Conceptualizing National Ownership: The Case of Mine Action

The document examines the concept of 'national ownership' within the context of the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, arguing that while the treaty mandates state responsibility, the reality is often dominated by international organizations. It proposes a model where national ownership is viewed as a relational process involving the relative strengths of state institutions and civil society, the actual scope of the mine problem, and the strategies of international donors. The author suggests that sustainable ownership is more likely to be achieved by engaging local civil society and indigenous capacities early in the process rather than relying solely on Western-style state-building.

• Despite the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty's requirement for governments to take responsibility for mine action, programs remain largely managed by international organizations with minimal coordination.
• National ownership should be conceptualized in two distinct ways: the formal integration of programs into national governments and institutions, and the involvement and legitimacy gained from the relevant population.
• A 'Catch-22' exists where the Mine Ban Treaty mandates state responsibility, but the aftermath of armed conflict often leaves national governments without the capacity to assume that responsibility.
• Western-style state-building paradigms often fail because they focus on creating formal executive and judicial structures in capital cities, ignoring traditional societal structures and local coping mechanisms that hold more legitimacy.
• Civil society can be a critical resource for sustainable mine action, but it can also be 'uncivil' if former warlords or 'strong men' use these organizations to maintain power or promote specific ethnic or religious interests.
• Donor strategies can inadvertently undermine national ownership by funding non-indigenous actors or imposing specific economic and political models as conditions for aid.
• The desirability of building long-term national mine action structures should be based on an empirical assessment of the mine problem's scope rather than an ideological commitment to national ownership; for example, in Kosovo, the problem was largely short-term.
• Effective national ownership is facilitated when donors identify and support indigenous capacities early, such as utilizing fire brigades, demobilized military, or village deminers, as seen in Cambodia.

APA

Kjellman, K. E. (2008). Conceptualizing National Ownership: The Case of Mine Action. Peace Research Institute Oslo. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/346d70e1-c0e7-4d62-bd85-2a88c8e6d010/Conceptualizing_National_Ownership_PRIO_Paper_2008.pdf?inline=true

Chicago

Kjellman, Kjell Erling. Conceptualizing National Ownership: The Case of Mine Action. Peace Research Institute Oslo, 2008. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/346d70e1-c0e7-4d62-bd85-2a88c8e6d010/Conceptualizing_National_Ownership_PRIO_Paper_2008.pdf?inline=true.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Kjellman |first1=Kjell Erling |title=Conceptualizing National Ownership: The Case of Mine Action |publisher=Peace Research Institute Oslo |date=November 2008 |url=https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/346d70e1-c0e7-4d62-bd85-2a88c8e6d010/Conceptualizing_National_Ownership_PRIO_Paper_2008.pdf?inline=true |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{kjellman2008conceptualizing, author = {Kjellman, Kjell Erling}, title = {{Conceptualizing National Ownership: The Case of Mine Action}}, institution = {Peace Research Institute Oslo}, year = {2008}, month = nov, url = {https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/346d70e1-c0e7-4d62-bd85-2a88c8e6d010/Conceptualizing_National_Ownership_PRIO_Paper_2008.pdf?inline=true}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }