More than 1 billion people live in countries affected by armed conflict or by the fragility of their societies. Fragile states are often vulnerable to conflict because their populations tend to see their governments as ineffective, illegitimate, or both. As a group, they are the ones that lag furthest behind in achieving the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals. On Friday, March 27 USIP hosted a discussion regarding a new report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, “States of Fragility 2015: Meeting Post-2015 Ambitions.”

Fragile Nations
From left: Alexandre Marc, Melissa Brown, Jolanda Profos, Sarah Hearn, Andrew Blum

This panel discussion, sponsored by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and the World Bank,took place at USIP from 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

The report presents a new understanding of fragility that moves beyond the conventional notion of fragile states. It puts forward a working model based on five dimensions: violence, justice, institutions, economic foundations, and capacity to respond to shocks and disasters. It measures all countries worldwide to identify the 50 most vulnerable states in each dimension, and discusses the implications of a universal approach for policies, practices, aid and monitoring. The report also assesses how the international development community allocates its resources.


Nancy Lindborg, Opening Remarks
President, U.S. Institute of Peace

Melissa Brown
Director, Office of Conflict Management and Mitigation, USAID

Alexandre Marc
Chief Technical Specialist, Fragility, Conflict and Violence-Cross Cutting Solutions Area, World Bank Group

Brenda Killen
Deputy Director, Development Co-operation Directorate, OECD

Jolanda Profos
Peace and Conflict Adviser, Development Co-operation Directorate, OECD

Sarah Hearn
Associate Director and Senior Fellow, Center on International Cooperation

Andrew Blum, Moderator
Vice President of Program Management and Evaluation, U.S. Institute of Peace

A copy of the report may be downloaded at beginning on March 26, 2015.


Related Publications

Senior Study Group on Counterterrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan: Final Report

Senior Study Group on Counterterrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan: Final Report

Tuesday, May 14, 2024

When announcing the US withdrawal from Afghanistan in April 2021, President Joe Biden identified counterterrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan as an enduring and critical US national security interest. This priority became even more pronounced after the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021, the discovery of al-Qaeda’s leader Ayman al-Zawahiri in Kabul less than a year later, and the increasing threat of the Islamic State of Khorasan (ISIS-K) from Afghanistan. However, owing to the escalating pressures of strategic competition with China and Russia, counterterrorism has significantly dropped in importance in the policy agenda.

Type: Report

Violent Extremism

Why Counterterrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan Still Matters

Why Counterterrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan Still Matters

Thursday, May 9, 2024

From wars in Ukraine and the Middle East to rising tensions in the South China Sea, there is no shortage of crises to occupy the time and attention of U.S. policymakers. But three years after the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, the threat of terrorism emanating from South Asia remains strong and policymakers need to be more vigilant. Indeed, at the end of March, an Afghanistan-based affiliate of ISIS launched a devastating attack outside of Moscow, killing over 140 people.

Type: Question and Answer

Global PolicyViolent Extremism

View All Publications