Paper short abstract:

This paper presents findings from a longitudinal research study in conflict affected sub-national areas of Myanmar exploring how marginalised people and their intermediaries navigate the governance systems of competing authorities to resolve problems.

Paper long abstract:

This paper presents findings from a longitudinal research study in conflict affected sub-national areas of Myanmar exploring how marginalised people and their intermediaries navigate complex multi-authority governance systems to resolve problems. It explores the lived experience of ordinary people in two conflict-affected & contested regions, expectations of and interactions with duty-bearers, who their formal and informal intermediaries are, and how these people mediate between them and multiple authorities. Using the ‘governance diaries’ method, the research team visited participant households monthly for one year, giving a rich understanding of their contexts, issues, and ‘repertoires of action’ amidst contestation. Subsequently identified village level intermediaries were interviewed regularly over several months to analyse their motivations, role, and strategies, and how they dealt with issues that arose. Ordinary people and intermediaries in these contexts face a multitude of challenges in resolving daily challenges of governing community life, accessing services, and resolving disputes. We find preferences for community self-provision and local resolution, rather than involving formal external authorities. These are driven by distrust in authority, previous negative experiences, difficulties engaging with competing authorities, and ideals of self-reliance. Local level intermediaries – in particular ‘village leaders’ – play a crucial gatekeeper role in determining how these decisions play out and enforcing their outcomes. They influence what issues are escalated, navigating a complex environment of multiple governance actors to do so. These dynamics have important implications if we want to understand how ongoing conflict and contestation alter ordinary people’s relationships with their ‘governors’.