“Localization” in Fragile Spaces: A Comparative Networks Evaluation of Community-Based Programmes in Pakistan and Afghanistan

References

• Barfield, T. (2010). Afghanistan: A cultural and political history. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beath, A., Christia, F., & Enikolopov, R. (2015). The national solidarity programme: Assessing the effects of community-driven development in Afghanistan. International Peacekeeping, 22(4), 302–320. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/13533312.2015.1059287
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett, C. (2012). Aid effectiveness in fragile states: Lessons from the first generation of transition compacts. New York: International Peace Institute, April 2012. https://www.ipinst.org/2012/04/aid-effectiveness-in-fragile-states-lessons-from-the-first-generation-of-transition-compacts
   Google Scholar
• Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. (Vol. 2). Journal of Statistical Mechanics, (10), P1000. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008
   Google Scholar
• Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for windows: Software for social network analysis. Analytic Technologies.
   Google Scholar
• Brechenmacher, S., & Carothers, T. (2019). Defending civic space: Is the international community stuck? Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
   Google Scholar
• Brinkerhoff, D. W. (ed). (2007). Governance in post-conflict societies: Rebuilding fragile states. Routledge, Contemporary Security Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Calder, J., & Hakimi, A. State-building and community engagement without reconciliation: A Case study of Afghanistan’s national solidarity program (Peace Building Series No. 2). Future Generations Graduate School. March 2009. https://www.academia.edu/38503675/Statebuilding_and_Community_Engagement_without_Reconciliation 
   Google Scholar
• Carothers, T., & De Gramont, D. (2013). Development aid confronts politics: The almost revolution. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
   Google Scholar
• Clunan, A. L., & Trinkunas, H. A. eds. (2010). Ungoverned Spaces: Alternatives to State Authority in an Era of Softened Sovereignty. Stanford, California: Stanford Security Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Community-driven development overview (The World Bank Group).
   Google Scholar
• Community-driven development spreads, empowers the poor in Asia (The World Bank). April 23, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, R. Developing network models of development projects: An introduction (MANDe News). UK. April 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Easterly, W. (2013). The tyranny of experts: Economists, dictators, and the forgotten rights of the poor. Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Easterly, W. The SDGs should stand for senseless, dreamy, garbled (Foreign Policy), September 28, 2015. https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/09/28/the-sdgs-are-utopian-and-worthless-mdgs-development-rise-of-the-rest/
   Google Scholar
• Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, M. (2017). Global governance networks. In J. N. Victor, A. H. Montgomery, & M. Lubell (Eds.), The oxford handbook of political networks (pp. 689 - 713). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190228217.013.30
   Google Scholar
• Emergency project paper for a FATA rural livelihoods and community infrastructure project (A World Bank Document). (2011). The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Eyben, R. (ed). (2006). Relationships for aid. Institute of Development Studies.
   Google Scholar
• FATA RLCIP Presentation. Retrieved November 10, 2014. RLCIP FATA Programme.
   Google Scholar
• FATA RLCIP projects and operations (The World Bank Group).
   Google Scholar
• FATA-Rural Livelihood and Community Infrastructure Project: Website. 2014. RLCIP FATA Programme.
   Google Scholar
• Faul, M. V. Networks and power: Why networks are hierarchical not flat and what can be done about it (Global Policy 7), ( no. 2, pp. 185–197). May 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Felbab-Brown, V. (2013). Aspiration and ambivalence: Strategies and realities of counterinsurgency and state building in Afghanistan. Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• ForeignAssistance.gov. (2017). ForeignAssistance.gov. Accessed 2017. Website. https://foreignassistance.gov/explore
   Google Scholar
• Fragile States Index. (2019). The Fund for Peace. https://fundforpeace.org/
   Google Scholar
• Fukuyama, F. (2002). Social capital and development: The coming agenda. SAIS Review, The John Hopkins University Press, 22(1), Winter-Spring, 23–37. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1353/sais.2002.0009
   Google Scholar
• Goodrick, D. (2014). Comparative Case Studies, Methodological Briefs: Impact Evaluation 9, UNICEF Office of Research, Florence. https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/brief_9_comparativecasestudies_eng.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1378. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/225469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groves, L., & Hinton, R. (eds). (2004). Inclusive aid: Changing power and relationships in international development. International Development Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Gul, I. (2010). The most dangerous place: Pakistan’s lawless frontier. Penguin Group.
   Google Scholar
• Halpern, D. (2005). Social capital. Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Houerou, P. L., Nishio, A., & Tata, G. (2008). Aid architecture: An overview of the main trends in official development assistance flows. An update (The World Bank Group).
   Google Scholar
• Impact Evaluation of NSP: Using Evaluation Findings to Strengthen the Program. (2013). (Working Paper 81338). The World Bank Group.
   Google Scholar
• Impact of rural support programmes in Pakistan: Key evidences from external and independent evaluations (RSPN). (2018). Rural Support Programmes Network (RSPN). http://www.rspn.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Impact%20of%20Rural%20Support%20Programmes%20in%20Pakistan.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Implementation completion and results report. FATA rural livelihoods and community infrastructure project (RLCIP) (The World Bank). June 26, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Implementation completion and results report. National solidarity program (NSP). The World Bank, December 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Kakar, P. Fine-tuning the NSP: Discussions and solutions with facilitating partners (Working Paper Series). Department for International Development (DFID), November 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Lambiotte, R., Delvenne, J.-C., & Barahona, M. (2009). Laplacian dynamics. and Multiscale Modular Structure in Networks.
   Google Scholar
• Lieven, A. (2011). Pakistan: A Hard Country. New York: Public Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Lin, N. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections, 22(1), 28–51. http://faculty.washington.edu/matsueda/courses/590/Readings/Lin%20Network%20Theory%201999.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lister, S., & Wilder, A. (2007). Subnational administration and state building: Lessons from Afghanistan. In D. W. Brinkerhoff (Ed.), Governance in post-conflict societies: Rebuilding fragile states (pp. 5214–5560). Routledge, Contemporary Security Studies. Chapter 12.
   Google Scholar
• Mezzera, M., & Aftab, S. (2009). “Pakistan State-Society Analysis: Country Case Study.” Democratization and Transitional Justice Cluster, Initiative for Peace Building
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of rural reconstruction and development (Islamic Republic of Afghanistan). MRRD. (2016). https://mrrd.gov.af/
   Google Scholar
• Murdie, A., & Polizzi, M. (2017). Human rights and transnational advocacy networks. In J. N. Victor, A. H. Montgomery, & M. Lubell (Eds.),The oxford handbook of political networks(pp. 715–732). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nagl, J. A., Exum, A. M., & Humayun, A. A. (2009). A pathway to success in Afghanistan: The national solidarity program (Center for a New American Security). Policy Brief.
   Google Scholar
• National Solidarity Program. (2015). Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development. Project Website. NSP Afghanistan Programme. https://www.nspafghanistan.org
   Google Scholar
• National Solidarity Program III Project Profile. World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Nawaz, S. (2019). The battle for Pakistan: The bitter US friendship and a tough neighbourhood. Penguin Random House, India.
   Google Scholar
• Newsletter RLCIP. Vol 1, Issue 1, June 2013.
   Google Scholar
• NSP Quarterly Report. (2014). Islamic republic of afghanistan, ministry of rural rehabilitation and development (National Solidarity Program). Reporting period June 22 to September 22, 2014. NSP Afghanistan Programme.
   Google Scholar
• Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2014). DAC Statistics. “Aid Statistics.” http://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, The Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions.
   Google Scholar
• Pomerantz, P. R. (2004). Aid effectiveness in Africa: Developing trust between donors and governments. Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Practitioner’s guide: Governance structures in a post conflict environment. National solidarity program - NSP, Afghanistan (Method Finder). Ministry of Rural Reconstruction and Development, 2006/09.
   Google Scholar
• Prell, C. (2012). Social network analysis: History, theory, and methodology. SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Progress report of rural livelihood and community infrastructure project. Quarterly progress report (RLCIP). April – June 2014. RLCIP FATA Programme.
   Google Scholar
• Qadeer, M. A. (2006). Pakistan : Social and cultural transformations in a muslim nation. Routledge contemporary South Asia series. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• A review of the priorities and accomplishments of FATA rural livelihood and community infrastructure project (RLCIP) (Impact). Biannual Review. October 2013 to March 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Ramalingam, B. (2013). Aid on the edge of Chaos. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reinert, K. (2020). From Sustainable Development Goals to Basic Development Goals. Ethics & International Affairs, 34(2), 125–137. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679420000180
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rural Support Programmes Network. (2020). RSPN. http://www.rspn.org/
   Google Scholar
• Sachs, J. D. (2015). The age of sustainable development. Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schiffer, E., & Hauck, J. (2010). Net-map: Collecting social network data and facilitating network learning through participatory influence network mapping. Field Methods, 22(3), 231–249. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X10374798
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siddique, A. (2012). “Afghanistan’s Ethnic Divides.” CIDOB Policy Research Project. Sources of Tension in Afghanistan and Pakistan: A Regional Perspective. CIDOB Barcelona Center for International Affairs, January 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Strategic directions for the national solidarity program: Assessment of strategic issues and recommendations for future directions (Technical Assistance Paper). The World Bank Group, March 31, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• The Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, FATA, & Balochistan. The World Bank Group, Operations Manual, Vol. 5. July 2012.
   Google Scholar
• The World Bank Operational Manual Operational Policies: Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies. 2014 Retrieved July 1, 2014, from The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Victor, J. N., & Khwaja, E. T. (2020). Network analysis: Theory and testing. In L. Curini & R. Franzese (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of research methods in political science and international relations (pp. 858–875). Sage Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• White, H., Menon, R., & Waddington, H. (2018). Community-driven development: Does it build social cohesion or infrastructure - A mixed-method evidence synthesis (3ie Working Paper 30). International Initiative for Impact Evaluation.
   Google Scholar
• World Bank. (2016). World bank group engagement in situations of fragility, conflict, and violence.
   Google Scholar