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»Donor Support to Non-state Providers of Security and Justice

Donor Support to Non-state Providers of Security and Justice

Helpdesk Report
  • Claire Mcloughlin
October 2009

Question

Please identify literature on donor support to non-state providers of security and justice services in fragile and conflict-affected states, and highlight any lessons learned. In particular, any lessons related to the conditions appropriate or not suited to supporting non-state actors, how to ensure services are equitable, affordable and accessible, and how performance can be assessed.

Summary

The following recommendations on on donor support to non-state providers of security and justice services in fragile and conflict-affected states are made in the literature:

  • There is a need for a ‘pragmatic realism’ approach, meaning that in addition to supporting state institutions, donors proportion a significant percentage of assistance, in the short- to intermediate-term, to non-state/local justice and security networks. This also means building more effective and accountable relationships between the different layers (state and non-state) of authority in fragile states (the ‘multilayered approach’).
  • Civil society may be better situated to support non-state providers of security and justice because they have the requisite knowledge and understanding of political dynamics and balances of power.
  • The specific needs and challenges of the state and non-state justice systems must be assessed in each case.
  • Support for non-state institutions may give rise to—or worsen—conflicts between state and non-state actors as well as between customary and state law. Open dialogue is key.
  • Any sort of recognition of non-state justice institutions could provide non-state actors and institutions with legitimacy that they might not otherwise have at the community level.
  • Working with the non-state sector in security and justice requires donors accepting a larger degree of risk than they are used to.
  • Efforts to bring together state and non-state systems involve highly sensitive political choices regarding the primacy of values, and so must be entered into in as thoughtful and participatory a manner as possible. A positive relationship between state and informal systems can be shaped through a process of dialogue, mutual recognition, and small-scale practical experience.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID

Related Content

Serious and Organized Crime in Jordan
Helpdesk Report
2019
Humanitarian Access, Protection, and Diplomacy in Besieged Areas
Helpdesk Report
2019
Rule of Law Challenges in the Western Balkans
Helpdesk Report
2019
Who are the Elite Groups in Iraq and How do they Exercise Power
Helpdesk Report
2018

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".