Researcher
Jon Harald Sande Lie
Contactinfo and files
Summary
Jon Harald Sande Lie holds a PhD in social anthropology from the University of Bergen (2011) and is research professor in the Research Group on Global Order and Diplomacy (GOaD).
His research scope pertains to international aid, global governance and state formation, focusing on development and humanitarian aid in Eastern Africa, particularly Ethiopia and Uganda where he has conducted long-term fieldworks in studying the partnership relation at the level of NGOs and those involving the World Bank.
He is co-editor for the journal Forum for Development Studies. He is project manager for the FRIPRO project Developmentality and the anthropology of partnership, and he is project manager and principal investigator of Public–Private Development Interfaces in Ethiopia - Research project | NUPI
Expertise
Education
2011 PhD in Social Anthropology, University of Bergen
2004 MPhil in Social Anthropology, University of Oslo
2000 Cand. Mag. (roughly equivalent to BA): Social Anthropology (1,5 year); History of Ideas (1 year); History of Religion (1 year); Philosophy (0,5 year); Development and Environment (0,5 year)
Work Experience
2022- Research professor, NUPI
2007- Research fellow/Senior Research Fellow, NUPI
2004- Scholarship holder, Institute of Social Anthropology, University of Bergen
Aktivitet
Filter
Clear all filtersPublic–Private Development Cooperation: Interface and Conflicting Logics in the Formation of a Strategic Partnership
Public–private development partnership constitutes the core of a deepening normative agenda that places private actors as active development agents and as means through which other development objectives are pursued in partnership with publicly funded aid actors. This normative agenda may challenge international development. This article goes beyond the official policy level to explore the formation of public– private development cooperation in practice, not just on paper. It zooms into the partnership between a Norwegian NGO and a multinational company and their joint project to renovate an old vocational college in Ethiopia to serve the private actor’s need for qualified workers. The article shows how a publicly funded development project becomes a proxy for private interests, but argues that the diversion of public aid is not due to bad intentions or conflicting interests. Rather, it is the result of interface situations created by the public–private partnership agenda and its intentional merger of actors with distinct institutional logics, accountabilities and rationales. The article demonstrates how actors put together as part of the public–private partnership agenda end up undermining the agenda itself because of the interface situations created in the nexus of public and private actors.
Africa in a time of global crisis: Some trends
Africa is facing major challenges. Poverty is increasing again after many years of decline, and many countries are experiencing an economic crisis as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, including rising inflation. Several countries are indirectly affected by Russia’s war in Ukraine, which has led to high energy prices and reduced access to grain and fertiliser. Several countries and regions are also marked by terrorism and violent conflicts, and climate change is creating increased risks of floods, droughts and heatwaves. Parallel to this, the role of the great powers in Africa is changing rapidly. After a period of strong European and American dominance, other great powers, such as China and Russia, have stepped up their activities in Africa. China has invested heavily in infrastructure, trade and development aid, while Russia has gained an important role in a number of countries, particularly through military aid and arms supply. Other countries, such as India, Turkey and Qatar, have also invested heavily in Africa. These developments are taking place simultaneously as Africa’s global significance is set to increase. First, the region has important natural resources, such as oil and gas, as well as rare minerals and earth metals that are in high demand in the context of the green transition. Second, Africa is severely affected by climate change, which can lead to social unrest, violent conflicts and extensive migration. In a time of increasing geopolitical rivalries and instability, this means that developments in Africa will have considerable global ramifications. Although other countries have increased their interest in and become more important partners for African countries, the EU and Europe are still Africa’s largest trading partners and providers of development aid. The influence of the EU and Europe in Africa is not challenged in this respect, but rather in areas such as governance, infrastructure and energy, and specifically from the Russian side within what we can call a niche of security markets. Russia has been able to operate here by offering arms sales, military training and services from the Wagner Group (a private military company) to regimes that Europe and the United States are not willing to provide that type of support for. The struggle for political and economic influence in Africa is stronger and more intense than since the Cold War, and there is reason to believe this will continue. This also gives African countries more choice and autonomy vis-à-vis external actors. African states are not just objects to be acted upon by the international community, whether through development aid, investment or in international forums; they are also active agents who, with increased self-awareness, will seek to navigate the new landscape of global power rivalries and fragmentation. This is a development that must be taken seriously. Neither Norway nor Europe can afford to take Africa and African support for our positions in international politics for granted. This report provides a brief overview of the key trends in Africa, which form the basis for Norway’s development of a new strategy for Africa.
The humanitarian-development nexus: humanitarian principles, practice, and pragmatics
The humanitarian–development nexus is increasingly being cast as the solution to humanitarian concerns, new and protracted crises, and to manage complex war-to-peace transitions. Despite widely endorsed amongst policymakers, this nexus presents some challenges to those implementing it. Humanitarian action and development assistance represent two distinct discursive and institutional segments of the international system that are hard to juxtapose. Humanitarianism’s apolitical and imminent needs-based approaches building on established humanitarian principles are fundamentally different from the more long-term, political, rights-based approaches of development. As they rub shoulders, as intentionally instigated by the nexus, they affect and challenge each other. These challenges are more acute to the humanitarian domain given the constitutive status of the humanitarian principles, which, when challenged, may cause changes to the humanitarian space and a mission-cum-ethics creep. This article explores the formation and effects of the humanitarian–development nexus as rendered both at the top, amongst policymakers, and from the bottom. The latter explores the discursive transition from conflict to reconstruction in Northern Uganda. Humanitarian organisations’ different response to the transition demonstrate more pragmatic approaches to the humanitarian principles and thus how the nexus itself is also formed bottom up and further exacerbates the mission creep.
The localisation of aid - debate and challenges
The localisation agenda resurfaced with the Covid 19-pandemic among development and humanitarian actors. Aid localisation refers to providing aid through local, grassroots institutions without the use of intermediaries, which involves a shift in power over policy and financial issue to local actors.
The Humanitarian-Development Nexus: A Bridge Too Far?
In their basic and caricature forms, development aid and humanitarian assistance highlight important differences that materialize in attitudinal, institutional, and funding obstacles in the implementation of the humanitarian-development nexus. While the nexus is implemented in order to respond to new types of crises characterised by the protracted nature of the conflicts, cooperation across the aisle has proved hard to achieve in practice. However, policymakers and practitioners have different perspectives on the nexus, and depending on the individual practitioners tasked with implementing the nexus, it can still work. To achieve this, boundary work is needed in order to overcome the distinct segments of the nexus’ constituent parts working in silos. To foster such boundary work, actors responsible for implementing the nexus in practice should be given greater autonomy so that the nexus is better sensitised to local actors, contexts and concerns, rather than being driven by headquarters’ policy demands.
WEBINAR: Theory Seminar: Models as Viral Assemblages
In this theory seminar, Marit Tolo Østebø presents from her latest book Village Gone Viral: Understanding the Spread of Policy Models in a Digital Age.
Research group for Global Order and Diplomacy
Research group for Global Order and Diplomacy
PM Abiy deserves the Nobel Prize, but can he keep the peace?
OP-ED: A process of change has been initiated in Ethiopia and the region, but it is under severe threat.
The evolving political dynamics in Ethiopia and its implications for the Horn of Africa
In this seminar, Dr. Abdeta Beyene of the Centre for Dialogue, Research and Cooperation in Ethiopia will talk about the evolving political dynamics in Ethiopia and its implications for the greater Horn of Africa.