almanac on security sector oversight in the Western Balkans

Box 1: Where is this framework applicable?
SSR Index – Measuring to Advance Democratisation
There is no value-neutral measuring, and the methodology used within this project
is no exception. The tools chosen for measuring are based on certain values and
norms, usually of the party on whose behalf the measuring is undertaken. The logic
of appropriateness which guided the BCSP team in defining the criteria for each
dimension and in determining the indicators reflects the normative assumption that
‘true’ security sector reform takes place only in countries that have begun democratisation.
Therefore, in this methodology, even the lowest grade of 1 assumes that
at a minimum the first democratic elections have taken place. Differently from Freedom
House’s ‘Freedom in the World’ annual survey, we do not give grades for ‘non
free’ or reforms that have taken place in non-democratic regimes. In addition, this
SSR Index assumes a continental legal and public administration legacy, as well as
standards set by international organisations (particularly European organisations,
e.g. Council of Europe). In this context, a state is perceived as the ‘dominant security
provider’ and oversight mechanism and authority for security governance comes
‘from above’ (from statutory institutions) and from legal sources. Since the idea of
the state as a desirable model of social organisation is presupposed here, this model
will probably not be fully applicable in regions where this concept of the state has
not yet been internalised.
Our methodology also presents challenges for use in analyzing federal states with
multi-level governance and oversight structure (including, in our study, Bosnia and
Herzegovina).
Starting from norms valid in Europe, where we wanted to apply our Index, we decided
to operationalise the various dimensions of an ideally reformed security sector in line
with the standards of the UN and European regional organisations (OSCE, Council of
Europe, EU, NATO). This conformed with a regional approach to measuring reform.
However, the disadvantage of this approach is that these standards do not provide the
right tools for a holistic measurement of SSR. Nonetheless, our basic analytical units
were derived from minimum common standards and these were then turned into our
criteria of SSR. This was how the first version of the SSR index was created, comprising a
list of 22 differentiated criteria. After this, the relevance of different criteria was debated
in workshops held in Belgrade and Oslo, which included the participation of international
experts. 220 Similarities between the original twenty-two criteria allowed
them to be logically consolidated into a smaller group of criteria, on which data collec-
220 Apart from the contributions of BCSP researchers and the presence of associates such as Djordje
Vukovic (CESID), Bogoljub Milosavljavic and David Law (DCAF), who were all included in operationalising
the Index, we received useful comments from researchers from the Norwegian Institute of International
Affairs after a presentation held in May 2008 and from a group of students enrolled in the
Master’s programme on International Security at the Faculty of Political Sciences at the University of
Belgrade and finally from participants of the DCAF regional Young Faces programme, with whose participation
the methodology was tested.
249
Almanac on Security Sector Oversight in the Western Balkans