Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Linnea Gelot
(Swedish Defence University)
Ulf Engel (Leipzig University)
Send message to Convenors
- Chair:
-
Jens Herpolsheimer
(Research Centre Global Dynamics , Leipzig University)
- Stream:
- Politics and International Relations
- Location:
- Appleton Tower, Seminar Room 2.14
- Sessions:
- Wednesday 12 June, -
Time zone: Europe/London
Short Abstract:
The panel highlights innovative methods and approaches emanating from the study of African organizations. It features socio-spatial perspectives, insights from the study of militarization, critical approaches to knowledge production, but also welcomes other perspectives African governance processes.
Long Abstract:
African organizations - like the African Union, various sub-regional mechanisms, the African Commission for Human and People's Rights, or the African Development Bank - have hitherto predominantly been studied through the lens of rational bureaucratic systems, inspired by assumptions from positivist International Relations traditions. A functionalist overemphasis on structural aspects has overlooked the multi-layered connections between internal/external and public/private actors that shape them and that drive processes of change within them. Oftentimes, events are singled out in a discourse of newness at the expense of analyzing them as junctures embedded within a context of more subtle enduring processes of change, as political effects, or as unintended consequences.
This panel brings together contributions that propose innovative methodological and theoretical approaches to the study of African organizations. It discusses and advances fine-grained and granular understandings of African governance processes, whether quantitative or qualitative in nature. It also explores the wider implications of such approaches for the study of international organizations as well as instances of global governance more generally.
The panel seeks to reflect on methods and approaches that are sensitive to institutional context as well as actors and reconcile subtle ongoing processes with the often more prominent junctures for change. These may include inter alia socio-spatial perspectives, approaches that highlight individual actors and their networks, transfers and entanglements, as well as reflections on knowledge production and who is included/excluded in the debates that accompany and shape it. Contributions should reflect on methods and approaches while being firmly grounded in empirical research or experiences.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Wednesday 12 June, 2019, -Paper short abstract:
The paper will explore the dynamics of policy research through the model of a commercial market. It will focus on the policymaker's needs; the researcher's outputs, evidence, methodology, norms, expertise and marketing; and the relationship between researchers and policymakers.
Paper long abstract:
The paper will explore the dynamics of policy research through the model of a commercial market. This model is instructive because policy researchers, whether for financial, normative or career reasons, seek to sell their ideas and services to policymakers. As with other products and services, the researchers will only be successful if they understand and meet the needs of the intended consumers of their research. The paper will consider the implications of this logic in terms of the policymaker's needs; the researcher's outputs, evidence, methodology, normative orientation, expertise and marketing; and the relationship between the researcher and the policymaker. The paper will draw on the literature on policy research and on the author's experience of three decades of policy advice on security sector reform, regional security and mediation, provided to the South African government, other governments in Southern Africa, the United Nations, the African Union and sub-regional organizations in Africa.
Paper short abstract:
This paper explores the ideal of 'African Solutions to African Problems' by looking into the experience of the Institute for Peace and Security Studies. Despite its rhetorical appeal, the practice is undercut by uncritical applications. We suggest use of Africa-centerd methodologies to rectify this.
Paper long abstract:
The ideal of "African Solutions to African Problems" has been used in various contexts and usages. The concept whose roots could be traced back to intellectual debates in the 20th century conveniently permeated into policy level discourse and action in the early 21st century, in part abetted by the discourse of African Renaissance and the centrality of African agency therein. This percept got strong traction within the field of African peace and security, not least for the compelling appeal it provides for imparting a unique take both on the problem and on the need for finding 'African' ways of addressing it. This paper seeks to unravel attempts at the innovative application of the concept in an African academic setting. The paper focuses on the experience of the Institute for Peace and Security Studies, one of the leading African think-tanks which made a serious attempt of deciphering the ideal as an implementation tool for delivering actionable research outputs. The paper observes despite the rhetorical appeal of the percept, the ideal of AfSol was not sufficiently explored for its epistemological relevance, more so when applied on an ontological entity as empirically complex as African peace and security. Its methodological value as a practical tool was undercut by the uncritical application of the concept. We propose complementing the percept by extant attempts of defining Afrocentric methodologies if the intellectual debate on Africa-centred solutions is not going to be a mere 'semantic acrobatics.'
Paper short abstract:
The paper traces the development of mediation support infrastructures of two regional economic communities and the African Union from a comparative history perspective to analyse factors affecting their characteristics and effectiveness.
Paper long abstract:
The paper traces the development of mediation support infrastructures of regional economic communities (RECs) and the African Union (AU) from a comparative history perspective to analyse factors affecting their characteristics and effectiveness. As part of the African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA), the AU and RECs have established institutions, including mediation support units, reference groups and early warning systems, amongst others, to bolster their conflict management capacity. But the development, functioning, stakeholder-relations and effectiveness of these institutions differ widely between African intergovernmental organisations (IGOs).
Using a comparative process-tracing approach, the paper examines the development and functioning of the mediation support infrastructures of the AU, Economic Community of West Africa and the Southern African Development Community in their respective historical and sub-regional political context, and compares these processes to analyse factors that have shaped their characteristics and affected their effectiveness. Rather than exclusively focusing on structural development, the paper also assesses the functioning of the three IGOs' mediation support infrastructures in selected diplomatic peace initiatives. The analysis is based on ongoing empirical research, drawing from interviews with IGO officials, civil society representatives and sub-regional experts, as well as official IGO communiqués and news coverage. The paper seeks to produce insights on parameters that determine the effectiveness of the mediation support infrastructures that may offer lessons for the development of equivalent institutions in other RECs. Moreover, it reflects on the use of comparative history to study the institutions of African IGOs.