Search Results

Chapter 2 makes the case for a redefinition of the democratic success of local participatory democracy, determined by the nature of the state-society relationships that develop through formal and informal participatory interactions. The chapter presents a typology to account for variation along the two defining dimensions of state-society relationships: the nature of mobilization (from individual to collective forms) and the level of autonomy of the participants (from controlled to autonomous). It defines the four ideal types used throughout the book to categorize the diversity of empirical outcomes observed across cases: clientelism, disempowering cooption, fragmented inclusion, and democratic cooperation.

Both influential scholarly works and development policy provide a powerful discursive space to the idea of local or pre-modern knowledge and community control over natural resources. This chapter provides a critique of both the ideas of the superiority of local or pre-modern knowledge and of community as a suitable form of institutional control over resources. It locates the transformation of pre-modern tank irrigation technology in the socio-agrarian context of Karnataka in the last four decades. The author ultimately argues that technological artifacts are not inert objects. They articulate with a complex mix of social tensions, relations of power, and ideological systems, and are transformed in historical processes. Those who advocate artifacts and knowledge systems as objects of values and virtues fail to capture their social and political scripting, thus denying technology as a historical process.

The purpose of this chapter is twofold. The first section discusses the main explanations put forward to account for variations in the level and change of job security regulations: the varieties of capitalism thesis, the social Catholicism thesis, and the power resources thesis. The section concludes that none of these arguments can account for the observed variations. The second section develops a new theoretical argument, which is based on some of the insights of the existing accounts, in particular the power resources thesis. However, the argument goes significantly beyond the classic power resources approach by incorporating insights about the power implications of political institutions, the strategic considerations of political actors when choosing among different forms of institutional change, the role of state–society relationships in shaping trade union strategies, the role of trade unions in public policy-making, as well as how international developments influence the balance of power in domestic politics.

This chapter analyses the historical development of job security regulations in Western Europe from the late nineteenth century until the years immediately following World War 2. It makes three key contributions: First, it demonstrates the crucial role of trade unions in the expansion of job security regulations. Second, it shows that protection against dismissal was strengthened during critical junctures that temporarily shifted the power balance in favour of the labour movement. Finally, it demonstrates how prevailing state–society relationships and legal traditions allowed some union movements to pursue job security regulations by means of collective agreements rather than legislation. Combined, these factors explain why, by the mid-twentieth century, some countries had introduced far-reaching restrictions of the employers’ right to hire and fire while others had not, and why the level of protection against dismissal in this period is not positively correlated with the commonly used indicators of labour movement strength.

Chapter 8 discusses the implications of interactions among violent non-state groups for security dynamics in borderlands and elsewhere across the globe. It argues that these implications are contingent on an approach that transcends externally imposed categories, particularly those related to space, time, and agency. The chapter presents how the book’s findings help develop “second-best” policy interventions that target those security challenges arising from violent non-state groups that are mitigated most effectively. To stimulate further debate and research conducive to tackling these challenges, the chapter sketches out three lines of inquiry on which a borderland lens can shed new light: transnational borderlands (space), a changing security landscape (time), and the relations among people, violent non-state groups, and the state (agency).

There are many more similarities than differences between international and subnational hydropolitics. But reconceptualizing hydropolitics as a continuum rather than a dichotomy between these levels requires considerable elaboration, which this chapter attempts in three sections. The first seeks to better define subnational hydropolitics by comparing and contrasting it with its international equivalent, noting a long-term trend toward greater institutionalized cooperation at the international, but not necessarily the subnational, level. The second explains this divergence by exploring the many constraints that central governments face in managing water resources, especially when political power is decentralized. Contrary to popular belief, shared water resources can be difficult to manage even when they are contained within the same country. The third builds on this conceptual foundation by adding an empirical survey of subnational hydropolitics in ten countries, in the process sketching its three basic dimensions: interjurisdictional, intergovernmental, and state–society relationships.

Chapter 2 presents a theoretical framework to systematically trace how interactions among violent non-state groups influence people’s security. The first part theorizes behavioral patterns among violent non-state groups as forms of non-state order. It offers a typology of violent non-state group interactions with eight types that fall into three clusters: the “enmity” cluster, in which groups fight each other; the “rivalry” cluster, involving unstable short-term arrangements among groups with unpredictable outbreaks of violence; and the “friendship” cluster that consists of relatively stable long-term arrangements. These clusters emerge from distinct distrust-reducing mechanisms employed by the groups. The second part of the chapter introduces the analytical lens of citizen security. This lens accounts for both observed and perceived insecurity, and for repercussions of these on the state-society relationship. It highlights why and how specific violent non-state group interactions are conducive to distinct security outcomes, including violence, the erosion of social fabric, and shadow citizenship.

Chapter 6 discusses security dynamics in contexts where violent non-state groups engage in relatively stable long-term arrangements with each other. They coexist or ally on the same territory, or one group dominates and engages in stable interactions at the margins of that territory. It demonstrates how these groups complement each other in assuming governance functions. Depending on the specific arrangement type, community members have reasonable certainty about the prevailing rules and on how to avoid exposure to violence. When locals consent to the groups as governance providers, shadow citizenship and shadow citizen security arise. In such situations, security emerges from a mutually reinforcing relationship between violent non-state groups and the community in which armed actors provide public goods and services, and define the rules of appropriate behavior, while community members socially recognize their illicit authority. If shadow citizenship extends across the borderline, the transnationality of borderlands disguises the armed actors’ illicit authority.

This chapter develops the model of administrative traditions that functions as the framework for the remainder of the book. The argument is that contemporary public bureaucracies are influenced significantly by their historical roots, and that many features of contemporary bureaucracy can be understood through the historically rooted administrative traditions. The model of administrative traditions developed in this chapter has a number of components. First is the nature of the state in which public administration functions. Second is whether there is an emphasis on law or management in defining the role of public servants. The third dimension is the relationship between politics and public administration, followed by the service orientation of public servants. The fifth element of the model is the nature of the career patterns of public servants. Another political dimension concerns the role of social actors in influencing the bureaucracy. Administrative traditions also are concerned with the degree of uniformity in public services throughout the country. The final dimension of the model of administrative traditions is the degree and form of accountability. This model of administrative traditions is based on the experiences of Western Europe, but also has relevance in many other settings.

Putin has built his leadership on collective identity politics and Russia’s perceived need to be recognized by the world. This concluding chapter presents three short vignettes to highlight the central issues in state-society relations in contemporary Russia and to argue that the issue of individual and collective recognition is central to state-society relations inside Russia. In all three stories we see individuals denied their dignity and recognition by the state. These issues could be used by political entrepreneurs to construct a new frame that is likely to resonate with the broader population in Russia and present an alternative to the system created under Putin’s leadership.