Skip to main content

The Fragile State of Disaster Response: Understanding Aid-State-Society Relations in Post-conflict Settings

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 828 Accesses

Part of the book series: The Anthropocene: Politik—Economics—Society—Science ((APESS,volume 25))

Abstract

Natural hazards often strike in conflict-affected societies, where the devastation is further compounded by the fragility of these societies and a complex web of myriad actors. To respond to disasters, aid, state, and societal actors enter the humanitarian arena, where they manoeuvre in the socio-political space to renegotiate power relations and gain legitimacy to achieve their goals by utilising authoritative and material resources. Post-conflict settings such as Burundi present a challenge for disaster response as actors are confronted with an uncertain transition period and the need to balance roles and capacity.

Ms. Samantha Melis, M.A., M.Sc., Ph.D. Candidate. International Institute of Social Studies (ISS), The Hague, The Netherlands. E-mail: melis@iss.nl. This chapter was made possible by a VICI grant of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research NWO, grant number 453-14-013.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Disasters are “a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society involving widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses and impacts, which exceeds the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources” (UNISDR 2007). Although socio-natural disasters, disaster and natural disasters are used interchangeably, they are all seen in their socio-political context.

  2. 2.

    EM-DAT (EM-DAT 2016) classifies hazards in different sub-groups; namely, geophysical, meteorological, hydrological, climatological, biological and extra-terrestrial. Examples of hazards are earthquakes (including tsunamis), volcanic activity, extreme temperatures, storms, floods, landslides, droughts, wildfires, epidemic etc.

  3. 3.

    The speed of onset can be either slow or rapid. While rapid onset disasters are seen as the result of a sudden event, OCHA (2011) defines slow onset disasters, such as droughts, as an emergency that develops from a combination of events over time. Also, some disasters such as floods are often the accumulation of several events. In theory, slow on-set disasters could be mitigated and prevented by early response, however, in practice, most responses to slow on-set disasters resemble those of rapid onset disasters, with large influx of aid, primarily food aid, and short-term solutions focusing on saving lives (OCHA 2011: 4).

  4. 4.

    Aid actors are those actors who have development and emergency assistance as their core mandate, such as various United Nations (UN) agencies, local, national, and international non-governmental organisations (NGOs), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), regional inter-governmental organisations’ agencies responsible for humanitarian assistance, and donor agencies providing funding and coordination. State actors are formally part of state institutions, whether on a national, regional, district, or local level, including national government agencies in charge of crisis response. Society encompasses a vast array of groups and identities, such as civil society, media, the private sector, volunteers, traditional leaders, beneficiaries, citizens and individuals.

  5. 5.

    To minimise the selection bias of each individual search engine, the combination of these engines was used.

  6. 6.

    Nodes included 34 emergent categories of different challenges encountered, such as coordination, beneficiary selection, mistrust, differences in response, relations between actors, communication, accountability, etc.

  7. 7.

    The disaster management cycle is mostly focused on the disaster itself, as it includes measures taken before, during and after the disaster to “avoid a disaster, reduce its impact or recover from its losses” (Khan et al. 2008: 46). The pre-disaster stage includes activities for mitigation and preparedness, and the post-disaster stage starts with emergency response and moves into rehabilitation and reconstruction (Khan et al. 2008: 47). Although the cycle presupposes a linear timeline, in practice the phases overlap.

  8. 8.

    From 1996 to 2015, low income countries experienced five times more deaths per 100.000 inhabitants compared to high income countries, while high income countries feature on the top ten list for economic losses (UNISDR/CRED 2016).

  9. 9.

    Others have preferred the term post-war, which directly refers to a period after the end of a war, which makes it easier to define than ‘conflict’. As the ‘post’ discourse refers to an outcome of the preceding period, war also does not do justice to the complexity of the ‘post’ situation: war was not the only or primary defining factor, but already an outcome in itself. Also, a post-war period can be a pre-war period and it does not reflect the reality of having a history of multiple conflicts and wars, or a conflict with less than 1000 battle-related deaths annually. This chapter sees both the post-conflict and post-war terms as not truly reflecting the processes and state after peace agreements or other types of political settlement. As post-conflict is a policy term used by the humanitarian actors, this chapter will continue using it to facilitate understanding of the type of period one is referring to.

  10. 10.

    Some of the recommended actions are: disarmament, restoration of order, repatriation, capacity building of security personnel, monitoring elections, promoting human rights, reforming or strengthening governmental institutions and promoting formal and informal political participation (Boutros-Ghali 1992, para. 55).

  11. 11.

    However, liberal peace theorists have strongly critiqued statebuilding interventions focused on the construction of a liberal democratic state through strengthening markets and through promoting democracy, civil society, and the rule of law (Barnett et al. 2014; David 2001; Paris 2004; Chandler 2013).

  12. 12.

    As Reyntjes (2016: 358) notes, hybrid governance is not only applicable to fragile states settings, but is universally applicable.

  13. 13.

    Although peace agreements are types of political settlement, political settlements are also more than that. Here, the terms are used somewhat interchangeably to denote the political arrangement (either mediated or not) that defines the start of the post-conflict period. Peace agreements are usually mediated by external actors, either regional or international, and political settlements can also take the form of victory of one party over the others or a divided peace.

  14. 14.

    Although the methods and numbers Collier uses for his arguments have been critiqued (Suhrke/Samset 2007), his work does show the vulnerability of post-conflict countries to conflict.

  15. 15.

    Donors are important actors who often delineate humanitarian aid. They are increasingly seen to instrumentalise and politicise humanitarian aid and privilege agendas of stabilisation (ALNAP 2015: 13). Government donors channel most of their funds, two-thirds, to multilateral agencies, primarily UN agencies, with six UN agencies receiving 46 per cent of the total funds. Then INGOs 19 per cent, of which ICRC received almost two-thirds (GHA 2016: 66). Only 1.2 per cent is channelled directly to governments, with non OECD-DAC (The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development – Development Assistance Committee) donors channelling 70 per cent of their funds to governments (GHA 2016: 73).

  16. 16.

    Although a distinction between aid, state and society is made, they are considered mutually constitutive and often problematic to identify as separate entities in practice. However, as DRR roles are generally different for aid agencies, states, and societal actors, this distinction is upheld to facilitate analyses of the processes within and relations between different groups of actors in the humanitarian arena.

  17. 17.

    While international humanitarian law is applicable to armed conflict and occupation, disaster response does not have an overarching legal framework. Instead, it relies on various multilateral treaties, resolutions, declarations, guidelines and bilateral agreements as instruments, known as “international disaster response laws, rules and principles” (IDRL) (ICRC 2007: 15). In practice, much depends on the individual state’s integration of disaster response in their national law, and their willingness and capacity to accommodate interventions after a disaster. In post-conflict countries, these policies cannot be seen separately from the Sustainable Development Goals. The Core Humanitarian Standard and the Sphere standard are recognised by humanitarian actors as standards to uphold and the Good Humanitarian Donorship principles and practices provide guidelines for donors to follow.

  18. 18.

    The Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement was signed in 2000, while the CNDD-FDD signed a power sharing agreement in 2004 and Palipehutu-FNL signed a cease-fire in 2006.

  19. 19.

    Alert ranking in Fragile states index 2015 (FFP 2015).

  20. 20.

    Previously part of Bujumbura Rural, but became officially part of Rumonge after the creation of the latter province on 26 March 2015.

  21. 21.

    See at: http://www.iwacu-burundi.org/gitaza-le-president-nkurunziza-en-appelle-a-la-solidarite-nationale-pluies-torrentielles/. The victims of the March floods were displaced in host families or lived in make-shift shelters, with limited support from the Ministry of Solidarity, local churches, political parties, the Burundi Red Cross and UN agencies. After the installation of IDP camps following the November floods, some victims from March were also included.

  22. 22.

    Author’s interview with International Humanitarian agency representative 3, 30 August 2016; this is also a view expressed by other actors in informal conversations in the same research period.

  23. 23.

    Author’s interview with local government representative 2, 22 August 2016.

  24. 24.

    Author’s interview with local actor 4, 25 August 2016, Focus Group with community actors 2, 29 August 2016.

  25. 25.

    Interview with local actor 4, 25 August 2016, interview with local government representative 2, 22 August 2016.

  26. 26.

    Author’s interview with Community actors 1, 25 August 2016, and Community actors 2, 29 August 2016.

  27. 27.

    Author’s interviews with Local actor 4, 25 August 2016, NNGO 2, 17 August 2016, community actors 1, 25 August 2016, community actors 2, 29 August 2016, UN representative 3, 30 August 2016.

  28. 28.

    Author’s interview with Local actor 4, 25 August 2016.

  29. 29.

    Author’s interview with Local actor 4, 25 August 2016.

  30. 30.

    Author’s interview with NNGO 2, 17 August 2016. Author’s interview with Local actor 5, Bujumbura, Burundi, 25 August 2016.

  31. 31.

    Author’s interview with NNGO 2, 17 August 2016, FGD with community 1, 25 August 2016, FGD with community 2, 28 August 2016, UN representative 2, 29 August 2016, UN representative 3, 30 August 2016, Local actor 4, 25 August 2016.

  32. 32.

    Author’s interview with Government representative 4, 18 August 2016.

  33. 33.

    Author’s interview with Community actors 1, 25 August 2016.

  34. 34.

    Author’s interview with IDP camp 2 and 3, 24 August 2016 and 26 August 2016.

  35. 35.

    Author’s interview with NNGO 2, 17 August 2016, FGD with community 1, 25 August 2016, FGD with community 2, 28 August 2016, UN representative 2, 29 August 2016, UN representative 3, 30 August 2016, Local actor 4, 25 August 2016.

  36. 36.

    Author’s interview with UN agency representative 2, 27 August 2016.

  37. 37.

    Author’s interview with Government representative 3, 18 August 2016, and interview with Humanitarian agency representative 1, 17 August 2016.

  38. 38.

    Author’s interview with National Humanitarian agency representative 1, 17 August 2016.

  39. 39.

    Author’s interview with Humanitarian actor 1, 17 August 2016.

  40. 40.

    Author’s interview with government representative 1 on 17 August 2016, and with government representative 3 on 18 August 2016.

  41. 41.

    Author’s interview with UN agency representative 3 on 30 August 2016.

References

  • Alejandro Leal, Pablo, 2007: “Participation: The Ascendancy of a Buzzword in the Neo-Liberal Era”, in: Development in Practice, 17(4–5): 539–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, D. E., 2013: “Resilience and Disaster Risk Reduction: An Etymological Journey”, in: Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 13(11): 2707–2716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, Jessica, 2015: “Informed Decision Making: Including the Voice of Affected Communities in the Process”, in: Humanitarian Accountability Report 2015. On the Road to Istanbul: How Can the World Humanitarian Summit Make Humanitarian Response More Effective? (Geneva: CHS Alliance): 98–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ariyabandu, Madhavi Malalgoda; Fonseka, Dilrukshi, 2009: “Do Disasters Discriminate? A Human Security Analysis of the Impact of the Tsunami in India, Sri Lanka and of the Kashmir Earthquake in Pakistan”, in: Hans Günter Brauch et. al. (Eds.): Facing Global Environmental Change: Environmental, Human, Energy, Food, Health and Water Security Concepts, 1215–26 (Berlin – Heidelberg: Springer).

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, Michael, 2011: Empire of Humanity: A History of Humanitarianism, Cornell Paperbacks (Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, Michael; Fang, Songying; Zürcher, Christoph, 2014: “Compromised Peace-building”, in: International Studies Quarterly, 58(3): 608–620; at: https://doi.org/10.1111/isqu.12137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beetham, David, 2nd ed., 2013: The Legitimation of Power. Political Analysis. (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire – New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, Peter L.; Luckmann, Thomas, 1966: The Social Construction of Reality: a Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge (Garden City, NY: Doubleday).

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaikie, Piers M.; Cannon, Terry; Davis, Ian; Wisner, Ben (Eds.), 1994: At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability, and Disasters (London – New York: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Boege, Volker; Brown, M. Anne; Clements, Kevin P., 2009: “Hybrid Political Orders, Not Fragile States”, in: Peace Review, 21(1): 13–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohle, Hans G.; Downing, Thomas E.; Watts, Michael J., 1994: “Climate Change and Social Vulnerability: Toward a Sociology and Geography of Food Insecurity”, in: Global Environmental Change, 4(1): 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre, 1989: “Social Space and Symbolic Power.” Sociological Theory, 7(1): 14; at: https://doi.org/10.2307/202060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyce, James K., 2002: “Aid Conditionality as a Tool for Peacebuilding: Opportunities and Constraints”, in: Development and Change, 33(5): 1025–1048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brauch, Hans Günter, 2005: Threats, Challenges, Vulnerabilities and Risks in Environmental and Human Security. Source 1 (Bonn: UNU-EHS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkerhoff, Derick W., 2005: “Rebuilding Governance in Failed States and Post-Conflict Societies: Core Concepts and Cross-Cutting Themes”, in: Public Administration and Development, 25(1): 3–14; at: https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkerhoff, Derick W., 2016: “State Fragility, International Development Policy, and Global Responses.” in: RTI International, International Development. Working Paper. October 2016. Forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Call, C. T., 2011: “Beyond the ‘Failed State’: Toward Conceptual Alternatives”, in: European Journal of International Relations, 17(2): 303–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, David, 2013: “International Statebuilding and the Ideology of Resilience: International Statebuilding”, in: Politics, 33(4): 276–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colebatch, H. K., 2014: “Making Sense of Governance”, in: Policy and Society, 33(4): 307–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, Paul; Hoeffler, Anke; Soderbom, Mans; 2008: “Post-Conflict Risks”, in: Journal of Peace Research, 45(4): 461–78, at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343308091356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, Paul; World Bank (Eds.), 2003: Breaking the Conflict Trap: Civil War and Development Policy. A World Bank Policy Research Report (Washington, DC: World Bank – New York: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornwall, Andrea, 2008: “Unpacking ‘Participation’: Models, Meanings and Practices”, in: Community Development Journal, 43(3): 269–83; at: https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsn010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, Devon, 2013: “The International Peacebuilding Paradox: Power Sharing and Post-Conflict Governance in Burundi”, in: African Affairs, 112(446): 72–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, Devon, 2015: “Development Assistance and the Lasting Legacies of Rebellion in Burundi and Rwanda”, in: Third World Quarterly, 36(7): 1365–81; at: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2015.1041103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David, Charles-Philippe, 2001: “Alice in Wonderland Meets Frankenstein: Constructivism, Realism and Peacebuilding in Bosnia”, in: Contemporary Security Policy, 22(1): 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donini, Antonio (Ed.), 2012: The Golden Fleece: Manipulation and Independence in Humanitarian Action (Sterling, Virginia: Kumarian Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Drury, A. Cooper; Olson, Richard Stuart, 1998: “Disasters and Political Unrest: An Empirical Investigation”, in: Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 6(3): 153–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffield, Mark, 2002: “Social Reconstruction and the Radicalization of Development: Aid as a Relation of Global Liberal Governance”, in: Development and Change, 33(5): 1049–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, Lilianne, 2013: “Disaster as Opportunity? Building Back Better in Aceh, Myanmar and Haiti”. HPG Working Paper (London: ODI [Overseas Development Institute]).

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, Christopher B.; IPCC (Eds.), 2012: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaption: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortna, Virginia Page, 2004: “Does Peacekeeping Keep Peace? International Intervention and the Duration of Peace after Civil War”, in: International Studies Quarterly, 48(2): 269–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel, 1984: “The Order of Discourse”, in: Michael J. Shapiro (Ed.): Language and Politics (New York: New York University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • François, Monika; Sud, Inder, 2006: “Promoting Stability and Development in Fragile and Failed States”, in: Development Policy Review, 24(2): 141–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frerks, Georg, 2013: “Discourses on War, Peace and Peacebuilding”, in; Dorothea Hilhorst (Ed.): Disaster, Conflict and Society in Crises: Everyday Politics of Crisis Response. Routledge Humanitarian Studies Series 1 (New York: Routledge); 19–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frerks, Georg; Klem, Bart, 2006: “Conditioning Peace among Protagonists: A Study into the Use of Peace Conditionalities in the Sri Lankan Peace Process” (Clingendael: Netherlands Institute of International Relations).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, Francis, 2004: State-Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century. (Ithaca, N.Y: Cornell University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Galtung, Johan, 1996: “Part II: Conflict Theory”, in: Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization (Oslo: International Peace Research Institute; London; Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications): 70–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaventa, John; Cornwall, Andrea, 2nd ed., 2008: “Power and Knowledge”, in: The Sage Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice, in: Reason, Peter; Bradbury, Hilary (Eds.): (London – Thousand Oaks, Ca: SAGE Publications): 172–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawronski, Vincent T.; Olson, Richard Stuart, 2013: “Disasters as Crisis Triggers for Critical Junctures? The 1976 Guatemala Case”, in: Latin American Politics and Society, 55(2): 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, Anthony, 1984: The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurr, Ted Robert, 2011: Why Men Rebel. 40th Anniversary paperback ed. (Boulder, Colo.: Paradigm Publications).

    Google Scholar 

  • Haar, Gemma van der; Heijke, Merel, 2013: “Conflict, Governance and Institutional Multiplicity: Parallel Governance in Kosovo and Chiapas (Mexico)”, in: Hilhorst, Dorothea (Ed.): Disaster, Conflict and Society in Crises: Everyday Politics of Crisis Response, edited by Routledge Humanitarian Studies Series 1. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, Paul; Overseas Development Institute, 2009: Towards Good Humanitarian Government: The Role of the Affected State in Disaster Response (London: Humanitarian Policy Group).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayward, Clarissa Rile, 2000: De-Facing Power. Contemporary Political Theory (Cambridge, UK – New York: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Heijmans, Annelies, 2004: “From Vulnerability to Empowerment”, in: Bankoff, Greg; Frerks, Georg; Hilhorst, Dorothea (Eds.): Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development, and People. (London – Sterling, VA: Earthscan Publications); 115–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellsten, Sirkku K., 2009: “Ethics, Rhetoric, and Politics of Post-Conflict Reconstruction: How Can the Concept of Social Contract Help Us in Understanding How to Make Peace Work?”, in: Addison, Tony; Brück, Tilman (Eds.): Making Peace Work (London: Palgrave Macmillan UK): 75–96.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt, Kenneth, 2013: “Disasters in ‘Development’ Contexts: Contradictions and Options for a Preventive Approach”, in: Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 5(2), Art.#91, 8 pages.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilhorst, Dorothea; Jansen, Bram, 2012: “Constructing Rights and Wrongs in Humanitarian Action: Contributions from a Sociology of Praxis”, in: Sociology, 46(5): 891–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilhorst, Dorothea, 2015: “Taking Accountability to the next Level”. in: CHS (Core Humanitarian Standard) Alliance (Ed.): Humanitarian Accountability Report 2015. On the Road to Istanbul: How Can the World Humanitarian Summit Make Humanitarian Response More Effective? (London: CHS Alliance): 108–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilhorst, Dorothea; Bankoff, Greg; Frerks, Georg, 2004: “Mapping Vulnerability”, in: Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development, and People (London – Sterling, VA: Earthscan Publications): 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilhorst, Dorothea; Jansen, Bram, 2010: “Humanitarian Space as Arena: A Perspective on the Everyday Politics of Aid”, in: Development and Change, 41(6): 1117–1139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hozić, Aida, 2014: “The Origins Of ‘Post-Conflict’”, in: Post-Conflict Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Routledge Studies in Peace and Conflict Resolution (London – New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group): 19–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross), 2007: “Law and Legal Issues in International Disaster Response: A Desk Study” (Geneva: International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies).

    Google Scholar 

  • IFRC (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies), 2016: World Disaster Report 2016 (Geneva: International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies).

    Google Scholar 

  • International Alert, 2015: “Compounding Risk: Disasters, Fragility and Conflict”, Policy Brief (London: International Alert).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jabri, Vivienne, 1996: Discourses on Violence: Conflict Analysis Reconsidered (Manchester; Manchester University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan, Himayatullah; Vasilescu, Laura; Khan, Asmatullah, 2008: “Disaster Management Cycle–a Theoretical Approach” in: Management & Marketing-Craiova, no. 1: 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch, Dirk-Jan, 2007: Blind Spots on the Map of Aid Allocations Concentration and Complementarity of International NGO Aid (Helsinki, Finland: United Nations University/World Institute for Development Economics Research [UNU/WIDER]).

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch, Dirk-Jan; Dreher, Axel; Nunnenkamp, Peter; Thiele, Rainer, 2009: “Keeping a Low Profile: What Determines the Allocation of Aid by Non-Governmental Organisations?”, in: World Development, 37(5): 902–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krasner, Stephen D.; Pascual, Carlos, 2005: “Addressing State Failure”, in: Foreign Affairs, 84(4): 153–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamb, Robert D., 2014: Rethinking Legitimacy and Illegitimacy: A New Approach to Assessing Support and Opposition across Disciplines (Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies [CSIS]).

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, Bruno, 1984: “The Powers of Association”, in: The Sociological Review, 32(May): 264–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levi, Margaret; Sacks, Audrey; Tyler, Tom, 2009: “Conceptualizing Legitimacy, Measuring Legitimating Beliefs”, in: American Behavioral Scientist, 53(3): 354–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lister, Sarah, 2003: “NGO Legitimacy Technical Issue or Social Construct?”, in: Critique of Anthropology, 23(2): 175–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lukes, Steven, 2nd ed., 2004: Power: A Radical View (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire – New York: Palgrave Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lund, Christian (Ed.), 2006: Twilight Institutions: Public Authority and Local Politics in Africa (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publications).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mac Ginty, R., 2010: “Hybrid Peace: The Interaction Between Top-Down and Bottom-Up Peace”, in: Security Dialogue, 41(4): 391–412; at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010610374312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manyena, Siambabala Bernard, 2006: “The Concept of Resilience Revisited”, in: Disasters 30(4): 434–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nathan, Laurie; Toft, Monica Duffy, 2011: “Civil War Settlements and the Prospects for Peace”, in: International Security, 36(1): 202–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nel, Philip; Righarts, Marjolein, 2008: “Natural Disasters and the Risk of Violent Civil Conflict”, in: International Studies Quarterly, 52(1): 159–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, D., 2008: “Partial Peace: Rebel Groups Inside and Outside of Civil War Settlements”, in: Journal of Peace Research, 45(4): 479–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OCHA (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs), 2011: OCHA and Slow-Onset Emergencies. 6th Occasional Policy Briefing (New York: OCHA).

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), 2010: The State’s Legitimacy in Fragile Situations Unpacking Complexity (Paris: OECD Publishing).

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD/DAC (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Development Assistance Committee), 2007: “Principles for Good International Engagement in Fragile States and Situations” (Paris: OECD Publishing, April).

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, Richard Stuart, 2000: “Toward a Politics of Disaster: Losses, Values, Agendas, and Blame”, in: International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters (IJMED), 18(2): 265–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papagianne, Katia, 2008: “Participation and State Legitimation”, in: Call, Charles (Ed.): Building States to Build Peace (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers): 49–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, Roland, 2004: At War’s End: Building Peace after Civil Conflict (Cambridge, U.K. – New York, NY: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton, Douglas, 2006: “Disaster Resilience: Building Capacity to Co-Exist with Natural Hazards and Their Consequences”, in: Paton, Douglas; Johnston, David M. (Eds.): Disaster Resilience: An Integrated Approach (Springfield, Ill: Charles C. Thomas): 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelling, Mark. 1998. “Participation, Social Capital and Vulnerability to Urban Flooding in Guyana”, in: Journal of International Development, 10: 469–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelling, Mark; Dill, Kathleen, 2010: “Disaster Politics: Tipping Points for Change in the Adaptation of Sociopolitical Regimes”, in: Progress in Human Geography, 34(1): 21–37; at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132509105004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, Katie; Budimir, Mirianna, 2016: When Disasters and Conflict Collide: Facts and Figures (London: ODI [Overseas Development Institute]).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reyntjens, Filip. 2016. “Legal Pluralism and Hybrid Governance: Bridging Two Research Lines: Legal Pluralism and Hybrid Governance.” Development and Change, 47(2): 346–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocha Monocal, Alina, 2013: “Aid and Fragility: The Challenges of Building Peaceful and Effective States”, in: Chandler, David P.; Sisk, Timothy D. (Eds.): Routledge Handbook of International Statebuilding, Routledge Handbooks (Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon – New York, NY: Routledge): 387–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serventy, Matthew, 2015: “Collective Accountability: Are We Really in This Together?”, in: Humanitarian Accountability Report 2015. On the Road to Istanbul: How Can the World Humanitarian Summit Make Humanitarian Response More Effective? (London: CHS [Core Humanitarian Standard] Alliance): 82–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sørbø, Gunnar M., 2004: Peacebuilding in Post-War Situations: Lessons for Sudan (Bergen, Norway: Chr. Michelsen Institute, Development Studies and Human Rights).

    Google Scholar 

  • Suhrke, Astri; Samset, Ingrid, 2007: “What’s in a Figure? Estimating Recurrence of Civil War”, in: International Peacekeeping, 14(2): 195–203; at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13533310601150776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction); CRED (Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters), 2016: “Poverty & Death: Disaster Mortality 1996–2015” (Louvain: CRED – Geneva: UNISDR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Uvin, Peter, 2008: “Local Governance after War: Some Reflections on Donor Behaviour in Burundi”, in: Praxis, 23: 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, Peter; Maxwell, Daniel G., 2008: Shaping the Humanitarian World. Global Institutions Series (Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon – New York: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Walter, Barbara F., 2004: “Does Conflict Beget Conflict? Explaining Recurring Civil War”, in: Journal of Peace Research, 41(3): 371–88; at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343304043775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max, 1978: Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wisner, Benjamin, 2012: “Violent Conflict, Natural Hazards and Disaster”, in: The Routledge Handbook of Hazards and Disaster Risk Reduction (London; New York: Routledge): 65–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wisner, Benjamin; Gaillard, J.C.; Kelman, Ilan; 2012: “Framing Disaster”, in: The Routledge Handbook of Hazards and Disaster Risk Reduction (London – New York: Routledge): 18–33.

    Google Scholar 

Other Literature

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samantha Melis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Melis, S. (2019). The Fragile State of Disaster Response: Understanding Aid-State-Society Relations in Post-conflict Settings. In: Brauch, H., Oswald Spring, Ú., Collins, A., Serrano Oswald, S. (eds) Climate Change, Disasters, Sustainability Transition and Peace in the Anthropocene. The Anthropocene: Politik—Economics—Society—Science, vol 25. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97562-7_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics