Date of Defense
12-11-2025 2:00 PM
Location
H1-1116
Document Type
Thesis Defense
Degree Name
Master of Governance and Public Policy
College
CHSS
Department
Government and Society
First Advisor
Dr. Mohammed Humaid Aljanahi,
Keywords
Extremism governance, United Arab Emirates, hybrid governance, public policy, Gareth Morgan’s metaphors, institutional analysis, counter-extremism, tolerance, social cohesion.
Abstract
This thesis investigates how the United Arab Emirates governs extremism using various models of governance and Gareth Morgan’s metaphorical organizational models. This research goes beyond a focus on security, and looks at extremism as a governance and policy problem related to social cohesion, institutional trust, and legitimacy. The research utilizes a qualitiatve case study design through analyzing federal laws and national strategies, as well as institutional frameworks to understand how authority, coordination and meaning are organized in the UAE’s governance of extremism.
The results show that the UAE’s governance of extremism is characterized as a hybrid governance model with hierarchical authority, network collaboration and good governance at play. Hierarchical authority is evident through federal laws such as Federal Law No. 7 of 2014 on Combating Terrorism Crimes, while institutions such as Hedayah and Sawab Centre illustrate collaborative and adaptive governance. Using Morgan’s metaphors, we see that the machine and domination metaphors represent legal components of governance, while culture, organism and brain metaphors depict preventive and institutional approaches, balancing coercion and adaptive logics in the governance of extremism.
Ultimately, the study finds that the UAE’s governance of extremism is simultaneously centralized and adaptive, a layered system that provides stability through control, while allowing inclusivity via education, tolerance, and rehabilitation. While successful in achieving security and cohesion, the UAE may face challenges of inclusivity and bottom-up engagement. This study adds to the academic and policy debate, while providing a theorized context-specific model of extremism governance rooted in Emirati cultural, religious and institutional realities that could be utilized for comparative studies across the region.
Included in
EXTREMISM GOVERNANCE IN THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: ACASE STUDY USING QUALITATIVE POLICY FRAMEWORK
H1-1116
This thesis investigates how the United Arab Emirates governs extremism using various models of governance and Gareth Morgan’s metaphorical organizational models. This research goes beyond a focus on security, and looks at extremism as a governance and policy problem related to social cohesion, institutional trust, and legitimacy. The research utilizes a qualitiatve case study design through analyzing federal laws and national strategies, as well as institutional frameworks to understand how authority, coordination and meaning are organized in the UAE’s governance of extremism.
The results show that the UAE’s governance of extremism is characterized as a hybrid governance model with hierarchical authority, network collaboration and good governance at play. Hierarchical authority is evident through federal laws such as Federal Law No. 7 of 2014 on Combating Terrorism Crimes, while institutions such as Hedayah and Sawab Centre illustrate collaborative and adaptive governance. Using Morgan’s metaphors, we see that the machine and domination metaphors represent legal components of governance, while culture, organism and brain metaphors depict preventive and institutional approaches, balancing coercion and adaptive logics in the governance of extremism.
Ultimately, the study finds that the UAE’s governance of extremism is simultaneously centralized and adaptive, a layered system that provides stability through control, while allowing inclusivity via education, tolerance, and rehabilitation. While successful in achieving security and cohesion, the UAE may face challenges of inclusivity and bottom-up engagement. This study adds to the academic and policy debate, while providing a theorized context-specific model of extremism governance rooted in Emirati cultural, religious and institutional realities that could be utilized for comparative studies across the region.