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»Evidence on programmes’ effectiveness on horizontal political inclusion

Evidence on programmes’ effectiveness on horizontal political inclusion

Helpdesk Report
  • Evie Browne
June 2015

Question

What evidence exists on the effectiveness of development programmes designed directly or indirectly to address group- or identity-based political exclusion in fragile states, to make political settlements horizontally more inclusive?

Summary

There is very little evidence on what role donors can play in making political settlements more horizontally inclusive. The state of research on this area remains theoretical and not empirical, although there is a clear normative consensus that international actors need to consider inclusivity in political settlements.

The three areas of inquiry in this report (political settlements in FCAS; horizontal inclusion; donor roles) have an extremely small overlap, with hardly any literature examining this nexus. In the literature on inclusive political settlements in FCAS more broadly, there is little evidence of any role that international actors can play. The literature which does identify examples of donor roles does not then describe horizontal inclusion as one of the objectives or outcomes.

Few successful inclusive political settlements in fragile and conflict-affected states (FCAS) had clear donor influence. The literature as it currently stands suggests that donors and international actors have not had key roles to play. National ownership and national motivation have by far been the more important factors for creating inclusivity, in cases such as Nepal, Kenya, and South Africa.

In cases where international actors have had some influence, a few commonalities can be found:

  • Assistance tends to take the form of supporting existing groups and facilitating them to put forward their voices.
  • National ownership of inclusivity projects is important. Broad-based coalitions of local support help create conditions for success.
  • A coordinated approach between donors has proved helpful.

Experts suggest that the way to make the political settlement more inclusive is to provide support to marginalised groups – programmes which are designed to address horizontal inequalities more generally will also automatically make the political settlement more inclusive (Expert comments: Frances Stewart). However, the literature on social inclusion does not usually frame impacts in terms of increased inclusion in the political settlement. This is a conceptual gap which has yet to be bridged.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF - 534 KB]

Suggested citation

Browne, E. (2015). Evidence on programmes’ effectiveness on horizontal political inclusion (GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report 1233). Birmingham, UK: GSDRC, University of Birmingham.

Related Content

Youth initiatives supporting citizen engagement with government
Helpdesk Report
2017
Communication interventions supporting positive civic action in Lebanon
Helpdesk Report
2017
Threats to and approaches to promote freedom of religion or belief
Helpdesk Report
2017
Civil Society in Authoritarian Regimes
Helpdesk Report
2017

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".