![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
One of the hybrid turn’s key contributions to debate in the fields of peacebuilding, state formation and international development is its approach to difference in post-colonial states. Observing difference and enmeshment is not new; it is in response to the standardising drive of statebuilding that it has critical significance. Rather than seeking to assimilate or eliminate difference, the hybrid turn enables approaching it as the field from which the political community of the state is crafted. This does not mean devising hybrid institutions, but supporting mutual recognition and dialogue as fundamental to political community in deeply heterogeneous states. Three different uses of hybridity are identified according to their capacity to enable forms of dialogue and mutual recognition.
Notes
1. E.g. Ellis and ter Haar, Worlds of Power; Grenfell, “Hybridity on the Ground”; Nordstrom, A Different War Story.
2. Eriksen, “State Effects.”
3. Mac Ginty and Richmond, “The Fallacy”; Millar, “Disaggregating Hybridity”; Wallis et al., “Political Reconciliation.”
4. Millar, “Disaggregating Hybridity.”
5. Richmond, “Becoming Liberal”; Mac Ginty and Richmond, “The Fallacy.”
6. Hinton, Transitional Justice.
7. E.g. Bhabha, “Signs Taken for Wonders.”
8. Nandy, The Intimate Enemy.
9. Foucault, The Order of Things, 373.
10. Tully, Strange Multiplicities; Ivison, Post-Colonial Liberalism; Chilisa, Situating Knowledge Systems.
11. Roberts, “Hybrid Polities,” 69.
12. Richmond, Failed Statebuilding.
13. Ghani and Lockhart, Fixing Failed States; Paris, At Wars End; Weber, Political Writings.
14. Held, Democracy and Global Order.
15. Miller and Rose, Governing the Present; Rhodes, “Understanding Governance”; Eriksen, “State Effects.”
16. Brown, “Security, Development, Nation Building,” 148.
17. Eriksen, “State Effects.”
18. Ellis and ter Haar, Worlds of Power; Hohe, “The Clash of Paradigms.”
19. Nixon, “The Crisis”; Roberts, “Hybrid Polities”; Sahlins, “Develop-man.”
20. Grenfell, “Remembering the Dead”; Ellis and ter Haar, Worlds of Power.
21. Sahlins, “Develop-man”; Nordstrom, A Different War Story.
22. Brown, “Security, Development, Nation Building,” 155; Grenfell, “Hybridity on the Ground”; Cummins, “Democrazy.”
23. Albrecht and Wiuff Moe, “The Simultaneity of Authority.”
24. Brown, “Security, Development, Nation Building.”
25. Eriksen, “State Effects,” 11, 8.
26. Lamour, Foreign Flowers.
27. Mac Ginty and Richmond, “The Local Turn”; Brown, Borders of Suffering, chapter 3.
28. Tully, Strange Multiplicities; Erkisen, “State Effects.”
29. Grenfell, “Hybridity on the Ground.”
30. Hohe, “The Clash of Paradigms”; Brown, “Entangled Worlds.”
31. Deng, Identity, Diversity and Constitutionalism; Sawyer, “Post-conflict Governance.”
32. Trindade and Castro, “Rethinking Timorese Identity.”
33. Fukuyama, Origins of Political Order.
34. OECD, Security System Reform; Grenfell et al., “Understanding Community.”
35. E.g. Boege, “Bougainville”; Brown, “Security and Development”; Dinnen and Peake, “More than just Policing”; Grenfell et al., “Understanding Community,” Moore, “The Solomon Islands.”
36. Menkhaus, “Managing Risk”; Moore, “The Solomon Islands.”
37. Sawyer, “Post-conflict Governance,” 1.
38. Eriksen, “State Effects.”
39. Moe, 71; Dinnen and Peake, “More than just Policing.”
40. Baker and Scheye, “Multi-layered justice”; Hunt, “Hybridity Revisited.”
41. Roberts, “Hybrid Polities.”
42. Eriksen, “State Effects.”
43. Tully, Strange Multiplicities; Connolly, Pluralism; Mac Ginty and Richmond, “The Fallacy,” 5.
44. Mac Ginty and Richmond, “The Fallacy,” 5.
45. Millar, “Disaggregating Hybridity,” 503.
46. Mac Ginty and Richmond, “The Local Turn,” 765.
47. Brown, Borders of Suffering.
48. E.g. Lederach, The Moral Imagination.
49. E.g. see Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed; Brown, “Peacebuilding and Anthropology”; Meas Nee, Towards Restoring Life.
50. Lederach, The Moral Imagination.
51. Richmond, “Becoming Liberal.”
52. Meas Nee, Towards Restoring Life.
53. E.g. see Lederach, The Moral Imagination; Westoby and Dowling, Dialogical Community Development.
54. Tully, Strange Multiplicities; Connolly, Identity/ Difference.
55. Mac Ginty and Richmond, “The Fallacy,” 13.
56. Millar, “Disaggregating Hybridity.”
57. Peterson, “A Conceptual Unpacking”; Wallis et al., “Political Reconciliation.”
58. Wallis et al., “Political Reconciliation,” 174.
59. Trinidade and Castro, “Rethinking Timorese Identity,” 31.
60. Mac Ginty and Richmond, “The Fallacy,” 12.
61. Dunn, Timor – A People Betrayed.
62. Mac Ginty and Richmond, “The Fallacy,” 2.
63. Moe, “Turn to the Local,” 132.
64. Lederach, The Moral Imagination.
65. Schmeidl and Karokhail, “Pret-a-Porter States.”
66. Sahak, “Afghanistan’s Enslaved Children.”
67. Ibid.
68. Brown, Borders of Suffering; Scarry Body in Pain.
69. Lederach, The Moral Imagination; Richmond, “Becoming Liberal”; Mac Ginty and Richmond, “The Fallacy,” 13.
70. Richards, “New War,” 12. Escobar, Encountering Development.
71. Smith, Decolonising Methodologies; Chilisa, Situating Knowledge Systems.
72. Brown, “The Nation-building Agenda”; Erikson, “State Effects.”
73. Zulaika, “The Anthropologist as Terrorist.”
74. Tully, Strange Multiplicities.
75. Ibid; Brown, “Borders of Suffering.”
76. E.g. Yoder, “Hybridising Justice”; Dinnen and Peake, “More than just policing”; Menkhaus, “Managing Risk”; Trindade and Castro, “Rethinking Timorese Identity.”
77. Tully, Strange Multiplicity. The literal quote is ‘imperious habits of thought and behaviour,” 19.
78. Ibid. Chilisa, Situating Knowledge Systems; Ivison, Post-colonial Liberalism.
