What are the different donor policy approaches to security and justice?
What are the different donor policy approaches to security and justice? (Refer to the differences and similarities with DFID’s approach).
Definitions and terms related to security and justice in a development context vary widely, and include a wide range of different types of programmes and projects. This rapid policy mapping includes donor policies that are self-identified as either being part of their security policy, justice policy, security and justice policy, or security sector reform (SSR). In terms of the differences and similarities to DFID’s approach, it finds that DFID is one of the only donors that conceptualises security and justice as a joint policy area, some donors note the overlap of the areas (e.g. AFD), while others conceptualise justice more as part of governance (World Bank), human rights (Sida), or rule of law (USAID) agendas. DFID is the only donor that focusses on ‘stability’ as an overarching concept. However, many of the donors share DFID’s focus on conflict prevention (e.g. USAID, AFD, DANIDA). Other donors emphasise instead on ‘human security’ (including violence) (SIDA, JICA) and ‘peace’ (BMZ). DFID has more policy documents on this area, and publishes a deeper level of detail, than the average donor examined in this query.
A common trend emerging across donors is a move from technical top down polices, towards bottom up policy development including the perspectives of users. All donors emphasised the importance of context-driven reforms. Another common trend is to move to whole-of-government approaches to implement security and justice activities. However, DFID is one of few donors to have a joint security and justice strategy with the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (with the exception of SSR policy documents, which more commonly involves other government departments).
Herbert, S. Donor policy approaches to security and justice (GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report 1189). Governance and Social Development Resource Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK (2015) 12 pp.