This paper presents a ‘political settlements framework’ that involves consideration of political settlements in conflict-affected and fragile areas; of how settlements are maintained; of how they change; of their historical evolution; and of settlements at subnational levels. It suggests that development organisations need to use such analysis to adapt their strategies. These should promote the best-case scenario in the short term, while investing in long-term programmes that will promote inclusiveness, development, and stability. Practical approaches to influencing political settlements are also outlined.
A ‘political settlement’ is defined as the informal power arrangements in a country. Institutions are the product of ongoing conflict, negotiation, and compromise among powerful groups.
Political settlements can often be the primary factor in determining the success or failure of statebuilding and peacebuilding efforts. Political settlements in conflict-affected and fragile areas are almost always exclusionary, and are often unstable. The proposed political settlements framework also involves consideration of:
- How political settlements are maintained: Ruling coalitions typically establish, consolidate, or strengthen a political settlement through 1) coercion; 2) co-optation of potential threats from powerful excluded elites; 3) building and maintaining the legitimacy of state institutions established and shaped through the political settlement; or 4) using state-directed external assistance to allocate benefits to allies and to withhold benefits from groups resistant to central control. In addition, international actors can exert a stabilising influence through a wide range of mechanisms.
- How political settlements change: Political settlements may be relatively stable over long periods, or may evolve quickly as a result of conflict, economic growth, or societal transformation. Changes in a political settlement are often the result of gradually accumulating pressure over time.
- Historical evolution of political settlements: It is important to understand the historical evolution of contemporary political settlements. In most cases, countries that have reached stable, inclusive, developmental settlements have been through periods of extreme instability, or highly exclusionary settlements. Settlements may involve trade-offs between stability, development and inclusiveness in the short-to-medium term, in order to achieve ideal conditions in the long term.
- Secondary political settlements: It is also essential to understand ‘secondary’ political settlements (at the subnational level), in order to explain the widespread problems of protracted subnational conflict, lagging regions, and centre-periphery tensions.
A key challenge for donors in influencing political settlements is prioritising among four interrelated and sometimes contradictory goals (stability, conduciveness to development, inclusiveness, and reducing the level of elite predation). In addition, clear definitions and limits are needed regarding legitimate roles for donors, so as to avoid sovereignty infringement.
In operational terms, the first step is to improve analysis through political settlement mapping. This type of mapping can draw on several common analytical tools, such as political-economy analysis, actor mapping, and conflict audits, but will focus on some additional questions. The second step is to realign programme or country strategy based on an analysis of key tradeoffs and plausible best-case scenarios. Practical approaches could include:
- Shifting the benefits of aid to excluded groups: This long-term, incremental, approach entails 1) shifting the benefits of economic or human development programmes to excluded groups (with the aim of accelerating their development and increasing their political influence); and 2) reducing political benefits to the dominant elite coalition that come from controlling aid resources.
- Supporting the emergence of developmental elite coalitions: This approach is best used in conditions where there is an emerging, pro-development elite class which is excluded from the dominant political settlement.
- Maximising transition moments: During a period of political transition, development assistance can be particularly influential in helping to shape the emerging political settlement. Assistance can a) support local actors seeking to make the settlement more inclusive; b) strengthen the emerging settlement by supporting the implementation of a peace agreement or new government; and c) encourage a more pro-development settlement by creating appropriate incentives for the new elite coalition.
- Improving centre-periphery relations: In regions affected by subnational conflicts, development assistance can be used to address the drivers of conflict, such as by a) reducing the threat to local identity; b) supporting devolution or decentralisation; and c) improving services, governance and development for conflict-affected minority groups.
- Helping to mobilise excluded groups: Under some circumstances, excluded groups can organise themselves and develop alliances with more powerful actors to advocate for particular reforms or to change the political settlement. The key is to find shared interests that are sufficiently compelling to bring together previously fragmented groups.
- Strengthening fragile political settlements: One approach to stabilising a volatile environment is to bolster the capacity and legitimacy of the political settlement to help improve the ability of elites to manage that environment. However, there is a risk that international support may be used to strengthen an illegitimate regime.
At present, however, many international development organisations are not equipped to work effectively on these issues. For example, influencing political settlements requires deep country knowledge and networks; higher levels of entrepreneurial programming; flexibility in design and implementation of projects; and the ability to work through non-traditional aid partners.
