000			01705nab a22002657a 4500
999			_c58728 _d58720
001			58728
003			MX-TxCIM
005			20191216142338.0
008			160126s2017 uk |||p|op||| 00| 0 eng d
024	8		_ahttps://doi.org/10.1177/1468018116633559
040			_aMX-TxCIM
041			_aeng
100	1		_95024 _8I1707129 _aDRUCZA, K.L. _gSocioeconomics Program
245	1	0	_aSocial inclusion in the post-conflict state of Nepal : _bDonor practice and the political settlement
260			_aLondon, United Kingdom : _bSAGE Publications, _c2017.
500			_aPeer review
520			_aFragile states constitute a challenging operating environment. Yet, the role of development partner engagement on issues of social inclusion, identity politics, or horizontal inequalities in such fragile environments has not received the attention these complex issues warrant. The attitudes of development actors, their level of commitment, bias, risk management, and understanding of the political settlement can have a real bearing on the effectiveness of such efforts to promote inclusion. In Nepal, certain development partners have faced elite backlash for their engagement on social inclusion, while others have been more successful. This article asks what lessons can be learned from these experiences for those interested in promoting social inclusion in fragile states through development assistance.
546			_aText in English
591			_aDrucza, K.L. : No CIMMYT Affiliation
650		7	_95025 _aSocial consciousness _2AGROVOC
650		7	_95026 _aPolitics _2AGROVOC
651		7	_93932 _aNepal _2AGROVOC
773	0		_dLondon United Kingdom : SAGE Publications _tGlobal Social Policy _gv. 17, no. 1, p. 62-88
942			_2ddc _cJA _n0