Examining Diffuse Benefits and Shared Responsibility in the Perpetuation of 'Failed' Policies

审视“失败”政策长期存在的分散利益和共同责任

• 批准号: 2751309
• 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: 2022
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2022 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2751309
• 关键词: Examining; Diffuse; Benefits; Shared; Responsibility

This research seeks to invoke critical international relations and normative theory lenses to advance our understanding of why many foreign interventions continue long after they have failed to achieve their stated goals and the normative implications of perpetual 'failed' interventions in terms of attributing responsibility and even legal culpability for such continued 'failure'. From botched humanitarian interventions to prolonged military aid programmes, foreign intervention policies often gain notoriety for 'doing more damage than good'. In explaining such 'failures', critiques often focus on the role of a handful of individual decision makers in an endless game of naming and shaming, a tendency toward attributional oversimplification that is well-documented in literature on organisational theory. This research proposal engages the theoretical premise that in order to understand and improve upon foreign interventions, it is first essential to expose and examine the diffuse web of interests and influences that perpetuate the status quo. Michel Foucault's critical theory underpins this framework: Foucault calls into question the negative nature of 'failure', demanding that we consider "the whole play of dependencies that make up a functional system" (Foucault 1968, 58) in order to understand it. Within the scope of this research, Foucault's approach pushes us to critically examine the secondary, hidden functions and benefits of prolonged foreign interventions, probing the possibility that seemingly 'failed' efforts may hold hidden benefits and secondary functions for a diffuse set of actors.I thus seek to critically examine the role of agent-driven strategic intent as opposed to less intentional and more diffuse factors in contributing to apparent policy 'failures', asking: a) how can we characterise the role of hidden and diffuse benefits in perpetuating supposed 'failed' foreign interventions? I will then consider the normative implications of such diffuse drivers behind apparent 'failure', ultimately asking: b) what are the normative implications of diffuse benefits of 'failure' in terms of attributing responsibility for continued 'failure'? How can we attribute blame if benefits of a 'dysfunctional' system are widely shared? By endeavouring to challenge entrenched notions of attribution of responsibility for such 'failure', we interrogate the unexplored premises of why and how-and if-we 'help'.I tentatively propose to consider the diffuse functions of 'failed' interventionsthrough exploring the case of perpetuated counter-narcotics assistance to Tajikistan. While this case study may evolve as I refine my project, Tajikistan provides an interesting possible case: funding to the Central Asian republic has repeatedly proven ineffective in stemming the flow of drugs from Afghanistan. Nonetheless, funding has been maintained. This project would seek to unpack the role of intentional decision-making on the part of donors and recipients as opposed to more diffuse forms of power such as path dependency and discourse in perpetuating assistance, before considering the normative implications of such a case of shared responsibility.This project ultimately seeks to contribute to critical theory literature on the functions of seeming 'dysfunction', questioning how we assign responsibility for 'failures' that produce benefits for actors living within systems and that are derived from a complex array of factors.

本研究试图援引关键的国际关系和规范理论镜头，以推进我们对为什么许多外国干预在未能实现其既定目标后仍持续很长时间的理解，以及在为这种持续的“失败”归因责任甚至法律责任方面，永久“失败”干预的规范含义。从拙劣的人道主义干预到长期的军事援助计划，外国干预政策常常因“弊大于利”而臭名昭著。在解释这种“失败”时，批评往往集中在少数个体决策者在无休止的命名和羞辱游戏中的作用，这是一种归因过度简化的倾向，在组织理论的文献中有充分的记载。本研究建议的理论前提是，为了理解和改进外国干预，首先必须揭露和检查维持现状的广泛的利益和影响网络。米歇尔·福柯的批判理论支撑了这个框架：福柯质疑“失败”的消极本质，要求我们考虑“构成一个功能系统的依赖关系的整体发挥”（福柯1968,58），以便理解它。在本研究的范围内，福柯的方法促使我们批判性地审视长期外国干预的次要、隐藏的功能和利益，探索看似“失败”的努力可能为分散的参与者群体带来隐藏的利益和次要功能的可能性。因此，我试图批判性地审视代理人驱动的战略意图的作用，而不是较少故意和更分散的因素，在促成明显的政策“失败”方面，提出以下问题：a)我们如何描述隐藏的和分散的利益在延续所谓的“失败”的外国干预中的作用？然后，我将考虑这些分散驱动因素在明显的“失败”背后的规范含义，最终问：b)在将持续的“失败”归咎于责任方面，“失败”的分散好处的规范含义是什么？如果一个“功能失调”的系统的好处被广泛分享，我们怎么能归咎于谁？通过努力挑战这种“失败”的责任归属的根深蒂固的观念，我们询问了未被探索的前提，即为什么和如何以及如果我们“帮助”。我试探性地建议，通过探讨长期向塔吉克斯坦提供禁毒援助的情况，来考虑“失败”干预的分散作用。虽然这个案例研究可能会随着我的项目的完善而发展，但塔吉克斯坦提供了一个有趣的可能案例：向中亚共和国提供资金一再被证明在阻止毒品从阿富汗流入方面无效。尽管如此，资金得到了维持。在审议这种共同责任的情况下的规范问题之前，本项目将设法揭示捐助者和受援国有意决策的作用，而不是更分散的权力形式，如路径依赖和话语，在使援助长期存在方面的作用。该项目最终旨在为看似“功能失调”的功能的批判理论文献做出贡献，质疑我们如何为“失败”分配责任，这些“失败”为生活在系统内的参与者带来好处，并且源于一系列复杂的因素。