Peacemaking, Policy, and the Politics of Evidence: A critical grounded theory of issue and technical bias in the 2012-2016 Colombian Peace Process

缔造和平、政策和证据政治：2012-2016 年哥伦比亚和平进程中问题和技术偏见的批判性扎根理论

• 批准号: 2265394
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: London School of Economics and Political Science
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2019
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2019 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2265394
• 关键词: Peacemaking; Policy; Politics; Evidence; critical

My proposed research looks at the use of evidence-based policymaking (EBPM) within the 2012-2016 Colombian Peace Process (CPP) between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). The process of peacemaking is designed to neutralise politics, thus promoting peace. In the CPP, the negotiation process was supported by the bipartisan creation of policies addressing the causes and effects of the conflict: rural land reform, political participation, the 'illicit drugs problem', and - ultimately - violence. Policymaking involved the extensive use of participatory evidence and proposals for peace, as facilitated by a systematic - neutrally administered - process. It also involved the use of expert analysis at the negotiation table and beyond. Unfortunately, the rise in rural violence and the increase in cocaine production suggests these policies may be ineffective or misplaced. I contend that this is the result of issue and/or technical bias. Issue bias is the artificial depoliticisation of inherently political issues using EBPM; technical bias is a deviation from scientific best-practice in EBPM. EBPM in the CPP exhibits these biases because the FARC-government conflict specific policies were sold as a panacea to wider issues (issue bias) and the policies have also been ineffective within their defined scope (potentially technical bias). I wish to explore how these biases came to be by interpreting and qualitatively analysing interview and documental data using a critical realist lens. Interviews with 20-30 bureaucrats, politicians, non-state actors, and other stakeholders will take place in Colombia in the second year of PhD study. By using a process of open-coding, axial coding, induction, deduction, and retroduction (including quantitative analysis), a critical grounded theory will emerge. Consistent with the methodology, this critical grounded theory will be emancipatory, enacting change to prevent issue bias and technical bias in future peacemaking scenarios (taking into account the relevant causal variables). This will have a significant impact because, in situations where conflict has arisen due to politics and policy issues, lasting peace depends on the effectiveness of solutions. Thus, by creating and disseminating knowledge about EBPM - and its biases - in the peacemaking process, I hope to contribute to the successful resolution and prevention of violent conflicts in Colombia and elsewhere.

我建议的研究着眼于使用循证决策（EBPM）在2012-2016哥伦比亚和平进程（CPP）哥伦比亚政府和哥伦比亚革命武装力量（FARC）之间。建立和平的过程旨在使政治中立化，从而促进和平。在CPP中，谈判进程得到了两党制定政策的支持，这些政策解决了冲突的原因和影响：农村土地改革、政治参与、“非法毒品问题”，以及最终的暴力。决策涉及广泛使用参与性证据和和平建议，这是由一个系统的、中立管理的进程推动的。它还涉及在谈判桌上和谈判桌外使用专家分析。不幸的是，农村暴力的增加和可卡因产量的增加表明，这些政策可能无效或错位。我认为这是问题和/或技术偏见的结果。问题偏见是使用EBPM对固有的政治问题进行人工去政治化;技术偏见是EBPM中科学最佳实践的偏离。CPP中的EBPM表现出这些偏见，因为哥伦比亚革命武装力量-政府冲突的具体政策被当作灵丹妙药出售给更广泛的问题（问题偏见），这些政策在其定义的范围内也是无效的（潜在的技术偏见）。我希望通过运用批判现实主义的透镜对访谈和文献资料进行解释和定性分析，来探讨这些偏见是如何产生的。与20-30名官僚，政治家，非国家行为者和其他利益相关者的采访将在博士研究的第二年在哥伦比亚举行。通过使用开放编码，轴编码，归纳，演绎和追溯（包括定量分析）的过程，一个关键的扎根理论将出现。与方法论相一致，这一关键的基础理论将是解放性的，制定变革，以防止未来建立和平的情景中出现问题偏见和技术偏见（考虑到相关的因果变量）。这将产生重大影响，因为在因政治和政策问题而产生冲突的情况下，持久和平取决于解决办法的有效性。因此，通过在建立和平过程中创造和传播有关EBPM及其偏见的知识，我希望为成功解决和预防哥伦比亚和其他地方的暴力冲突做出贡献。