Forsker
Jon Harald Sande Lie
Kontaktinfo og filer
Sammendrag
Jon Harald Sande Lie er sosialantropolog (PhD fra Universitetet i Bergen) og forsker 1 ved NUPI, i Forskningsgruppen for global utvikling og diplomati (GOaD).
Hovedtema for forskningen hans er internasjonal bistand, global styring og statsdannelse, med fokus på utvikling og humanitær bistand i Øst-Afrika, spesielt Etiopia og Uganda, hvor han har oppholdt seg i lange perioder i forbindelse med feltarbeid og studert partnerskapsforholdet mellom aktørene på NGO-nivå og aktørene involvert i verdensbanken.
Lie er medredaktør for tidsskriftet Forum for Development Studies. Han er prosjektleder for FRIPRO-prosjektet «Developmentality and the Anthropology of Partnerhsip».
Ekspertise
Utdanning
2011 PhD i sosialantropologi ved Universitetet i Bergen
2004 Cand. Polit. i sosialantropologi ved Universitetet i Oslo
2000 Cand. Mag. med sosialantropologi, idehistorie, religionshistorie, filisofi, og miljø og utvikling i fagkretsen.
Arbeidserfaring
2022- Forsker 1, NUPI
2011- Seniorforsker, NUPI
2007-2011 Forsker, NUPI
2004- Stipendiat, sosialantropologisk institutt, Universitetet i Bergen
Aktivitet
Filter
Tøm alle filtreForskningsgruppen for global orden og diplomati
Statsminister Abiy fortjener Nobelprisen, men kan han bevare freden?
KRONIKK: Etiopias statsminister Abiy Ahmed Ali er en verdig mottaker av Nobels fredspris, men det er usikkert om prisen hjelper ham på veien til fred mellom Etiopia og Eritrea.
Den politiske situasjonen i Etiopia og ringverknader for Afrikas Horn
Korleis er den politiske dynamikken i Etiopia, og kva implikasjonar kan han ha for Afrikas Horn?
Teoriseminar: Betydninga av mellommenn for å mekle tryggleik – arbeidsrekruttering og migrasjonsassistanse i Mekongregionen
På dette teoriseminaret vil Dr. Sverre Molland (ANU) snakke om betydninga av mellommenn og mekling for arbeidsrekruttering i Mekong-regionen.
Local Ownership as Global Governance
The ownership discourse has profoundly altered the management of development aid. Nominally, it seeks to instil greater freedom as well as responsibilities among aid recipients. Revisiting two ethnographic studies (the World Bank–Uganda partnership and NGO relations in Ethiopia), this article shows how ‘ownership’ practices also involve new forms of tacit governance mechanisms that enable the donor to retain control. By using ‘freedom’ as a formula underpinning governance at a distance, developmentality is made contingent on the donor’s ability to frame the partnership and the conditions under which the recipient exercises the freedom that has been granted.
Kinship in International Relations: Introduction and framework
This chapter identifies and discusses some of the ways in which kinship may be of use to IR scholars. The chapter offers examples of how kinship relations have manifested themselves historically in international relations, seeking to demonstrate how blood kinship from the beginning has been accompanied, reinforced and challenged by metaphorical kinship – that is, how certain non-blood related relations in or via practice come to be treated as kin, with the duties, obligations and expectations that entails.
Donor-driven state formation: friction in the World Bank–Uganda partnership
The chapter explores the partnership relation between the World Bank and Uganda from 2000 and onwards. It demonstrates how the notion of politics frames apolitical development discourses, and argues for how the formation of partnership entails specific tacit governance mechanisms that have been central to the formation of neoliberal Uganda, the latter being the anthology's overall topic. The donor's governance mechanisms mediated through partnership are indeed powerful, but this does not mean that the aid recipient is prostrate and without any theoretical or empirical possibilities for resistance. The formation of neoliberal Uganda in the context of development aid should thus be understood in the nexus between external governance mechanisms and local means for translation and resistance.
Ethiopia: A Political Economy Analysis
This report provides an overview and analysis of some key issues pertaining to the political economy of Ethiopia in a historical perspective. The continuous rule of the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) since 1991 has advanced a revolutionary democracy founded on the idea that the EPRDF itself should be the vanguard party both representing and leading the people. This form of central dirigisme has produced a developmental state with authoritarian features and opaque boundaries between the party and the state system. The strong and assertive party, having its clear vision of the developmental objectives and means, has produced a self-determined state apparatus that seldom yields to internal or international pressure. It has also produced impressive economic results over the last decade and a half, especially in the central and urban areas, and now aspires to become a middle-income country by 2025. Against this economic performance, there are critical concerns regarding democracy, human rights, uneven distribution and growing inequalities. The political space has gradually narrowed since the contentious 2005-elections, and there are currently no opposition parties with parliamentary representation. The invocation of a ten months state of emergency following the popular anti-government protests in 2015 and 2016, is just one expression of how human rights are being truncated, the lack of an open political space and the regime’s authoritarian features. Despite this, international actors maintain their relations to Ethiopia and continue to provide development assistance. This is partly due to the government’s performance in other domestic areas, but also a recognition of Ethiopia’s important regional role in providing stability in the Horn of Africa. The government has known to capitalize on the international actors’ need for a stable partner in the region, which has provided leeway for both its domestic and international affairs. It is thus unlikely that Ethiopia would be challenged by any other regional state or combination of states. Nor is it expected that any of its international partners would challenge Ethiopia, for instance by putting conditions pertaining to domestic political and human rights issues before the concern for regional stability. Any challenges to the regime and political stability are more likely to emerge from within – whether in the form of further popular political unrest, or disagreements within the EPRDF government or its coalition parties.