IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ctwqxx/v35y2014i2p210-231.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

International Organisations and the Production of Hegemonic Knowledge: how the World Bank and the helped invent the Fragile State Concept

Author

Listed:
  • Olivier Nay

Abstract

This article examines the role of the World Bank and the oecd in the emergence and circulation of the ‘fragile state’ concept. These organisations were critical to the early development of the concept and in the consolidation of a knowledge-based agenda set out by Western aid donors to justify international assistance to poor and conflict-ridden countries. Attention is focused on three normative processes affecting the production of transnational knowledge: normalisation, fragmentation and assimilation. ‘Normalisation’ is the process by which influential knowledge producers help to transform a rough concept into a widely accepted transnational norm based on expert knowledge, detailed definitions and statistical exercises. Once the concept has been appropriated by several international actors, it undergoes normative ‘fragmentation’ as it is subjected to various interpretations across time and space. ‘Assimilation’ is the process by which the overarching concept is renewed, enriched and gradually adapted through the incorporation of additional insights. The article argues that the World Bank and oecd have functioned as central knowledge hubs, facilitating the circulation of new and controversial ideas on fragile states and their integration into the prevailing policies of the most powerful aid donors. The two organisations have thus taken an active role in the consolidation and perpetuation of the aid donors’ policy doctrine, ultimately protecting it from major normative dissent.

Suggested Citation

  • Olivier Nay, 2014. "International Organisations and the Production of Hegemonic Knowledge: how the World Bank and the helped invent the Fragile State Concept," Third World Quarterly, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(2), pages 210-231, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:ctwqxx:v:35:y:2014:i:2:p:210-231
    DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2014.878128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01436597.2014.878128
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01436597.2014.878128?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Boris Branisa & Carolina Cardona, 2015. "Social Institutions and Gender Inequality in Fragile States: Are they relevant for the Post-MDG Debate?," Development Research Working Paper Series 06/2015, Institute for Advanced Development Studies.
    2. Joshua K. Ault & Andrew Spicer, 2020. "State fragility as a multi-dimensional construct for international entrepreneurship research and practice," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 981-1011, December.
    3. Park, Sung Jae & Lee, Kyu-Min & Yang, Jae-Suk, 2023. "Calculating the country risk embedded in treaty-shopping networks," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    4. Yijian Liu & Chaoqun Zhou & Lin Li & Liang Su & Yuanbiao Zhang, 2018. "Fragile States Metric System: An Assessment Model Considering Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-29, May.
    5. Maria Paola Bertone & Jean-Benoît Falisse & Giuliano Russo & Sophie Witter, 2018. "Context matters (but how and why?) A hypothesis-led literature review of performance based financing in fragile and conflict-affected health systems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-27, April.
    6. Zeigermann, Ulrike & Böcher, Michael, 2020. "Challenges for bridging the gap between knowledge and governance in sustainability policy – The case of OECD ‘Focal Points’ for Policy Coherence for Development," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ctwqxx:v:35:y:2014:i:2:p:210-231. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/ctwq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.