Upload
matt
View
38
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Symposium on Humanitarian Assistance at the Crossroads. Melani Cammett Political Science Watson Institute for International Studies Brown University March 2, 2013. Political Consequences of Non-State Provision. Why varied political consequences? Characteristics of NSPs. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
SYMPOSIUM ONHUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE AT THE CROSSROADS
Melani CammettPolitical ScienceWatson Institute for International StudiesBrown University
March 2, 2013
Political Consequences of Non-State Provision
Concept Dimension
AccessEquity
Sustainability
AccountabilityAbility of citizens to hold providers responsible for the experience and quality of service provision
State capacity State capacity to provide, finance and/or regulate welfare
Why varied political consequences?Characteristics of NSPs
Dimension Range
Level of personalization Formal/rule-based ↔ informal/personalized
Locus of operation Local ↔ international
Profit orientation Not-for-profit ↔ for-profit
Eligibility criteria Inclusive ↔ exclusive
Why varied political consequences?Modes of state-NSP relations
State Capacity to Deliver and/or Regulate Social Welfare Low High
NSP Capacity to Finance and/or Deliver Social Welfare
Low
Appropriation (i.e., NSPs control access to state resources through brokerage, patronage, credit-claiming)
State Domination (i.e., state control over financing and delivery of services)
High
Substitution (i.e., NSPs take over when state does not perform or provide)
Co-production (i.e., joint financing and/ or delivery of services by state and NSPs) or Delegation (i.e., authority granted to NSPs to finance and/ or deliver services)
Example: Non-state provision of health care in Lebanon
Affiliations of health clinics and dispensaries in Lebanon(2008 estimates)
Focus: Sectarian providers in Lebanon
The nexus of social welfare and sectarianism
State v. NSP capacity (esp. Hezbollah, Future Movement, etc.)
Provider motivations: Charitable and political/community-policing
Lebanese Forces leader: “We know we need to help our supporters, especially now that we are constituting ourselves into a real political party,”
2001 poll in Lebanon: “What were the two most important reasons for your vote in the 2000 national elections?” Services provided and social activities of the candidate:
27.09% most important reason 23.46% second most important
What’s at stake?
Non-state actors & welfare regimes What types of providers – public,
private, non-state – provide the best quality of care and why?
The impact of welfare provision by actors with political agendas? When and how, if at all, does service
provision Islamists & others shape political behavior?
Consequences for equity of access, national integration, etc.
Implications for international donors/NGOs: Working with local political actors,
“terrorist” groups, etc.
Thank you
Political Consequences of Non-State Provision: Access
Concept Dimension Sub-dimensions
Access
Equity
- Equity of access to social welfare by gender, ethnicity, age, religion, wealth, partisanship, geography, etc. - Equity of access to high quality of social welfare by gender, ethnicity, age, religion, wealth, partisanship, geography, etc.
Sustainability
- Duration over time of service provision - Stability and renewability of financial support for services - Cultural appropriateness of services - Social embeddedness of services in community
Political Consequences of Non-State Provision: Accountability
Concept Dimension Sub-dimensionsAccountability Ability of Citizens to
Hold Providers Responsible for the Experience and Quality of Service Provision
- Existence of liability mechanisms for services rendered or not supplied - Rule-based v. personalized procedures for lodging complaints and receiving compensation
Political Consequences of Non-State Provision: State Capacity
Concept Dimension Sub-dimensions
State CapacityState Capacity to Provide, Finance and/or Regulate Welfare
- Human capital (i.e., number of staff, education levels of staff) - Spending per capita - Proportion of total delivery of social welfare services - Quality of services provided - Effectiveness of regulation of service provision
Non-State Welfare Provision in the Global South
Increase in NGOs in Selected Countries in the Global South, 1980-2008
Beyond NGOs: Varieties of NSPs . . .
1980
1990 2000 2010
Argentina 2,000 (1994) 15,800
(2012) Azerbaijan 300 2,700-3,700
(2011) India
20,000-30,000 (1989)
3.3 million (2008)
Ghana 80 700 1,300 4,772
Kazakhstan 6,000 36,815 (2011)
Kenya 250-400 4000 6,000 Tanzania 25 137 3,000
(2001) 5,300
Russia 30-40
(1987) 275,000 450,000-600,000 (2005)
Types of Non-State Providers (NSPs)
Formal Informal
Private Sector Organizations
Secular NGOs
Ethnic/sectarian organizations
Faith-based organizations
Community-based
organizations Informal brokers
Family and friendship networks
International MNCs INGOs Transnational
ethnic organizations and networks
International church-based
charities -- --
Transnational family networks,
migrant remittances
Domestic Domestic for- profit
firms Domestic NGOs
Ethnic and sectarian
political groups Local FBOs,
churches
Village or neighborhood-
based associations
Naya Netas in India, Private
providers in FSU
Family and friendship networks