skip to main content
10.1145/2691195.2691256acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicegovConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

State stability: a governance analysis framework for Arab spring countries

Published:27 October 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

The 2011-2012 Arab Spring uprising can be considered a new political phenomenon with respect to collective action and the origin of network governance in North Africa and the Middle East. Nevertheless, current formal and empirical models are incapable of analyzing and predicting the future of the uprisings. Therefore, the conceptualization of these models must be reviewed given the increasing need for a political analytical model that can assess the state of the state and consider the influence of non-state actors on service provision and security mechanisms inside their society. The circumstances require a simple conceptual model to describe state status (stable or unstable) in a simple representational form for countries such as Egypt following the Arab Spring.

This study propose a framework to explain the influence of network governance on state stability, it was preferable that this model be general and conceptual. Thus, this framework can offer a more realistic explanation of the political transformations that occurred in the Arab Spring countries, such as Egypt. The analysis showed that formal mathematical models could not persuasively explain the Arab Spring phenomenon because such models are based on theories and ideas that are inapplicable to the changes in the political environment that occurred in these countries. The proposed framework, attempts to describe state status, whereby a state is stable or unstable and it is not necessary for the state to be a failed state. This framework aims to help political analysts develop recommendations for policy- and decision-makers on how to avoid state instability.

References

  1. Abdollahian, M, M Baranick, B Efird and J Kugler. A Predictive Political Simulation Model. Center for Technology and National Security Policy, National Defense University. 2006. http://www.ndu.edu/ctnsp/publications.html (accessed 10 4, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Aragonès, E, and P Dellunde. "An Automated Model of Government Formation." Workshop on the Political Economy of Democracy, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkinson, M, and W Coleman. Policy networks, policy communities and the problems of governance. 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Atkinson, M, and W Coleman. "Strong States and Weak States: Sectoral Policy Networks in Advanced Capitalist Economies." British Journal of Political Science 14, no. 1 (1989): 46--67.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Ayoob, M. "State Making, State Breaking and State Failure." In Turbulent Peace: The Challenges of Managing International Conflict, edited by C Crocker, F Hampson and P Aall. Washington, DC.: United States Institute of Peace, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Banks, J, and J Duggan. "A bargaining model of collective choice." American Political Science Review 94, no. 1 (2000): 73--88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Campbell, J. "Evaluating U.S. presidential election forecasts and forecasting equations." International Journal of Forecasting 24, no. 2 (2008): 259--271.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Campbell, J, and M Lewis-Beck. "Introduction---The 2004 presidential election forecasts." Political Science & Politics 37, no. 4 (2004): 733--736.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Chhotray, V, and G Stoker. Governance Theory and Practice: A Cross Disciplinary Approach. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Choucri, N, et al. Understanding & Modeling State Stability: Exploiting System Dynamics. working paper 4574-06, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Clarke, K, and D Primo. "Modernizing Political Science: A Model-Based Approach." Perspectives on Politics 5, no. 4 (2007): 741--754.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Crossroad. "A Participative Roadmap for ICT Research in Electronic Governance and Policy Modelling-State of the Art Analysis." the European Commission, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Daniel, L. Intelligence Community Needs to Predict Uprisings. 2011. http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=62790 (accessed 10 6, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Daugbjerg, C, and P Fawcett. "Governance Theory and the question of power: lesson drawing from the Governance Network and Policy Network Analysis Schools." The Australian Political Studies Association Conference. Melbourne: School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Melbourne, 2010. 27--29.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Day, J. The strategy of presidential campaigns. Phd Dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa Research Online, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Diermeier, D, H Eraslan, and A Merlo. "A Structural Model of Governmment Formation." Econometrica 71, no. 1 (2003): 27--70.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Dobbins, J. Beginner's Guide to Nation Building. RAND NATIONAL DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE, Santa Monicaz: Rand Corporation, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. eGovPoliNet. The added value brought by eGovPoliNet and Crossover. 2010. http://www.policy-community.eu/in-a-nutshell/the-added-value-brought-by-egovpolinet (accessed 10 22, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. European Commission. "European Governance: a White Paper." Vers. 428. European Commission. 2001. http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/governance/index_en.htm (accessed April 1, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Fawcett, P, and C Daugbjerg. "Explaining Governance Outcomes: Epistemology, Network Governance and Policy Network Analysis." Political Studies Review 10, no. 2 (2012): 195--208.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Foucault, M, and R Nadeau. "Forecasting the 2012 French Presidential Election." PS Political Science and Politics 45, no. 2 (2012): 218--223.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Galeotti, M, and D Josselin. Non-State Actors in World Politics. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Giere, R. "Using models to represent reality." In Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery, edited by L Magnani, N Nersessian and P Thagard. New York: Kluwer Academic and Plenum Publishers, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Glasgow, G, M Golder, and S Golder. "Modeling the Government Formation Process." MPSA Annual National Conference. Chicago: unpublished, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Goldstone, J. "Population and Security: How Demographic Change Can Lead to Violent Conflict." Journal of International Affairs 56, no. 1 (2002): 11--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Goldstone, J, and J Ulfelder. "How to Construct Stable Democracies." The Washington Quarterly 28, no. 1 (2004): 9--20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Goldstone, J, et al. "A Global Model for Forecasting Political Instability." American Journal of Political Science 54, no. 1 (2010): 190--208.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Graefe, A. Issue and Leader Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections. 2012. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2110794 (accessed 10 5, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Guardian. Egypt's supreme court dissolves parliament and outrages Islamists. 2012. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/14/egypt-parliament-dissolved-supreme-court (accessed 10 29, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Hamza, K. The Impact of Social Media and Network Governance on State Stability in Times of Turbulence: Egypt After 2011 Revolution. PhD Thesis, Institute for European Studies, Brussels: Vrije Universiteit, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Hamza, K, and J Van Dalen. "E-Governance and Strategic Information Warfare -- Non Military Approach." 6th International Conference on Information Warfare & Security. Washington, DC, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Johnson, P. "Simulation Modeling in Political Science." American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 10 (1999): 1509--1530.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Kingdon, J. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1984.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Kooiman, J. Governing as governanc. London: Sage, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Kooiman, J. Modern governance: New government-society interactions. london: Sage, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Lewis-Beck, M, and C Tien. "Forecasting presidential elections: when to change the model." International Journal of Forecasting 24, no. 2 (2008): 227--236.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Lewis-Beck, M, and C Tien. "The future in forecasting: Prospective presidential models." American Politics Quarterly 24, no. 4 (1996): 468--491.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Lewis-Beck, M, and T Rice. Forecasting Elections. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Linzer, D. "A Bayesian Prediction Model for the U.S. Presidential Election." American Politics Research 37 (2009): 700--724.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Macintosh, A. eParticipation in policy-making: The research and the challenges. In Exploiting the knowledge economy: Issues, applications, case studies. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Marsh, D, and R Rhodes. Policy Networks in British Government. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Martin, L, and R Stevenson. An Empirical Model of Government Formation in Parliamentary Democracies. 2012. http://polmeth.wustl.edu/mediaDetail.php?docId=358 (accessed Oct 5, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Meier, K, and L O'Toole. "Managerial Networking: Issues of Measurement and Research Design." Administration & Society 37, no. 5 (2005): 523--541.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Meier, K, and L O'Toole. "Managerial Strategies and Behavior in Networks: A Model with Evidence from U.S. Public Education." Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 11, no. 3 (2001): 271--293.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Morton, R. Methods and Models: A Guide to the Empirical Analysis of Formal Models in Political Science. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. NBC News. Intelligence community under fire for Egypt surprise. 2011. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41423648/ns/politics-more_politics/t/intelligence-community-under-fire-egypt-surprise/ (accessed 10 4, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. OECD. Concepts and Dilemmas of State Building in Fragile Situations: FROM FRAGILITY TO RESILIENCE. UN report, OECD, ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. OECD. "OECD Policy Briefs: Engaging Citizens Online for Better Policy." http://www.oecd.org. 2004. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/62/23/2501856.pdf (accessed september 2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. OECD/DAC. "Principles for Good International Engagement in Fragile States and Situations." UN report, ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT, Paris, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Oliver, P. "Formal Models of Collective Action." Annual Review of Sociology 19 (1993): 271--320.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Oliver, P, and D Myers. "Formal Models in Studying Collective Action and Social Movements." In Methods of Social Movement Research, edited by B Kiandermans and S Staggenborg. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Ostrom, E. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Pollitt, C, and G Bouckaert. Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis. 2nd. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Porter, R. Knowledge utilization and the process of policy formation: Toward a framework for Africa. Washington, DC: USAID, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Quinn, K, and A Martin. "An Integrated Computational Model of Multiparty Electoral Competition." Statistical Science 17, no. 4 (2002): 405--419.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Rhodes, R. A. W. Governance and public administration. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Rhodes, R A W. "Policy network analysis." In The oxford handbook of public policy, edited by M Moran, M Rein and R Goodin, 425--447. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Rhodes, R A W. "The new governance: Governing without government." Political Studies 44, no. 4 (1996): 652--667.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Rhodes, R A W. "Understanding Governance: Ten Years On." Organization Studies 28, no. 8 (2007): 1243--1264.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  60. Rhodes, R A W, I Bache, and S George. "Policy Network and Policy Making in the Europen Union: A Critical Appraisal." In Cohesion Policy and European Integration: Building Multi-Level Governance, edited by L Hooghe, 367--387. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Rhodes, R. A. W. Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Sabatier, P A. "Toward better theories of the policy process." Political Science and Politics 24, no. 2 (1991): 147--156.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. Sabatier, P A, and C M Weible. "The advocacy coalition: Innovations and clarifications." In Theories of the policy Process, edited by P Sabatier, 189--220. Boulder, CO: Westview, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Sabatier, P. Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Sabatier, P, and H Jenkins-Smith. Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder: Westview Press, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Sabatier, P, and H Jenkins-Smith. "The Advocacy Coalition Framework: An Assessment." In Theories of the Policy Process, edited by P Sabatier, 117--166. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Schlager, E. "A Comparison of Frameworks, Theories, and Models of Policy Processes." In Theories of the Policies Process, edited by P A Sabatier, 233--260. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Shachtman, N. Pentagon's Prediction Software Didn't Spot Egypt Unrest. 2011. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/02/pentagon-predict-egypt-unrest/ (accessed 10 6, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. The Economist. Egypt's constitution: An endless debate over religion's role. 2012. http://www.economist.com/node/21564249 (accessed 10 29, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Tilly, C. From mobilization to revolution. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1978.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Tilly, C. Social Movements. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Tilly, C. "Social movements and (all sorts of) other political interactions -- local, national, and international -- including identities." Theory and Society (Springer Netherlands) 47, no. 4 (1998): 452--480.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Toros, E. "Forecasting elections in Turkey." International Journal of Forecasting 27, no. 4 (2011): 1248--1258.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  74. Volden, C. "A Formal Model of the Politics of Delegation in a Separation of Powers System." American Journal of Political Science 46, no. 1 (2002): 111--133.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  75. Wachhaus, T. "Anarchy as a Model for Network Governance." The American Society for Public Administration 72, no. 1 (2011): 33--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. State stability: a governance analysis framework for Arab spring countries

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      ICEGOV '14: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
      October 2014
      563 pages
      ISBN:9781605586113
      DOI:10.1145/2691195

      Copyright © 2014 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 27 October 2014

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      ICEGOV '14 Paper Acceptance Rate30of73submissions,41%Overall Acceptance Rate350of865submissions,40%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)4
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader