeing development as security enables the mutual constitution of top-down authorisation and inequitable resource access, building an undemocratic local-level state.

This article builds on the securitisation and post-development literature and scrutinises the Czech and Hungarian legitimising discourses of their respective Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) in Logar and Baghlan provinces of Afghanistan between 2007 and 2013. In spite of the hybrid civil-military character of the PRTs, their security-development nexus was absent, and they were respectively securitised and “developmentalised” only indirectly and in different ways. The PRTs were mostly justified by the Czech Republic’s NATO membership as an identity issue, and they were justified as a Hungarian national interest and as both an obligation and an opportunity. Rather than merely importing NATO’s arguments as suggested by the previous literature, the depoliticisation and positive connotation of the intervention in Afghanistan was constructed through domestic NATO-related identities and interests in the Czech Republic and Hungary.

Why do aid agencies from wealthy donor countries with diverse domestic political and economic contexts arrive at very similar positions on a wide array of aid policies and priorities? This book suggests that this homogenization of policy represents the effects of common processes of globalization manifest in the aid sector. Drawing on both quantitative and qualitative analysis of policy adoption, the book argues that we need to examine macro-level globalizing influences at the same time as understanding the micro-level social processes at work within aid agencies, in order to adequately explain the so-called ‘emerging global consensus’ that constitutes the globalization of aid.

The book explores how global influences on aid agencies in Canada, Sweden, and the United States are mediated through micro-level processes. Using a mixed-methods approach, the book combines cross-national statistical analysis at the global level with two comparative case studies which look at the adoption of common policy priorities in the fields of gender and security. The Globalization of Foreign Aid will be useful to researchers of foreign aid, development, international relations and globalization, as well as to the aid policy community.

The growing connection between security and development has been among the most notable changes in the global political sphere since the end of the Cold War. The perceived link between these two concepts or policy fields is now commonly ‘recognized’ by everyone from the U.N. Secretary-General to a host of national and transnational actors. How has this ‘security-development nexus’ been adapted from the global level to national spaces and policies and what has this meant for security and development as policies and concepts? This paper describes the framework and early empirical findings of a PhD dissertation examining the dynamics of the merger between security, development and related concepts in the Scandinavian countries (Denmark, Norway and Sweden).

This book, published by Routledge in 2018, examines and compares the diverging security approaches of the UK, China and India in peacebuilding settings, with a specific focus on the case of Nepal. Rising powers such as China and India dissent from traditional templates of peacebuilding and apply their own methods to respond to security issues. This book fills a gap in the literature by examining how emerging actors (China and India) engage with security and development and how their approaches differ from those of a traditional actor (the UK). In the light of democratic peace and regional security complex theories, the book interprets interview data to compare and contrast the engagement of these three actors with postwar Nepal, and the implications for security sector governance and peacebuilding. It contends that the UK helped to peacefully manage transition but that the institutional changes were merely ceremonial. China and India, by contrast, were more effective in advancing mutual security agendas through elite-level interactions.

Interactions of rising powers and established powers and their implications in peacebuilding and security remain underexplored in existing literature. This paper aims to explore inferences of the behaviour of Brazil, China and India in peacebuilding and security, their contention and cooperation with the US and European powers, and implications for the global south. It analyses their interactions in the light of democratic peace propositions, adhered to by established powers, and the regional security complex theory pertinent to the ascendancy of new powers. Though liberal countries are co-opting emerging actors, the responses of rising powers to international security issues appear inconsistent and unpredictable. With increasing material capabilities, rising powers have been creating a patron–client relationship with conflict-affected states, because of which this article disconfirms possibilities of a sometimes anticipated pro-south world order.

Security is one of the objectives that has become associated with development policies. This article offers a genealogical perspective on this shift, focusing on the introduction of “Security Sector Reform” (SSR) into development policy as an apparatus with a two‐fold normative process. The first point of note is the securitization of development policy. This pertains both to the discourse elements of the apparatus—here, the effects of the use of security semantics—and to its political technologies, with an SSR apparatus which can function as a new label for military co‐operation. This has led to new approaches in societies where this has taken place, with threat a key focus. There has also been a process of depoliticization in the wake of technical, standardized approaches. This has sidelined debate on the norms and political choices involved, albeit implicitly. Secondly, one can observe structural ambivalences in the field, chiefly on the issue of the state and the normative contradictions of a policy to strengthen “fragile states” that relies on external intervention in national politics. The case study of Lebanon complements this analysis, highlighting the structural tensions between the various aims of SSR, and how this affects local ownership: both the perception and reception of SSR are marked by power relationships which translate into hegemonic and counter‐hegemonic labelling. Available on: http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/tQYKCc4RWyzg69fIvHrw/full

This article analyses the merging of development and security in Western policies vis-à-vis ‘deficient’ states in the Global South, looking at the social life of anti-terror policies in Kenya. The attacks on 11 September 2001 renewed the interest in strong and stable states, leading many donors to focus on capacity building and security sector reform. In Kenya, the repressive use of these new powers by the Kibaki government has created significant resistance and the main external actors have taken the local opposition into account and have adapted their anti-terror agendas. They have complemented hard security assistance with soft interventions aimed at addressing local issues such as conflict prevention and development in communities perceived as being ‘at risk’ of harbouring terrorists. Representing a more general shift in security interventions in Africa, countering terrorism is now presented as part of a broader ‘peace and security’ agenda, but despite using new methods to engage with so-called crucial parts of the population, this repositioning is not a paradigm shift. Despite the different approaches and objectives, the various projects have ambiguous effects and donors have not abandoned the traditional rationality, which privileges homeland protection over civil rights in the recipient country.

This article traces multinational extraction companies' social and security policies in the ‘community belt’ next to their operations. A comparison between mining companies in the DRC in the early twentieth century and in the period post-2000 shows remarkable continuities in corporate community interventions. It demonstrates how contemporary participatory practices have partly replaced techniques of discipline and coercion seen in the colonial past. However, the discourse of ownership and participation runs alongside exclusionary forms of exercising power that have an old history. The liberal claim of self-determination is compromised by the recourse to indirect rule in order to secure stable working conditions.

Surprisingly, perhaps, China’s flagship Belt and Road Initiative
expresses a familiar mix of the security–development nexus and
liberal interdependence thesis: Chinese leaders expect economic
development and integration will stabilise and secure neighbouring states and improve inter-state relations. However, drawing on
the record of China’s intensive economic interaction with
Myanmar, we argue that the opposite outcome may occur, for
two reasons. First, capitalist development is inherently conflictprone. Second, moreover, China’s cross-border economic relations
today are shaped by state transformation – the fragmentation,
decentralisation and internationalisation of party-state apparatuses. Accordingly, economic relations often emerge not from
coherent national strategies, but from the uncoordinated, even
contradictory, activities of various state and non-state agencies
at multiple scales, which may exacerbate capitalist development’s
conflictual aspects and undermine official policy goals. In the SinoMyanmar case, the lead Chinese actors creating and managing
cross-border economic engagements are sub-national agencies
and enterprises based in, or operating through, Yunnan province.
The rapacious form of development they have pursued has exacerbated insecurity, helped to reignite ethnic conflict in Myanmar’s
borderlands, and plunged bilateral relations into crisis.
Consequently, the Chinese government has had to change its
policy and intervene in Myanmar’s domestic affairs to promote
peace negotiations.

This article argues that liberal practices of peace- and statebuilding in post-conflict societies contribute to cement ethnic divisions and exacerbate social and spatial splintering. Drawing on historical experiences from colonial policy and from postcolonial international development and statebuilding the article argues that a particular problem lies in the conception and character of the state being promoted. Although liberal peace- and statebuilding have come under accumulating critique over the past decade, the practices and liberal interventionist agenda has consolidated and continued to expand. It has come to increasingly express an authoritarianism and lack of legitimacy and democracy that has recently given rise to a critique in terms of ‘postliberal’ governance. This article instead argues that the authoritarian and undemocratic nature of governance is an extension of and fully in line with historical liberal practice as well as the theory and ideology of neoliberalism.

Why does the European Union have a border management programme in Central Asia? Guided by this question, this dissertation aims to highlight and discuss the complex interactions and practices that facilitate and produce specific knowledge on border management as promoted by the EU in the external, third country context of Central Asia. It will do so by looking at the practices and activities of the EU-funded Border Management in Central Asia Programme (BOMCA), locating them in the wider field of global management of unease, as centred on specific understandings of (in)security. The concept of Integrated Border Management and the security-development nexus is discussed in detail. This dissertation concludes the need to further study the practices of externalised and more marginal programmes as BOMCA to further our understanding on how knowledge on the management of security, development, mobility and border management is produced and facilitated.

This article contributes to the analysis of transnationalized forms of security governance in the postcolonial world by looking into the production of knowledge aimed at increasing coherence between domains of security and development in Western donor policies. The article takes an ethnographic approach to the analysis of knowledge production, using the author’s personal experience of writing a policy analysis for
a donor government concerning how to ‘further improve’ the policy of ‘concerted civil–military planning and action’. This attempt to ‘study up’ and analyse upstream practices involved in transnational security governance shows the degree to which policy-related knowledge production is a negotiated, social process that involves informal practices and defensive tactics. The policy process seems to be less concerned with
effects on the ground than with the problem of creating unity among the wide range of agents and institutions involved in the emerging policy field. While such an approach may have potentially destabilizing effects – both for policy narratives and for researchers’ authority – it responds to calls for reflections on the politics of representation and writing in studies of international relations.

This paper describes the framework and early findings of a PhD project examining and comparing the relationship between security, development and related political concepts in Scandinavian foreign policies, mainly focusing on the period since the late 1990s. It does so firstly by introducing the basic problems connected with this political and conceptual ‘nexus’ (section 1) and secondly through draft excerpts from three dissertation chapters (sections 2-4). The first of these sections sketches the origins of the security-development nexus at the global level and the second makes initial observations on its introduction into Sweden’s global policies, while the third briefly examines the adaptation of the nexus within academia and civil society. Finally, the paper offers some brief concluding remarks on directions for further research.

The current state of peace and security in southern Africa is, to a large degree, the product of its history. Factors impacting on the political stability of the region today can be traced to the effects of age-old political structures and traditions (from the level of the village to that of the kingdom); to pre-colonial trading patterns and slavery; to the scramble for Africa and its subjugation under European colonisation; to waves of immigration from within and from beyond southern Africa; to the ‘hot’ superpower proxy wars of the Cold War; to the process of decolonisation and the struggle for control over the newly independent states; to the reconfiguration of global politics at the end of the Cold War; and to more recent changes and trends in the local and global landscape. Regrettably, this short overview is unable do justice to this history and its implications for peace and security in the region today (for such a historical perspective, see Bauer and Taylor 2005; Farley 2008; Reid 2012; Meredith 2011). It will focus its attention instead on southern Africa’s recent past, beginning with the tumultuous events of the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Pénélope Larzillière & P. Micheletti (eds). Dossier : Faut-il désoccidentaliser l'humanitaire ?. Humanitaire, n°24, 2010, pp.10-60.

Les ONG sont confrontées de façon croissante à des réticences, des réactions de refus voire d'hostilité sur leurs terrains d'opération. Leur personnel peut être pris comme cible, l'utilité de leurs programmes remise en cause, les objectifs exacts de leur intervention questionnés. Contestant leur volonté de neutralité, les détracteurs des ONG soulignent les liens avec les États anciennement colonisateurs ou les considèrent comme le poste avancé d'un impérialisme occidental. Face à cette situation, la prise en compte des représentations des populations bénéficiaires est apparue de plus en plus comme une nécessité. Les études de perception se multiplient auprès des populations, de même que les réflexions sur la réduction de l'espace humanitaire, ou sur la difficulté même du geste humanitaire qui implique un rapport asymétrique.

Over the past decade, Brazil has stepped up its involvement in international security and development. However, few studies have looked at how Brazil's concrete experiences in post-conflict and fragile states have shaped its broader positions on key security and development issues (and vice versa). Analysing Brazil's role in Guinea-Bissau, this article asks how Brazilian government actors interpret the intersection between security and development. Drawing on a combination of document analysis and interviews, findings suggest that the Brazilian government has rejected labels such as ‘failed state‘ and ‘narco-state’ and that cooperation needs to address the multidimensional causes of Guinea-Bissau's instability. Brazil's stress on combining security sector reform with broader institution-building and socioeconomic development reflects a somewhat different emphasis than the approach promoted by actors that have concentrated more narrowly on curbing the drug trade.