GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»GSDRC Publications»Stability and stabilisation approaches in multinational interventions

Stability and stabilisation approaches in multinational interventions

Helpdesk Report
  • Siân Herbert
July 2013

Question

How many multinational interventions are mandated to pursue an agenda for stability (local, regional or global), and how many are authorised to use ‘stabilisation’ approaches?

Summary

This rapid report is based on quantitative discourse analysis of stability and stabilisation approaches in all current UN, EU and NATO missions. The analysis included a total of 49 missions (covering peacekeeping, civilian and political missions) and 107 mandates/resolutions linked to these missions.

Key findings:

  • Out of a total of 49 missions examined for this report, 30 missions use the words stability or stabilisation, (61% of those examined), 29 missions use the word stability, and 16 missions use the word stabilisation.
  • While one resolution relating to a mission may use the words stability or stabilisation, this does not mean that all of the related resolutions use these words, as the mission may change over time.
  • Out of a total of 107 mandates/resolutions examined for this report, 87 mandates/resolutions use the words stability or stabilisation (81% of those examined). 58 mandates/resolutions use the word stability; 36 mandates/resolutions use the word stabilisation.
  • In terms of location, most missions with a stability or stabilisation mandate are found in Africa, some are in the Middle East and Europe, and one is in Latin American and the Caribbean.
  • In terms of frequency, this report covers the key mandates/resolutions related to the UN, EU and NATO missions currently in operation – the majority of which date from 2000 onwards. This skews the data to over represent more recent mandates/resolutions, so a comprehensive historic overview of the frequency of use of the terms stability or stabilisation is not possible. However, analysis indicates a strong trend – from 2000 onwards – of a gross and relative increase in mandates/resolutions including the key word stability.
  • Through quantitative discourse analysis of these phrases, 26 categories have been identified to represent the different approaches to stability and stabilisation. These have been arranged into seven groups: stability from conflict; political and legal stability; military and criminal stability; physical stability; stability for citizens; economic stability; and regional stability. These categories are not mutually exclusive and one mandate/resolution may include multiple phrases with multiple references to different types of stability. Table 2 combines the 26 categories into groups – this indicates that that stability and stabilisation are most commonly cited in the context of political and legal stability, and in relation to security and peace.
  • The top six most commonly cited approaches to stability and stabilisation in the mandates/resolutions are: security; peace; regional stability; economic stability; law and justice; and organised crime.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID

Related Content

Who are the Elite Groups in Iraq and How do they Exercise Power
Helpdesk Report
2018
State-society relations and citizenship
Topic Guide
2016
The legitimacy of states and armed non-state actors
Topic Guide
2015
Capacity building in the Ministry of Interior in fragile and post-conflict countries
Helpdesk Report
2015

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2025; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2025; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2025

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".