|
The project
involves two main components: research and
dissemination.
Research
Literature Review: At the international
level, research on the link between
misgovernance and radicalization yields
ambiguous findings. While some studies reveal a
terrorism-enhancing effect of economic
underdevelopment , others find that development
and poverty do not constitute strong
determinants of terrorism . Most studies do not
find income –inequality to be significantly
linked to terrorism, contrasted by the findings
of Li and Schaub (2004) who find strong
correlations between income distribution
patterns and terrorism. While some researchers
have linked economic downturns to increased
terrorist activity , others have found no
significant relationship between terrorism and
economic performance in terms of growth,
inflation or unemployment rates. While most
studies suggest a strong negative or positive
interrelationship between democracy and
terrorism, (depending on how recently the
transition was made) , Drakos and Gofas (2006a)
find no significant link between the two. Higher
degrees of political freedom and protection of
civil liberties are found to dampen terrorist
activity, while state repression is found to
encourage terrorism and radicalization. In
contrast, a few studies find only weak
associations between political freedoms , while
others characterize this relationship as
non-linear. While some researchers find that
governmental capacity and strength, (operationalized
through proxies such as military manpower and
government size) correlates negatively with
terrorist activity , other studies contradict
these findings. Researchers who control for
regime stability find that more stable regimes
tend to experience less terrorist violence , but
not in the case of suicide terrorism. Adequate
social welfare policies are found to reduce both
the generation and risk of exposure to terrorist
attacks. The link between education and
terrorism is similarly weak and ambiguous. While
certain studies have uncovered at best a weak
link , others have linked higher illiteracy
among males to higher terrorist incidence. Sound
performance against indicators of governance,
especially ‘rule of law’, bureaucratic quality’
and ‘government corruption’ are found to reduce
ethnic tensions and discourage radicalization
and extremism by reinforcing market principles,
contract rights, and economic opportunity.
At the national level, research is mostly limited to newspaper articles
and opinion pieces. Academic research that does
exist lacks methodological rigor, policy
relevance or both. Robert Kemp (2008) attributes
the rise of radicalism in Pakistan to the
disintegration of state structures, which
creates a vacuum filled by the growing influence
of religious orthodoxy, compounded by poverty,
unemployment and other factors. He does not,
however, reveal the extent to which these
factors enhanced the influence of orthodox
“foreign elements”. Sohail Abbas (2007) surveyed
prisoners held in Khyber Pukhtunkhwa who
returned to Pakistan in 2001, having fought
against US forces until the fall of the Taleban
regime. The respondents were mostly employed,
literate, and educated in public schools rather
than madrassas. However, the small sample size
(517 men), and the lack of evidence linking
these men to terrorist acts in Afghanistan or
Pakistan, undermines the validity and
reliability of these findings. Christine Fair
(2008) conducted a similar study based on
surveys of the families of militants slain in
conflict in Kashmir and Afghanistan. Again, a
small sample size (141 families), and the use of
‘convenience’ sampling techniques undermine the
veracity of findings. A sociological study by
Shinwari (2008) posits poverty and lack of
opportunity as drivers of growing militancy in
FATA. However, as Safiya Aftab (2008) finds in
her analysis of spatial distribution of poverty
incidence across Pakistan, poverty levels are
not nationally exceptional in FATA or Khyber-Pukhtunkhwa
which are hotbeds of militant activity.
Research Hypothesis: Factors of
misgovernance either cause or create an enabling
environment for radicalization and the growth of
extremist behavior. These factors involve the
inadequate delivery of public goods and services
to local citizens, in areas of public safety and
law enforcement, dispensation of justice, land
management, revenue administration, and social
services such as health and education, among
others. Targeted policy interventions can
successfully address these misgovernance
factors, thereby constricting the growth of
radicalization and extremist behavior.
Research
Questions:
1. Is there a relationship between
misgovernance and radicalization? If so, what is
the direction, strength, and linearity of
causality?
2. Which misgovernance factors are most
significant for pushing citizens toward
radicalization and further into extremist
behavior? What is the tipping point where
radicalization assumes behavioral proportions
for violence and extremism and for which
individuals?
3. What are the mediating or intervening
variables that condition the inclination or
support for terrorism, for instance,
tribal/family affiliations? What are the
individual and composite effects of these
variables in creating an enabling environment
for radicalization and extremism? What are the
reasons for differences (if any) in results for
different regions or respondent profiles?
4. What are the policy interventions necessary
to address these misgovernance factors, through
improvements in the financial, administrative
and performance management aspects of local
governance, so that the growth of radicalization
can be stemmed or reversed?
Analytic Framework: The purpose is to
determine as accurately as possible, whether
exposure to state or institutional failure
(possibly manifesting as corruption) leads to
militancy or support for militancy, and to what
extent. We would explore the impact of poor
service delivery (citizens’ perceptions of
police, judiciary, land administration,
education department, revenue, and other state
institutions) governance mismanagement and
inefficiency on inclination or support for
terrorism. Since the research would provide
access to highly robust data on the state of
corruption (or perceptions of corruption),
service delivery, and inefficiency vis-à-vis
state institutions such as police, judiciary,
education department, revenue, utilities related
departments like WAPDA (the government run
electricity- power company), we can also explore
the impact of exposure to corruption on regime
legitimacy and hence the indirect or direct
effect of regime legitimacy, political support
or system support on radicalization.
The above hypotheses will be refined and various indicators developed to
construct support for the terrorism and
militancy dimension. Once data has been captured
and processed, it will be analyzed using support
for the militancy dimension (created through
various indicators loaded together through
factor analysis) as the dependent variable and
various other variables like indicators of
corruption, service delivery, socio-political
efficacy etc. as independent variables and
control variables using multiple regression as
an analytical tool. The results will then be
shared with local service providers to gain
insights into the supply-side dynamics of
misgovernance, evolve policy recommendations and
identify areas for further research.
As borne out by the literature review, this framework differs from
previous research in focus and methodology.
While previous research has focused on the link
between socio-economic anomalies (such as
poverty and unemployment) and terrorism, this
project focuses on essentially a sub-set of
state-citizen relations, by exploring the
relationship between inadequate service delivery
and the inclination or support for militancy.
Also, the research is solution-oriented, probing
the causal factors behind misgovernance in its
supply-side dynamics. This means that research
carries far greater policy relevance by framing
analysis in the policy and institutional context
with clearly defined policy dimensions.
Methodologically, this research project is far
more sophisticated as it will cover a much
larger sample size, a randomized sample design,
and inferential statistics for analysis (rather
than simple descriptive statistics) to establish
causal relationships. Also, Focus Group
Discussions with local service providers will
allow findings to be triangulated, the
conclusions thus drawn to be far more robust,
and the recommendations to be more grounded,
specific, and actionable.
Dissemination
Once the research is complete, the findings may be formatted and
summarized into a Special Report, as
commissioned by USIP, which will be uploaded
onto their website to enhance outreach and
visibility.
GINI will conduct a series of one-day seminars at the provincial (1 each
in provincial capitals of Karachi, Lahore,
Peshawar and Quetta) and national (1 in
Islamabad) levels to disseminate and gain
feedback on the Final Report. These seminars
will invite the participation of provincial
government officials (politicians and civil
servants), media professionals (representatives
of Press Clubs and Press Associations including
journalists and commentators from print and
broadcast media), academics (Vice Chancellors,
department heads and researchers from provincial
and national universities), civil society
organizations (NGOs and think-tanks conducting
research, advocacy, and/or capacity building for
governance, human rights, conflict prevention
and peace-building, service delivery
improvement, etc.), and international donors
focusing on governance or counter-radicalization
efforts (including multilaterals such as World
Bank and ADB, as well as bilateral donors such
as USAID and DfID). The selection criteria for
invitees will include experience,
qualifications, and level of influence as
opinion formers and policy stakeholders within
professional domains, as related to either
governance or radicalization and terrorism.
These seminars will present the Final Report to the invitees and allow
them to discuss and debate the conclusions and
recommendations in detail. These discussions
will focus on the merits of the research from
political, academic and policy standpoints; the
relevance of findings to provinces other than
the targeted areas; the feasibility of the
recommendations given political, economic and
social realities; the roles of provincial and
national stakeholders in realizing the
recommendations of the report; and other points
emerging from the findings of the report. The
proceedings of each seminar and the key policy
implications and recommendations will be
recorded in Seminar Reports which will be
prepared by the Research Analyst following each
event and shared with project stakeholders so
that they may receive intermediate feedback from
the seminars. The Preliminary and Final Reports,
the Special Report, as well as the Seminar
Reports will be uploaded on the GINI website
where organizational partners and other
interested parties will be encouraged to view
and download their contents.
In addition, the Final Report will also be presented to USIP by the
Project Team Leader and the Research Analyst at
USIP offices in Washington, USA.
METHODOLOGY
This section provides details on the methodology adopted for survey
research, Focus Group Discussion, and overall
administration.
Survey Research: The research design
envisages a multistage probability survey of
FATA, NWFP(Khyber-Pukhtunkhwa), and the former
Malakand Division. These three regions have
evolved governance institutions and cultures
that are markedly different in terms of
historical evolution, and current structure and
function. FATA has been governed under the
pre-independence Frontier Crimes Regulation
(1901); the former Malakand Division includes
the former princely states of Swat, Chitral and
Dir; while the rest of (Khyber-Pukhtunkhwa) has
been administered by the provincial and local
governments. Data also signifies varying levels
of radicalization across the 3 regions. FATA is
described as being under “Taleban control”,
(with about 80% of terrorist attacks in Pakistan
planned and executed from South Waziristan), the
former Malakand Division is described as being
under “contested control”, while most other
districts of Khyber-Pukhtunkhwa are described as
being under “Taleban influence”. These three
regions have been chosen purposively to
adequately represent these differences in the
sample frame.
The sample would be approximately 1000 in sample size within NWFP (Khyber-Pukhtunkhwa),
chosen through probability proportionate to the
size, another 500 in Malakand division and
approximately 500 in FATA. Within these regions,
villages (in rural areas) and circle numbers (in
urban areas) will form primary sampling units
stratified by administrative units such as
Districts, Tehsils and Urban/Rural locations.
Within each primary sampling unit we would choose 10 respondents
identified through selection of 10 households
through systematic sampling after identifying
the first household through a random walk
method. Within each household we would interview
a respondent aged 18 years and above, identified
through Kish Grid after listing the eligible
respondents in descending or ascending order
according to their ages, stratified by gender.
We plan to select equal numbers of male and
female respondents from each primary sampling
unit. This sample would be representative of the
regions thus chosen. Nevertheless, the 3
regions, (FATA, NWFP and Malakand Division)
would be weighted according to their adult
population. The disproportionate multistage
cluster sample has been designed to keep enough
number of cases in each region for sub analysis
of each region. This sample design also helps to
control for contextual effects or cultural or
ethnicity aspects which is presented as an
alternative hypothesis to explain the support
for radicalization.
Regression analysis will give adequate controls and can link the main
explanatory variable to the dependent variable
as causal variables (having controlled for
mediating and intervening variables). To
overcome the weaknesses emerging from the lack
of control and treatment groups, we will use
aggregate district level data to form control
and treatment groups through matching
(propensity score matching, CEM, genetic
matching etc.). Incase the number of cases are
too few to constitute a treatment group (given
the relatively few number of districts sampled),
we can match individuals in the survey data,
working within the framework of stata or R
(statistical software packages) to form control
and treatment groups in case of dichotomous
treatment variables (for instance, exposure to
corruption or not). Such treatment or pre-
processing of data will help us to cater for
Omitted Variable Bias in the regression analysis
(if any). Aside from these pre-processing
purposes, we plan to use regression mainly to
control for intervening and mediating effects.
Focus Group Discussions: Focus Group
Discussions (FGDs) would be conducted in each of
the 3 regions selected for survey research (Malakand
Division, NWFP, and FATA) inviting the
participation of lower, medium, and higher tier
public service providers, organized as:
• Police, Prosecution and Judiciary;
• Land Management and Revenue; and
• Social Services departments including Health, Education, & WAPDA,
Civil Works, etc.
These clusters are organized according to the inter-institutional
dependencies that determine the process of
delivering each public good and service to the
consumer. Police, prosecution and judiciary must
function in an inter-related fashion to play
their roles in the provision of public safety,
law enforcement, and justice to the citizens.
Similarly, Land Management is closely linked to
the Revenue Department, while social services
cover various departments that are similar in
function and structure.
Each management tier administering these public service areas would be
represented with 9 FGDs (3 tiers x 3 public
service areas) in each of the 3 regions. The
agenda of the FDGs would be to:
-
Assess the
level of extremist behavior in targeted
regions, which may be linked to factors of
misgovernance
-
Identify the
supply-side factors that are responsible for
negative citizen perceptions related to each
public service area (if any) emanating from
the surveys and highlight the reasons that
explain differences
-
Evolve policy
recommendations that may mitigate these
factors, to improve negative public
perceptions of local governance, which may
promote radicalization
-
Identify
areas for further research to explore the
misgovernance-terrorism nexus in light of
FGD findings
Administration: The project team will
consist of a Project Team Leader, 1 Research
Analysts, 1 Statistical Expert and 9 Field
Operations Teams (3 for each region). The
Project Team Leader will provide substantive
inputs into the development of the research
design, methodology, and instruments. He/she
will also lead the analysis of research findings
and provide overall supervision and guidance for
the research. The Research Analyst will be
responsible for designing and executing
research, undertaking on-site spot checks,
managing contingencies, and ensuring overall
monitoring and evaluation. GINI has evolved
detailed methodologies for developing survey
instruments, recruiting and training field
teams, and conducting interviews and Focus Group
Discussions that have been applied successfully
in the past and will be utilized for the
proposed project. In addition, the following
safeguards will ensure the integrity of the
research process:
-
Interim
deliverables for early vetting and revision
-
Contractual
safeguards and financial incentives tied to
compliance and performance standards for
outsourced activities
-
Assurance of
researcher capacity and skills at the
recruitment and training stages
-
Random
on-site spot checks conducted by the
Research Analyst
-
Built in
reliability checks in the research design,
that gauge inter-rater and test-retest
reliability levels
-
Multi-stage
data processing that detects and corrects
errors at the data entry, verification and
validation stage
-
Brief trip
reports compiled through research journals
kept by enumerators
-
Monitoring
adherence to Research Action Plans
The Statistical
Expert will be responsible for developing the
detailed Research Design, (including research
instruments), performing statistical analysis
and providing inputs into development of
findings, conclusions, and recommendations. The
Field Operations Teams (FOTs) will be
composed of a Field Supervisor and 4 Enumerators
who will undertake the research in each of the
target Agencies and Districts. A total of 9
Field Operations Teams will be contracted. A
team of Data Entry Operators will also be hired,
led by a Database Manager who will enter, verify
and process the data.
|
