State Formation, the Local and Hybridity

  • Balázs Áron Kovács
Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)


This brief chapter discusses the interrelated concepts of ‘the local’ and hybridity in the context of peace-building. Both have been theorised as analytical devices, as avenues of emancipation, and have in praxis been deployed as stratagems to further the agenda of institutional state- and peace-building. In this sense the chapter serves as a bridge between the preceding chapter and the one that follows, on peace infrastructures, which have in different ways relied on these concepts.

List of References

  1. Autesserre, S. (2009). Hobbes and the Congo: Frames, Local Violence, and International Intervention. International Organization, 63(2), 249. Scholar
  2. Balthasar, D. (2015). From Hybridity to Standardization: Rethinking State-Making in Contexts of Fragility. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 9(1), 26–47. Scholar
  3. Barnett, M., & Zürcher, C. (2009). The Peacebuilder’s Contract: How External Statebuilding Reinforces Weak Statehood. In R. Paris & T. D. Sisk (Eds.), The Dilemmas of Statebuilding: Confronting the Contradictions of Postwar Peace Operations (pp. 23–52). Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Belloni, R. (2012). Hybrid Peace Governance: Its Emergence and Significance. Global Governance, 18, 21–38.Google Scholar
  5. Bliesemann de Guevara, B. (2010). Introduction: The Limits of Statebuilding and the Analysis of State-Formation. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 4(2), 111–128. Scholar
  6. Boege, V., Brown, A., Clements, K. P., & Nolan, A. (2008). On Hybrid Political Orders and Emerging States: State Formation in the Context of “Fragility”. Berlin: Berghof Research Centre for Constructive Conflict Management.Google Scholar
  7. Canuday, J. J. (2014). Big War, Small Wars: The Interplay of Large-scale and Community Armed Conflicts in Five Central Mindanao Communities. In W. M. Torres III (Ed.), Rido: Clan Feuding and Conflict Management in Mindanao (Expanded ed., pp. 220–253). Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.Google Scholar
  8. De Certeau, M., Jameson, F., & Lovitt, C. (1980). On the Oppositional Practices of Everyday Life. Social Text, 3, 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hameiri, S. (2007). Failed States or a Failed Paradigm? State Capacity and the Limits of Institutionalism. Journal of International Relations and Development, 10(2), 122–149. Scholar
  10. Hameiri, S. (2011). A Reality Check for the Critique of the Liberal Peace. In S. Campbell, D. Chandler, & M. Sabaratnam (Eds.), A Liberal Peace? The Problems and Practices of Peacebuilding (pp. 191–208). Zed Books.Google Scholar
  11. Kent, S., & Barnett, J. (2012). Localising Peace: The Young Men of Bougainville’s ‘Crisis Generation’. Political Geography, 31(1), 34–43. Scholar
  12. Kerkvliet, B. J. T. (2013). Everyday Politics in the Philippines: Class and Status Relations in a Central Luzon Village. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Krause, K. (2012). Hybrid Violence: Locating the Use of Force in Postconflict Settings. Global Governance, 18, 39–56.Google Scholar
  14. Lederach, J. P. (1997). Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.Google Scholar
  15. Leonardsson, H., & Rudd, G. (2015). The ‘Local Turn’ in Peacebuilding: A Literature Review of Effective and Emancipatory Local Peacebuilding. Third World Quarterly, 36(5), 825–839. Scholar
  16. Mac Ginty, R. (2011a). Hybrid Peace: How Does Hybrid Peace Come About? In S. Campbell, D. Chandler, & M. Sabaratnam (Eds.), A Liberal Peace? The Problems and Practices of Peacebuilding. Zed Books.Google Scholar
  17. Mac Ginty, R. (2011b). International Peacebuilding and Local Resistance: Hybrid Forms of Peace. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  18. Mac Ginty, R., & Richmond, O. P. (2013). The Local Turn in Peace Building: A Critical Agenda for Peace. Third World Quarterly, 34(5), 763–783. Scholar
  19. Mason, S. J. A. (2009). Insider Mediators: Exploring Their Key Role in Informal Peace Processes. Berlin: Berghof Foundation for Peace Support/Center For Security Studies, ETH Zurich.Google Scholar
  20. Migdal, J. S. (1988). Strong Societies and Weak States: State-Society Relations and State Capabilities in the Third World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Millar, G. (2014). Disaggregating Hybridity: Why Hybrid Institutions Do Not Produce Predictable Experiences of Peace. Journal of Peace Research, 51(4), 501–514. Scholar
  22. Pouligny, B. (2009). Local Ownership. In V. Chetail (Ed.), Post-Conflict Peacebuilding: A Lexicon (pp. 174–187). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Richards, R. (2015). Bringing the Outside In: Somaliland, Statebuilding and Dual Hybridity. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 9(1), 4–25. Scholar
  24. Richmond, O. P. (2009). The Romanticisation of the Local: Welfare, Culture and Peacebuilding. The International Spectator, 44(1), 149–169. Scholar
  25. Richmond, O. P. (2013a). Failed Statebuilding Versus Peace Formation. Cooperation and Conflict, 48(3), 378–400. Scholar
  26. Richmond, O. P. (2013b). Peace Formation and Local Infrastructures for Peace. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 38(4), 271–287. Scholar
  27. Scott, J. C. (1999). Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  28. UNSG. (1992). An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping (A/47/277–S/24111). New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  29. World Bank. (1997). World Development Report 1997: The State in a Changing World.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Balázs Áron Kovács
    • 1
  1. 1.MindanaoPhilippines

Personalised recommendations