How can countries escape the vicious cycle of fragility and move towards a virtuous cycle of confidence building and institutional transformation? This chapter sets out a framework that involves: 1) restoring confidence; 2) early attention to the reform of institutions that provide citizen security, justice and jobs; 3) reform approaches that allow for flexibility and innovation; and 4) marshalling external support and resisting external stresses. This endogenous spiral of confidence building and institutional transformation should be continually expanded. It must also be adapted to context. Outsiders can help by reducing external stresses as well as providing support.
Contests around changes in power relations are a constant feature of all societies. However, institutional transformations are particularly difficult for middle- and low-income states affected by violence. There are three key reasons for this. First, reaching agreements between elites is difficult due to a lack of trust. Second, institutional change can increase the risk of violence in the short term from those who lose out from the change. Third, during fragile periods of transition, these countries can face external security threats or economic shocks which can overwhelm progress.
Achieving institutional resilience is difficult and under-researched. However, current research suggests a framework involving a repeating process of several transitions. Key features of this framework are:
- The need to restore confidence: This is a prerequisite for institutional change. Key mechanisms for achieving this are: developing institutions inclusive enough to build trust between groups; sending signals of a break with the past backed up by commitment mechanisms; and delivering results early to establish credibility.
- Sustained institutional transformation: Confidence building measures need to be linked to development of more legitimate and capable institutions. This involves devoting early attention to the reform of institutions that provide citizen security, justice and jobs.
- Using ‘best-fit’ reform approaches that allow for flexibility and innovation: To avoid backlashes, institutional forms should be adapted to the political context rather than being technically perfect.
- Marshalling external support and resisting external stresses: External action can help by building trust through external commitment mechanisms, delivering quick results, and adopting flexible approaches with realistic timeframes. Action must be taken to contain external stresses such as trafficking, international corruption and money laundering.
Development actors need realistic expectations about how long institutional processes take. Historically, the fastest institutional transformations have taken a generation, and these should not be considered easy benchmarks for today’s violence-affected countries.
- Three current international trends may support a ‘virtuous cycle’ for faster transformations: modern states are part of an international system that confers certain benefits and requires certain behaviours; new technologies support growing demands for good governance; and new technologies also create possibilities for improving service delivery.
- Differentiated application of the framework is essential. The types of stresses being experienced vary, as do the institutional challenges of dealing with stresses. In addition, both of these factors vary over time.
- Important questions to be asked in tailoring the above framework include: what stresses does country currently face that increase the risks of violence? What institutional characteristics are most important? Which stakeholders are crucial to building confidence and institutional transformation?
