Bureaucratic legacies in Peace Agreements: A study on the pervasiveness of New Public Management doctrines in the Colombian Peace Agreement (2016)

Ideas matter. Thus, approaching peacebuilding efforts from an ideational perspective can contribute to a deeper understanding of their meanings and legacies. Traditionally, the liberal peace paradigm has been prevalent in peacebuilding, translating into programs, projects, actions, and agreements that model liberal norms, values, and practices. Among these sets of ideas, it is possible to identify beliefs about New Public Management (NPM), which affect how instruments like peace agreements are designed and codified. However, this relationship has not been thoroughly explored in the peacebuilding and public management literature, although both strive to achieve efficient and effective governance and peace. In response to this gap, this thesis examines, through text analysis, the degree to which the normative and bureaucratic legacies of NPM are present in the design of a comprehensive peace agreement. This required the selection of an empirical case that could deepen the understanding of what kind of public management NPM ideas are embedded and to what extent, hence the selection of the Colombian Peace Agreement, an example of the golden standard in comprehensive arrangements. The study systematically reviewed and codified the text of the agreement –578 provisions or stipulations– based on the presence and specificity of NPM-related doc-trines. The findings show the pervasiveness of bureaucratic legacies associated with strategic planning, performance audit of provisions, decentralisation, and the appointment of managers and high-level bodies to administer the implementation. However, ideas associated with financial control, competition and flexibilization of the public sector, were less relevant. The analysis also identified other ideas, which expand on the civilian input in the main bureaucratic doctrines. Thus, it provides a new insight to understanding peace in bureaucratic terms as the strategic expansion of institutional infrastructure with strong oversight mechanisms within peace agreements. This calls for a more careful review of the bureaucratic legacies and understandings present in peacebuilding efforts and how they could relate to other sets of ideas already reviewed in the literature, which could lead to further research shaping our understanding of peace through time and across contexts