Means to what end: policymaking and state-building in Afghanistan

This study describes a number of national-level policymaking processes in Afghanistan, applying a cross-case analysis of five different case studies. The five cases highlight the complicated and difficult relationship between donors and the government, as well as the rather weak relationships between the people and both of these actors. Nonetheless, the cases also reveal examples of and opportunities for mutually positive collaboration that may ultimately strengthen state legitimacy.

Based on the examination of these cases, the following are key recommendations for donors: 

• donor agents should recognise that unilaterally pursuing national policy agendas through off-budget sourcing undermines state-building
• the relationship between donors and Afghan people is a crucial part of the state-building equation and needs to be factored into donor policy and action
• donors could do more to ensure that Afghans have the space to determine and negotiate for themselves the nature of a post-Taliban Islamic republic, which is essential to state legitimacy
• forms of aid conditionality seeking to discourage policies that are clearly at odds with the wishes and well-being of populations should be pursued.
  

Similarly, the paper presents the following recommendations for policymakers:

• policymaking should be based as much as possible on principles of simplicity and transparency
• ministry policy and related programmes should be balanced carefully 
• more emphasis on policymaking at the provincial and even district levels will allow policy to be responsive and appropriate to context
• Afghan civil society actors should be involved in a more systematic way.
  

The author also finds that research that describes and documents existing practices, systems and perceptions in policy-relevant areas can help policymakers to redress the gaps they are not aware of.