building citizenship in a context of violence

January 16 2009

Building citizenship in a context of violence

Presentation by

Joanna Wheeler

Citizenship is necessary for effective states

Violence leads to fragilities of citizenship in both fragile and strong states; increasingly high rates of violence persist

Constructive and destructive role of communication in a context of violence

Building citizenship in a context of violence

2006 DFID White Paper: Helping to Build States That Work For the Poor

‘Effective states are central to development. They protect people’s rights and provide security, economic growth and services like education and health care....This means we need to work not just with governments, but also with citizens and civil society.’

Reversing the Telescope: Seeing like a citizen rather than seeing like a state

Citizens are key social actors, rights bearers, and sources of knowledge about democracy building

Asks how citizens perceive their rights and identities as actors for democracy and how they engage with the institutions that affect their lives

Taking this perspective gives a very different view of development interventions – in some cases the institutions being

strengthened by external assistance are the very ones seen by citizens as anti-democratic

Active citizens build democracies, not (only) the other way around

Citizens can build democratic institutions by contributing to different dimensions of more effective states

– Legitimacy

– Responsiveness

– Capability

– Accountability

Citizens and Accountable States

Multiple ways in which citizens and civil society organisations can increase accountability:– Citizen report cards, budget monitoring, policy

advocacy, demands for freedom of information, etc

– Help the state hold other non-state actors to account (e.g. corporate social responsibility)

– Accountability is more than ‘accounting’ – citizen action goes beyond technical approaches to challenge power relations

– Citizens link formal and informal strategies, draw on international standards and local, regional and global networks

Violence leads to fragilities of citizenship

Fractures sense of identity– Role of fear

Undermines access to basic services– Violent actors mediate access

Fragments authority, weakening basis for state interventions– State must compete with violent actors

Limits the possibilities for citizen action – Barriers at individual, community, and national

levels

Constructive role of participatory communication

Increased interaction between people separated by fear and stigma,

– Crossing boundaries created and reinforced by violence

Validation of people’s own perspectives and on insecurity

– Potential for counter-labelling

Builds the basis for greater solidarity– Necessary element for citizen action

Destructive role of participatory communication

Exacerbates/reinforces exclusions and existing

power relations

Reductive and superficial

Tendency for self-censorship, and increased risk

Building active citizens in a violent context?

Recognition, not only redistribution;– Sense of political community eroded by fear

Citizenship (skills, identities, practices) are emergent and take time– Address parallel structures of authority and gaps in accountability

Start with the assets not just the deficits– Foster leadership

Recognise the role of communication