Insecurity and Development: The Rhetoric of the Failed State

In this article in the September 2005 special edition of the European Journal of Development Research, Fafo researchers Morten Bøås and Kathleen Jennings argue that the utility of the "failed state" paradigm favored by politicians and academics is undermined by misguided assumptions on how states and state actors operate. They argue that the concept of state failure is only useful in the context of human security -- particularly insofar as it enables analysts and policymakers to recognise and respond to the problem of state recession.

The abstract of the article reads:

'State failure' assumes all states are constituted and function in the same way: on a spectrum from good to bad. Yet the relevant question is not 'Is the state failing?' but 'For whom is the state failing, and how?' This captures the fact that different actors within the state have different interests; what is good for some - informalised power structures that enable elite consolidation of power and profit - may not be good for ordinary citizens; and that in fact, the goal of the regime may be to create and sustain structures and power relations that are generally considered the consequences of state failure. The concept of state failure is only useful in the context of human security, as it enables a fuller description of the realities and coping strategies in the state, taking into account agency, interests and incentives on the part of various local, national and regional actors.

The article is not posted freely online; for more information, please contact Kathleen Jennings at Fafo,