There is broad recognition that countries in fragile situations face unique challenges. While fragility may afflict countries at different levels of income and capacity, common features of fragile states are institutions that are seen to be weak and lack legitimacy, as well as a fractious political setting, which in turn elevates the risk of violence. Fragilities impose large costs and hardships on local populations that can spill over to neighboring countries—directly through conflict, crime, and disease, but also through economic linkages. Considering these unique challenges, the international community is developing forms of engagement that stress peacebuilding, social cohesion, and statebuilding. They incorporate recognition of the need for sustained engagement, a willingness to take calculated risks in uncertain environments, fuller attention to the political economy of reforms and capacity constraints, and coordination of donor efforts.

More than one-third of Official Development Assistance is spent annually on fragile and conflict-affected countries. Nonetheless, aid does not always flow promptly and effectively to where it is most needed, especially in countries recovering from ...

This publication provides the evidence to help donors understand how to balance risks and opportunities in order to protect the integrity of their institutions while delivering better results to those who need it most.

This 2015 OECD report on fragility contributes to the broader debate to define post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), and argues that addressing fragility in the new framework will be crucial if strides in reducing poverty are to be made.

States of Fragility 2020 sets a policy agenda for fragility at a critical turning point: the final countdown on Agenda 2030 is at hand, and the pandemic has reversed hard-fought gains. This report examines fragility as a story in two parts: the global state of fragility that existed before COVID-19, and the dramatic impact the pandemic is having on that landscape.

The International Development Committee believes the Government is right to increase aid to fragile and conflict-affected states, such as Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) , but it must prepared suspend or even cancel a programme if a Government flouts agreements or refuses to engage in efforts to increase transparency and accountability. The MPs urge DFID to set out specific governance conditions under which it will provide direct budget support to fragile states, and any under which it will be withdrawn and apply these consistently. They also recommend that DFID invest more in community-led local initiatives which respond to community priorities and give communities more confidence to hold their governments to account. Two case studies of Rwanda and the DRC highlight areas of concern. Rwanda is heavily dependent on aid which provides 45% of government expenditure. The UK will provide £90 million to Rwanda in 2014-15. While Rwanda has made progress in reducing poverty, concerns have been expressed about its human rights record and the lack of political pluralism. The Committee urges the UK Government to use its position as the largest bilateral donor to Rwanda to insist on improvements to the country's governance. In the DRC there is concern about high levels of violence against women and girls. DFID should give greater priority to tackling this in its programme and include the reduction of violence against women in its results framework for the DRC.