This project has been set up in June 2010, together with the Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (PRIF/HSFK). It analyzes which modes of governance are the most promising in global crime governance - the governance of non-state violence and organized crime

The project starts with the assumption that existing approaches in crime governance can only deal with specific types of challenges while neglecting others. In particular, the criminalization of actors and activities demonstrates the limits to coercive approaches that aim for containment and elimination. In particular if we assume that non-state organized violence and crime can have justice-related origins in issues of recognition, participation and distribution, alternative approaches that target these origins could be more successful. To assess such possibilities, we examine diverse fields, e.g. terrorism, human trafficking and piracy, or money laundering, emphasizing the role of non-state actors - civil society or business - in crime governance.

The project will proceed in four analytical steps:

Mapping existing approaches to combating armed non-state actors

The first step will the institutional design of approaches to global crime governance according to participation, mode of governance, and substance of regulation. For example, implementation can primarily target symptoms by repressive police or military measures. It could also address root causes of violence or crime by offering development assistance or alternative sources of income in cases of economically motivated types of crime, such as piracy, or by providing recognition, integration or learning forums in cases of politically motivated violence.

Investigating dominant drivers of regulation

After mapping designs of global crime governance, case studies will identify causal mechanisms that can explain why certain designs were established and not others. Three driving factors are distinguished, namely functionalist explanations, which focus on the rule maker-issue relationship and the needs of the regulatory problem; interest-based explanations, which focus on the rule maker-rule maker relationship and strategic reasoning based on various regulators' stakes in the regulation process; and constructivist/norm-oriented explanations, which focuses on the rule maker-rule addressee relationship.

Assessing and explaining effectiveness

To specify the explanatory value of the general hypothesis, the effects of different approaches to global crime governance, particularly the relationships between problem structure, actor characteristics, governance design, and effectiveness, will be analyzed.

Policy recommendations

The project aims for policy recommendations that will increase the effectiveness of governance approaches to transnational non-state violence and organized crime. These recommendations are intended to answer questions such as: How much hierarchical governance is necessary? How much and what kind of assistance is needed? How much inclusion and recognition is necessary and feasible in designing global crime governance?