Ethnogovernmentality: the colonial legacy of the nexus between ethnicity, territory and conflict

An “ethnic territory” may seem like self-explanatory unit: A bounded space inhabited by people belonging to the same ethnic community with shared interests and values. However, ethnic territories are thoroughly historical and contested constructions. While ethnic territories are historical and contested constructions, they are not innocent. Throughout history they have been deployed to naturalise and justify mass violence, exclusion, oppression, and inequality in many corners of the world (see e.g. here and here). During moments of violent upheaval and conflict, essentialised ideas of ethnic territories often come to the fore, informing people’s understanding of the conflict’s stakes and fault-lines..

Forms of stateness in the JSRP’s research sites

Tom Kirk and Kasper Hoffmann draw on the JSRP’s research to argue that calls to tackle the root causes of conflict and insecurity in many ‘fragile’ and ‘failing’ regions require understanding the multiple ways the state is often present as both an idea and a power-broker

The challenges of multi-layered security governance in Ituri

There has been a slow, but growing awareness among external actors that some local non-state security actors should be involved in security governance in conflict-affected situations. Already in 2006, the OECD published a report that called for a ‘multi-layered’ approach to reforming actors and institutions that provide security and justice services (Scheye and McLean, 2006). Often these actors consist of local authorities, such as customary chiefs, village elders, or business people working in collaboration with different kinds of self-defense groups. The idea behind ‘multi-layered’ security governance is that the inclusion of local non-state actors in security governance will improve security provision to people because they have more legitimacy. But in reality ‘multi-layered’ security governance is often marked by conflict and competition as much as by collaboration and common solutions to people’s security problems

Competition, patronage and fragmentation : the limits of bottom-up approaches to security governance in Ituri

People are affected by different kinds of insecurity in the Ituri Province in the northeastern region of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). This article investigates donor-driven attempts to improve security governance there. More specifically, it investigates bottom-up approaches to security governance in Ituri’s capital of Bunia and in Irumu territory. Whereas in Bunia people are faced with high levels of violent crime, Irumu is the site of a violent conflict between the Ituri Patriotic Resistance Force (FRPI), an armed group connected to the Ngiti community, and the Congolese army. Involving local non-state security actors in security governance is perceived by international and national actors as a pragmatic way to improve security conditions. However, we show that these bottom-up security governance initiatives have not succeeded in resolving the issues that generate insecurity. We argue that this is because the drivers of insecurity in northeastern Congo are translocal and too complex for localised bottom-up approaches to significantly change the status quo

JSRP paper: multi-layered security governance as a quick fix? The challenges of donor-supported bottom-up security provision in Ituri (DR Congo)

There is currently a lively debate among policy-makers and scholars about the role that local non-state actors can play in security provision in so-called ‘fragile situations’, or contexts characterized by high levels of insecurity and limited state capacity to deal with it. The idea that building security institutions based on Western models is the remedy to the insecurity of fragile situations, has come under increased criticism both from scholars and practitioners and has promoted the inclusion of local non-state actors in peace-building strategies

Making space with data: Data politics, statistics and urban governance in Denmark

In this article we engage with the contemporary data moment by exploring how particular data practices – consisting of census data and statistics - have become embroiled in the making of urban space and governance in Denmark. By focusing on the controversial case of Danish “ghettos” - a state-sanctioned list of marginalised urban areas– we show how Danish data practices of routinely collecting and aggregating extensive census data have become central to ascribing particular urban neighbourhoods as ghetto areas. These data practices spatialise residential housing areas as problematic and influence Danish urban governance. We explore how new forms of data practices for monitoring urban areas arise, and argue that these practices help to maintain the spatialisation of the “ghetto list”. They do so by drawing multiple forms of data together, that visualise and monitor “at risk” areas making them governable and amenable to physical changes. Finally, we show how the state uses data practices to make citizens (and municipalities) accountable; yet, this accountability cuts both ways, as citizens and municipalities also use data to hold the state accountable. We end with a discussion of how our analysis of data practices has implications for how we imagine the scalar hierarchy of the state and the politics of data

Rebel rule: a governmentally perspective

Much of the recent literature on rebel governance and violent political orders works with ‘centred’ and instrumental understandings of power. In this view, power is seen as exercised over subjects, and as situated in rebel rulers, governance institutions, or ruling networks. Drawing on the study of the armed groups known as ‘Mai-Mai’ in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, this article instead adopts a governmentality perspective on rebel governance. It demonstrates how Mai-Mai groups rule not only through direct imposition but also, more subtly, by shaping people’s subjectivities and self-conduct. We identify four clusters of techniques of Mai-Mai rule that relate respectively to ethnicity and custom; spirituality; ‘stateness’; and patronage and protection. We argue that a governmentality perspective, with its focus on rationalities and practices of power, offers a fine-grained understanding of rebel rule that moves beyond common binaries such as coercion versus freedom. By showing its relevance for the analysis of rebel rule in the eastern Congo, our findings further strengthen the case for applying a governmentality perspective to non-Western political orders

Rethinking rebel rule: how Mai-Mai groups in eastern Congo govern

Around the world, vast amounts of people live in areas marked by rebel presence. A growing body of scholarly work examines “rebel governance”, which has emerged as an interdisciplinary field of study. Scholars in this subfield typically share a desire to go beyond stereotypical images of rebels as violent savages or as greedy warlords. By focusing on how rebels govern, these scholars wish to show that rebels are engaged in creating forms of order rather than disorder