The Centre for International Governance Innovation
SSR Issue Papers: No. 8
that contributes to public security, rendering non-state
security mechanism depends largely on where its
security providers a more practical option (Scheye, 2009b:
resources come from. William Reno (2007) uses
14–20). Alternatively, the state may empower local civil
such an approach to delineate protective militias
society groups to monitor, audit and negotiate with PSCs
from predatory ones in West Africa: those militias
(a function that would be easier in relation to national
who depended upon the patronage networks of
rather than to international PSCs).
patrimonial states had no interest in the needs of the community and were thus highly predatory,
While the shift from state-centrism to a broader
unaccountable, illegitimate and ultimately bad
governance perspective implies the existence of a wide
security providers. Militias that did not receive
variety of alternative security mechanisms in areas of
regime funding depended on local communities
limited statehood, a non-state SSR strategy requires a
for resources and support, creating an interest in
particularly in-depth understanding of such actors in
serving the community. Such groups operated
order to decide who is a suitable candidate to engage
through local customs and institutions rather than
in reform. In one rubric, Ulrich Schneckener (2006)
raw coercion, enabling a form of reciprocity and
proposes three axes with which to assess the nature of
protection for these communities. The key questions
non-state security actors: motivations of greed versus
are: how do non-state actors acquire the means to
grievance; territorial versus non-territorial basis; and
provide security, and what patterns of negotiation,
status quo versus change orientation. The presumption
accountability and reciprocity does this entail?
is that those actors with a developed political agenda, territorial control and orientation towards change will be
• Communitarianism and the right of security
most amenable to reform. More broadly, there are at least
provision: Within this approach, security provision
three theoretical approaches for strategists analyzing the
occurs within a web of shared values, beliefs and
emergence and characteristics of such actors.
identities that creates a community-based conception of legitimacy as the foundation of informal
• Functionalism and the purpose of security provision:
institutions. This intersubjective normativity affects
Within this approach, new security threats drive
who has the authority to provide security; the
the emergence of informal security mechanisms.
particular rules, norms and procedures of security
As new security issues confront a community,
provision; and public acceptance and support for
creative problem solvers develop novel methods of
these mechanisms. Security provision may be based
coping with them. Institutions can be understood
on common bonds of civic, tribal, religious or union
in reference to the functions they perform. The
identity and responsibility. Tobias Debiel et al., for
functionalist framework is often used to explain
example, identify the presence of “shared mental
European integration after World War II as a
models” (in the form of common ethnic identity) as
progressive deepening of cooperation in order to
the key foundation of durable and effective non-state
confront shared challenges. The key question within
governance in Afghanistan and Somaliland (2009).15
this perspective is: which threats and issues confront
The key question is: what patterns of legitimacy and
communities and informal security providers?
15 Debiel et al. argue that “relevant actors such as traditional elders or warlords are embedded into societal contexts. This ‘embeddedness’ limits their scope of action and, at the same time, produces expectations within their constituencies” (2009: 39-40).
• Political-economy and the means of security provision: In this approach, the nature of the informal www.cigionline.org 15
Towards a Non-State Security Sector Reform Strategy