After Exit: Assessing the Consequences of United Nations Peacekeeping Withdrawal

冷战结束以来，联合国维和行动的数量和范围都大大扩大。除了极少数例外，联合国不再部署军队来维持前交战国之间的和平；相反，联合国维和人员现在经常干预正在进行的冲突，目的是在短期内维持秩序，然后通过支持（重新）建设国家和政府机构，使和平在长期内制度化。但是，联合国通过国家建设实现了这一雄心勃勃的和平目标吗？要回答这个问题，我们需要了解，在联合国维和行动结束、维和人员撤离后，驻在国是否还能履行基本国家职能。然而，有问题的是，目前关于国家能力和退出后提供公共服务的数据很少，而且没有系统。在这个项目中，我们的目标是通过解决两个问题来解决这一经验差距。我们首先提出的问题是，在维和特派团和相关维和部队撤离后，国家能力的发展轨迹是怎样的？这个问题需要一个经验性的描述性回答，我们将通过收集关于退出后原维持和平国家功能的原始数据来得出这个回答。我们的数据收集工作将涉及跨国定量和定性数据的汇总，以及在利比里亚和海地的长期联合国特派团结束后进行的大规模调查。我们的第二个问题从描述转向解释，问“在什么条件下，退出后国家功能得以维持？在什么条件下，国家功能发生了转变？”这个问题基于这样一个假设：我们将观察到，在联合国撤出维和支持后，各国能够提供公共服务的程度会发生变化。如果确实观察到这种变化，我们将探讨可能影响退出后国家能力的三组因素：(1)在维和部队部署之前和期间，国内机构的实力和范围；（二）国际干预的范围和国际退出策略；(3)在退出后，各种国内和国际行动者介入并取代联合国维和部队以前发挥作用的程度。为了评估这些可能的因果因素的相对影响，我们将在联合国维和行动部署之前和期间对国家职能的定量和定性测量与联合国部队撤离后五年内的国家职能指标进行比较。我们将重点关注四项国家职能，特别是：安全能力、政府/行政能力、生产/采掘能力和对外关系。学术和政策影响鉴于我们项目的创新性质，预计会引起学术和政策受众的极大兴趣。在学术方面，我们的研究将至少面向三种不同的受众；对评估联合国建设和平与国家建设的有效性感兴趣的学者；对国家、国家能力和国家脆弱性概念感兴趣的人；以及研究人员，他们的工作探讨了衡量维和干预的有意和无意遗留问题的方法挑战。拟议的研究也将明显引起目前参与联合国发起的建设和平的政策行为者的兴趣。由于我们研究小组的几位成员与联合国密切合作多年，我们与联合国各部门建立了良好的联系。因此，我们将能够将我们的调查结果直接传达给负责实施联合国维和行动退出的政策行为者。我们还与利比里亚和海地的国家和非政府行为体建立了关系，这将促进我们在那里的工作的传播。

Aims and ObjectivesSince 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host to UN peacekeeping missions are able to perform basic state functions after PKOs have ended and peacekeepers have withdrawn.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 ImpactGiven 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.