After Exit: Assessing the Consequences of United Nations Peacekeeping Withdrawal

Aims and Objectives
Since the end of the Cold War, there has been a vast expansion in the number and scope of UN peacekeeping operations. With rare exceptions, the UN is no longer deploying troops to maintain the peace between former belligerents; rather UN peacekeepers now regularly intervene in ongoing conflicts with the aim of imposing order in the short-term, and then institutionalizing peace over the long-term by supporting the (re)construction of state and governmental institutions.

But is the UN realizing this ambitious aim of peacebuilding through statebuilding? To answer this question, we need to know whether states that have played host to UN peacekeeping missions are able to perform basic state functions after PKOs have ended and peacekeepers have withdrawn. Problematically, however, there is currently little and unsystematized data on state capacity and the delivery of public services after exit. In this project, we aim to address this empirical gap by addressing two questions.

We first ask, 'What are the trajectories of state capacity following the withdrawal of peacekeeping missions and associated peacekeeping forces?' This question invites an empirical descriptive response, which we will produce by gathering original data on the functionality of formerly peacekept states after exit. Our data collection effort will involve an aggregation of cross-national quantitative and qualitative data, as well as large-scale surveys in Liberia and Haiti after long-standing UN missions close in those countries.

Our second question moves from description to explanation by asking 'Under what conditions are state functions sustained after exit, and under what conditions is there a shift in state functionality?' This question rests on the assumption that we will observe variation in the degree to which states are able to deliver public services after the withdrawal of UN peacekeeping support. Where such variation is indeed observed, we will explore three sets of factors that may shape post-exit state capacity: (1) the strength and scope of domestic institutions before, and during, the period of PKO deployment; (2) the scope of international intervention and strategy of international withdrawal; (3) the degree to which diverse domestic and international actors step in and substitute for the roles previously played by the UN PKO, after exit.

To assess the relative impact of these possible causal factors, we will compare quantitative and qualitative measures of state functions before and during periods of UN PKO deployment with indicators of state functionality during the five years that follow the withdrawal of UN forces. We will focus on four state functions, in particular: security capacity, governmental/administrative capacity, productive/extractive capacity, and external relations.

Academic and Policy Impact
Given the innovative nature of our project, it is expected to generate significant interest among academic and policy audiences alike. On the academic side, our study will speak to at least three distinct audiences; scholars who are interested in evaluating the effectiveness of UN peacebuilding and statebuilding; those interested in concepts of the state, state capacity, and state fragility; and researchers whose work explores the methodological challenges of measuring intended and unintended legacies of peacekeeping interventions.

The proposed study will also be of clear interest to policy actors who are currently involved in UN-sponsored peacebuilding. Since several members of our research team have worked closely with the UN for many years, we have well-established connections to various UN departments. As such, we will be able to convey our findings directly to policy actors who are responsible for operationalizing the exit of UN PKOs. We also have established relationships with state and non-governmental actors in Liberia and Haiti, which will facilitate dissemination of our work there.

The principal beneficiaries of this project (in addition to scholars) will be practitioners who are concerned with monitoring and enhancing the effectiveness of peace operations, notably policy makers, analysts, and planners in inter-governmental organizations, national governments (donors, troop contributors, and hosts), and non-governmental organizations (national and international). These practitioners stand to benefit from the project in two key ways. First, we will generate novel and significant empirical data on 'peacekept' states, which we will make available to all interested parties for their own analyses and applications. Second, the project will yield our own account of the development of peacekept states' capacities following the withdrawal of peacekeepers, and this will be of value to planners and managers of peace operations, who stand to be better informed about the possible implications of peacekeeping closure.

In terms of actors, the UN itself will be one of the primary beneficiaries of this project. The current UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, has identified the enhancement of UN peacekeeping as one of his highest priorities. It is an especially propitious moment, therefore, to contribute relevant research findings to the discussion and debate about UN peacekeeping effectiveness. Drawing on PI Caplan's extensive contacts within the UN system -- notably in the Dept of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO), the Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO), and the UN Development Programme (UNDP) -- we plan to organize in-house seminars at UNHQ with various UN actors. Working in conjunction with the International Peace Institute (IPI) in New York, we will also bring our analysis to UN Member States that have a direct interest in peacekeeping (especially donor states and troop-contributing countries).

Beyond the UN and associated actors, we will present our findings to governmental and non-governmental actors with a policy focus in Liberia and Haiti, due to the extensive contacts of Co-I Karim in Liberia and the long-term experience of Co-I Kolbe in working with local institutions and researchers in Haiti.

The UK government is also a major potential beneficiary. The UK is one of the leading global peace operations actors -- as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, as a troop contributor to UN and other multilateral peace operations, and as a major source of innovation in peacekeeping policy and practice, among other key roles it plays. The UK government has a strong interest in enhancing the capacity of international organizations to promote conflict recovery and peace consolidation more effectively. To the extent that this project can shed light on problems associated with efforts to assess the effects of UN peacekeeping closure on peace- and statebuilding, it can help the UK government, working within the UN system, to determine when, and in what ways, it can engage more constructively in peace- and statebuilding efforts. PI Caplan will be able to ensure that our findings reach senior-level UK governmental actors by drawing on relationships that he has previously established through his roles as a Specialist Advisor to the UK House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs and a consultant to the UK Foreign Office (FCO) and UK Department for International Development (DfID).

The Communications and Impact Team in Oxford's Dept of Politics and IR will support these and any other engagement and exchange activities to help ensure that their effectiveness and impact are maximised.