The first article I've read in my endeavor is Beyond the 'failed state': Toward conceptual alternatives by @call4pax, published in 2011 by the European Journal of International Relations. https://doi-org.proxy.uchicago.edu/10.1177/1354066109353137

The basic gist of the article is this: the term 'failed state' is a catch-all term applied to countries that face a litany of different problems. Part of the problem with the use of failed state is that the solutions are all the same, despite the vastly different problems.

As a response to this, Call suggests a framework of three 'gaps' by which to analyze states: capacity, security, and legitimacy. Within any specific context the gaps may vary in size and presentation. They need not appear in all cases.

The three gaps are not terribly difficult to grasp. The capacity gap refers to the ability (or lack thereof) of state institutions to deliver public goods and services (or regulate those that do).

The security gap is when the state cannot provide security from organized armed groups. For the most part, this applies to states engulfed in armed conflict, or recently out of it.

The legitimacy gap exists when a significant portion of the political elites or society reject the rules of exercising power or the accumulation and distribution of wealth. This definition excludes external threats to legitimacy.

Call's argument is that international policy responses should be tailored to the type of gap a state is facing, which prevents wasteful use of resources. For a capacity gap, the response is to assist the government.

For a security gap, the response is to assist both the government and the opposition. For a legitimacy gap, the response is to assist counterweights to the government.

The thing about this article that really piqued my interest was how it related to the United States in 2020. Worryingly, I see signs of a nation that has substantial capacity and legitimacy gaps.

COVID-19 has exposed a pretty dire situation for the basic provision of public healthcare in the middle of a pandemic. The failure to execute a national testing strategy, and the now continued lack of federal guidance on anything is glaringly obvious.

However, I would also add the inability of Congress as an institution to actually produce much in the way of legislation is part of that. The frequency of government shut downs and looming debt ceilings--to me--suggest a concerning capacity gap.

The other major gap I see is a legitimacy gap. My understanding of polarization within the United States means that a substantial portion of the population finds actions of the opposing political party to be inherently illegitimate.

It's also worth noting that there has been a substantial degradation of democratic norms and "constitutional hardball" that both hampers capacity and delegitimizes the state in the view of opposing partisans.

One thing that I'm curious to see more of is literature that links the capacity gap to the legitimacy gap and vice-versa. Specifically, I'd like to see if perceived failures of capacity are related to anti-democratic backlashes that expand the legitimacy gap.

Anyway, that's all from me. If you have suggestions for next week send them along!

Final thought: in the US both the capacity and legitimacy gaps have racial undertones in them. Specifically, the failure to provide public goods to African Americans and the perceived illegitimacy from certain corners of the first Black president.