|
Lehrende: Dr. Pia Ruth Hollenbach
Veranstaltungsart:
Seminar
Orga-Einheit: Politics, Administration & International Relations
Anzeige im Stundenplan:
123212
Semesterwochenstunden:
3
Credits:
5,0
Standort:
Campus der Zeppelin Universität
Unterrichtssprache:
Englisch
Min. | Max. Teilnehmerzahl:
5 | 35
Prioritätsschema: Standard-Priorisierung
Inhalte:
Content
Since the late 1990s, the debate on the relationship between aid and governance has focused on the need for donors to manage aid in order to help developing countries to achieve good governance. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) defines governance as ‘the exercise of political, economic and administrative authority necessary to manage a nation’s affairs’ (OECD, 2006). One argument was that aid could be the ‘midwife’ of good policies, governance and good institutions (World Bank, 1998). However these consequential effects should be viewed critically, since donors have not yet necessarily been successful in fostering policy change, good governance or even reduced corruption, poverty nor inequalities through aid, and may have even cause deeper inequalities or dissatisfaction (Epstein and Gang, 2008) through various and large scale interventions. Therefore it is important to rethink the relation of aid and good governance and pay more attention analyzing good governance of aid processes (or good aid governance) in order to realize long-term sustainability and good conditions - at international, national and local level - achieving the objectives of long-term efficient development.
In particular the seminar will try to understand better and discuss (good) governance processes of international humanitarianism in post-disaster situations as in such complex, devastating and chaotic moments, the relations of involved humanitarian stakeholders - disaster experts, governments (national/international), and local (affected and non affected) people - have often been considered problematic. Practical but also scientific experiences show that a majority of stakeholders assume - disasters caused by natural hazards are the ultimate terrain of experts and managers, disrespecting the capacities and coping practices of local governments/governance and affected people. Furthermore the solidarity of communities and societies is not taken into consideration or is deliberately (?) overlooked. In addition the role of central vs local governments as well as the interplay between experts and local people is not examined or understood in its complexity. Hence in post-disaster situations it is imperative to understand disaster governance at it marks the domain of disaster response defining the society’s priorities regarding risk and vulnerability. “It is the domain where disaster knowledge and management is mediated and altered through political and bureaucratic governance practices and institutions … disaster governance is … the domain where it becomes apparent how disasters affect state society relations and, vice versa, how state-society relations affect responses to risk and disaster” (Hilhorst, 2003: 44).
Academic and policy oriented literature position housing at center stage in post-disaster interventions (Barakat, 2003; Davidson et al., 2007; Zetter and Boano, 2007) highlighting, that post-disaster efforts therefore mainly lead to large-scale reconstruction programs in disaster affected countries. Sustainable reconstruction is thereby described as ‘‘an integrated approach to reconstruction. Environmental, technical, economic, social and institutional concerns are considered in each stage and activity of reconstruction to ensure the best long-term result, not only in housing design and construction activities, but also in the provision of related infrastructure such as water supply and sanitation systems’’ (UNEP and SKAT, 2007: 9). In this seminar we will have a more insight look in reconstruction and rehabilitation activities asking if the described sustainable reconstruction approach has been fulfilled and we will critically analyze and discuss the relation between governance, international humanitarianism and (good) disaster response.
Topics
• Governance (global vs local)
• Developing Countries
• International Humaniatrianism (Development and Emergency Aid)
• Disasters
• Disaster Response
• Aftermath of aid: Practical Cases from post-disaster expriences
Weitere Informationen zu den Prüfungsleistungen:
2LP presence and active participation
3LP presentation and thesis
Literatur:
Literature (preliminary/short introduction)
Barakat, S. (2003) Housing Reconstruction After Conflict and Disaster. Network Paper no. 43. Humanitarian Practice Network, London.
Brautigam, D. (2000) Aid Dependence and Governance. Expert Group on Development Issues, American University, Washington, DC.
Buchanan, A. and Keohane, O.R. (2006) The legitimacy of global governance institutions. Ethics and International Affairs, 20(4), 405–437.
Davidson, C.H. et al. (2007) Truths and myths about community participation in post-disaster housing projects. Habitat International, 31(1), 100–115.
Epstein, Gil S. and Gang, Ira N. (2008) Good Governance and Good Aid Allocation, Institute for the Study of Labour (IZA) Discussion Paper No. 3585. Bar-llan University, Department of Economics and Rutgers University, New Brunswick/Piscataway, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
Gibson, C.C., et al. (2005) The Samaritan’s Dilemma: The Political Economy of Development and Aid. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hilhors, D. (2003) Responding to Disasters: Diversity of Bureaucrats, Technocrats and Local People. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 21(1), 37-55.
Kemp, R. and Parto, S. (2005) Governance for sustainable development: moving from theory to practice. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(1/2), 12–30.
Kennedy, J., et al. (2008) The meaning of ‘build back better’: evidence from post-tsunami Aceh and Sri Lanka. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 16(1), 24–36.
OECD (2006) DAC Guidelines and References Series Applying Strategic Environmental Assessment: Good Practice Guidance for Development Co-operation. Paris: OECD.
Papadopoulos, Y. (2000) Governance, coordination and legitimacy in public policies. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24(1), 210–223.
Passerini, E. (2001) Who is to blame for the failures of sustainable reconstruction projects. Natural Hazards Review, 2(2), 45–53.
World Bank (1998) Assessing Aid: What Works, What Doesn’t and Why. World Bank Policy Research Report. New York: Oxford University Press
Zetter, R.W. and Boano, C. (2007) Gendering space for forcibly displaced women and children: concepts, policies and guidelines. Working Paper Commissioned by the Inter-University Committee on International Migration for the United Nations Population Fund, New York, NY.
|
