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
  • Projects
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»Understanding and supporting security sector reform

Understanding and supporting security sector reform

Library
DFID
2002

Summary

A badly-managed, irresponsible security sector contributes to unstable governments, excessive military expenditures, human rights abuses and intractable poverty. This document, published by the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID), is a set of guidelines for DFID governance advisors and managers considering security sector reform (SSR). It may also assist those working on economic reform, social development and post-conflict reconstruction. SSR programmes should only be considered if they contribute to DFID’s primary mission: the reduction of poverty.

Effective security requires well-managed and competent personnel operating within an institutional framework defined by law. A badly-managed security sector that fosters excessive military spending and corruption, and contributes to unstable governments, hampers development, discourages investment and helps perpetuate poverty. 

The security sector includes armed forces, police, security services and coast/border guards. It also includes security management and oversight bodies, justice and law enforcement institutions and non-statutory security forces, such as liberation and guerrilla armies.

DFID’s security sector work focuses on related institutional machinery: the executive and judiciary, advisory and oversight bodies, defence and interior ministries and financial audit and planning units. DFID SSR programme development guidelines call for consultation, strategy development and diagnosis. Consultation with UK ministries and departments, academic institutions and donors expands DFID’s security expertise and strengthens policy coherence.

Sound strategy development involves consultations with host governments, ministries, the military, civilians, civil society, opposition parties and neighbouring countries. Such engagement of local actors helps produce a country-specific strategy and local SSR commitment. Strategy development should address issues such as military disengagement from politics, civilian policy making, military restructuring/demobilisation, regional peace frameworks and donor relations.

Diagnosis should utilise DFID’s Governance Framework diagnostic questions concerning government security capacity, public confidence in existing security and current SSR. It should consider security governance quality, reform capacity, institutional context and regional issues.

Building public awareness and engaging non-state actors in security issues is a key SSR focus. Other key foci include:

  • Building strategic planning capacity to help governments assess how to meet security needs;
  • Strengthening constitutional/legal frameworks to institutionalise security sector roles and mandates;
  • Strengthening civil oversight mechanisms to build legislative oversight capacity;
  • Strengthening financial management systems to establish transparency, accountability, anti-corruption and auditing practices;
  • Facilitating war-to-peace transitions to restore state security capacity; and
  • Improving human resource management to promote a sense of public duty and political neutrality.

Military and other security actors in many countries are entrenched in the economic, social and political fabric of the state. Since donor assistance can often provide such regimes an international legitimacy, SSR intervention in these cases should be approached cautiously.  But if SSR programmes developed along the above guidelines address sustainable development and help improve physical security, they will contribute to DFID’s mission to reduce poverty.

Source

DFID, 2002, 'Understanding and supporting security sector reform', DFID, UK

Related Content

Varieties of state capture
Working Papers
2023
Rebuilding Pastoralist Livelihoods During and After Conflict
Helpdesk Report
2019
Infrastructure Project Failures in Colombia
Helpdesk Report
2018
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 2026; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2026; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2026

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".