local peacebuilding - peace direct€¦ · local peacebuilding – what works and why / 3 1...
TRANSCRIPT
Local peacebuilding
What works and why
6 June 2019
i / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Abbreviations
AMA Assistance Mission for Africa
APD AssociationforPeaceandDevelopment
CAFOB CollectifdesAssociationsetONGsFémininesauBurundi
CSO Civilsocietyorganization
DM&E Design,MonitoringandEvaluation
DRC DemocraticRepublicofCongo
FNJ FederationofNepaliJournalists
NGO Non‑governmentalorganization
PDRC PeaceandDevelopmentResearchCenter
SDG SustainableDevelopmentGoals
UN UnitedNations
YMCA YoungMen’sChristianAssociation
Acknowledgements
Thisisapdfversionofanonlinereportwhichisavailableonlineat:https://www.peaceinsight.org/reports/whatworks
ThisresearchwasconductedandthefinalreportwrittenbyPhilVernonundertheguidanceofasteeringgroupconsistingofJessicaBaumgardner‑Zuzik,ElizabethHume,DylanMathews,BridgetMoixandSarahPhillips.TheresearchbenefitedfromsupportbyMohamedIsmail,VaheMirikianandShaziyaNetto,andwewouldalsoliketothankKenBarlowforeditorialsupport.Theauthorretainsfinalresponsibilityforallerrorsoffactorjudgement.Weacknowledgeandthankalltheorganizationswhocontributedsourcedocuments,andparticularlythosewhokindlyagreedtotheinclusionofreferencestotheirworkinthetext.
ThisreportwouldnothavebeenpossiblewithoutgenerousfinancialsupportfromMiltLauensteinandourcorporatepartner,Away.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / ii
PrefaceAlthoughtheGlobalPeaceIndexrecordedthefirstincreaseinglobalpeacefulnessinfiveyearsin2019,thefactsonthegroundinmanycountriesspeaktoadifferentreality;onewherecommunitiesarebeingtornapartbyviolencethatwasbothavoidableand,inmanycases,predictable.Inthepastmonth,continuedviolenceincentralMalithreatenstospiraloutofcontrol,withthelatestattackresultnginthedeathsofscoresofpeople.InMay,theUNestimatesthat300,000peoplefledtheviolenceinIturiprovinceinDRC,hamperingtheongoingEbolaresponseefforts.AndinSriLanka,theEasterSundayterroristattackshaveledtoaseriesofretaliationsagainstMuslimcommunitiesacrossthecountry,withover1,000MuslimrefugeesoriginallyfromPakistan,IranandAfghanistanfleeingjustonetown.Allthewhiletheglobalnumberofrefugeescontinuesgrowingtounprecedentedlevelsaspeoplefleeviolentconflict.
Whatlinkstheexamplesabove,andmanyothercountriesexperiencingviolencerightnow,istheproliferationofopportunitiestobuildpeacethatareroutinelybeingoverlookedbytheinternationalcommunity.Whilehighlevelnegotiationsdooftenstall,therearecountlessopportunitiestosupportbottomuppeacebuildinginsomeofthemostviolentcontextsrightnow.Localpeacebuildingactorsareprotectingvulnerablepeople,resolvinglocaldisputes,preventingdisplacementsandsavinglives.
AtPeaceDirectwehavebeendedicatedtosupportingandstrengtheninglocalcapacitiesforpeacesinceourfoundingoverfifteenyearsago.Thepremiseunderpinningourworkisthatlocalpeopleworkingtostopviolenceandbuildpeaceintheircommunitiesremainthegreatestsourcesofuntappedpeacebuildingpotentialglobally.Whiletherhetoricaroundsupportinglocalpeacebuildingeffortsisslowlychanging,internationalandnationalpoliciesand
practicearenotkeepingup.Acombinationofbureaucraticinefficiency,systemicinertia,riskaversion,concernsaboutscale,capacity,effectivenessandimpact,andalackofcontextualunderstandingstillhamperseffortstoprovidetimely,flexiblesupporttolocalpeacebuildingefforts.Inaddition,existingpolicycommitmentsattheUNlevelhavenotyetbeenoperationalized.
Thisreport,ajointcollaborationbetweenPeaceDirectandtheAllianceforPeacebuilding,aimstoaddressoneofthequestionsweoftenhearfrompolicymakersanddonorsaroundtheeffectivenessoflocalpeacebuildingefforts.Ifconcernsabouttheeffectivenessoflocaleffortsisoneofthereasonsforthelackofinvestmentbygovernmentsandmultilateralinstitutions,wehopethatouranalysisofover70evaluationscollectedfromadiverserangeoforganizationsandcontextsacrosstheworldwillhelpstrengthenthecaseforsupport.Theexamplesinthisreportandtheaccompanyingwebsitenotonlyspeakofremarkableheroism;theydemonstratetangibleimpactsonthegroundinplaceswhereviolenceisoftendismissedasendemic.FromreducingviolentconflictinSudanandeasternDRCongotoprotectingvillagesfromattackinColombia,thesestorieshighlightwhatispossible,eveninplaceswherenationallevelpeaceprocesseshavestalled.
ThisyearattheUNHighLevelPoliticalForuminNewYork,memberstateswillreviewprogressmadetowardsSDG16.WebelievethatSDG16cannotbeachievedwithoutgreaterlevelsofparticipationbyandsupportforlocalpeacebuildingefforts.Localizationisnowaprominentthemewithinthehumanitariansector.Let’sstarttalkingaboutlocalizingpeaceandinvestinginitnow.
Dylan Mathews CEOPeaceDirect
iii / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Contents
Abbreviations i
Acknowledgements i
Preface ii
1 Introduction 1Supportforlocalpeacebuilding–thegapbetweenrhetoricandreality 3Peacebuildingimpact 5Thisreport 7
2 Approach 8
3 Community‑based peace initiatives 10Localdisputeandconflictresolution 11Longer‑termimpactsonstabilityandpeacefulco‑existence 12Sustainablemechanismsthatcontributetolong‑termresilience 16Lessonslearned 19
4 Initiatives led by, or engaging, specific groups 24Helpingpeoplewhohavebeentraumatizedbyconflict 25Youngpeople 27Women 31Lessonslearned 33
5 Shaping public discourse and policy, and early‑warning networks 36Shapingpublicdiscourse 37Changingpublicpolicyanddecision‑makingmechanisms 40Earlywarning,earlyintervention 42Lessonslearned 44
6 Findings and recommendations 46Whathelpslocalpeacebuildingsucceed? 48Challenges 51Areasandmechanismsforsupport 53Recommendations 56
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 1
1 Introduction
Peacebuilding, and especially local peacebuilding, is needed more than ever if the world is to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. Having reviewed evaluations of over 70 local initiatives, this report finds that they make a significant and essential impact on peace, and deserve more support.
1 StevenPinker,The Better Angels of Our Nature: The Decline of Violence in History and Its Causes,NewYork:Viking,2011.2 MontyG.MarshallandGabrielleC.Elzinga‑Marshall,‘GlobalReport2017:Conflict,Governance,andStateFragility’,Centrefor
SystemicPeace,2017;K.Dupuy,S.Gates,H.M.Nygård,I.Rudolfensen,H.StrandandH.Urdal,‘TrendsinArmedConflict,1946–2014’,PeaceResearchInstituteOslo,2016.
3 OECD,States of Fragility 2018,Paris:OECDPublishing,2018.4 InstituteforEconomics&Peace,‘GlobalPeaceIndex2018:MeasuringPeaceinaComplexWorld’,June2018.Availablefrom:
http://visionofhumanity.org/reports5 UnitedNationsandWorldBank,Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict,Washington,DC:WorldBank,2018.
Inmanyrespects,theworldhasbecomemorepeaceful.1Thenumberandmagnitudeofarmedconflictsdeclinedsteeplybetween1990and2003,amidimprovementsinlocalandinternationalpeacemaking.2
Morerecently,however,thistrendhasgoneintoreverse.In2016,morecountriesexperiencedviolentconflictthanatanytimeintheprevious30years,withnearly26,000peopledyingfromextremistattacks,and560,000peoplelosingtheirlivesduetoviolence.3TheGlobalPeaceIndexfor2018showedpeacehaddeterioratedforthefourthyearinsuccession.4WhilethisisfeltmostacutelyinpartsofAsia,theMiddleEastandAfrica,therealityisthatarmedviolenceaffectspeopleonallcontinents,witharoundfiftyintra‑stateandinterstateconflictsactivein2016.5Suchconflictsinflictwidespreaddeath,woundingandtrauma,aswellasunderminingtheresilience,well‑beinganddevelopmentprospectsoffamilies,communitiesandentiresocieties.
Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16Promotepeacefulandinclusivesocietiesforsustainabledevelopment,provideaccesstojusticeforall,andbuildeffective,accountableandinclusiveinstitutionsatalllevels.
SDG 16 peace targetSignificantlyreduceallformsofviolenceandrelateddeathrateseverywhere:Lesshomicides,conflict‑relateddeaths,peoplesubjectedtophysical,psychologicalorsexualviolence,andmorepeoplethatfeelsafewalkingalonewheretheylive.
2018 UN report on progress‘Manyregionsoftheworldcontinuetosufferuntoldhorrorsasaresultofarmedconflictorotherformsofviolencethatoccurwithinsocietiesandatthedomesticlevel.’
2 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
1 Introduction
Itisthereforewelcomethatpeacebuildinghasagrowingroleininternationalaid.PeaceisprominentlyincludedintheSustainableDevelopmentGoals(SDGs),6 andisthefocusofmajornewinternationalpolicies.TherecentflagshipdocumentPathways to Peace,producedjointlybytheUnitedNations(UN)andtheWorldBank,callsfor‘ashiftawayfrommanagingandrespondingtocrisesandtowardpreventingconflict.’7Thisreflectscommitmentsmadebymanyotherinternationalorganizations,includingmajoraiddonors,andtherecognitionthatachievingtheSDGsdependsonachievingpeace.8
6 UNSustainableDevelopmentGoalsKnowledgePlatform.See:https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg167 UnitedNationsandWorldBank,Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict,Washington,DC:WorldBank,2018.8 PathfindersforPeacefulandJustandInclusiveSocieties,‘TheRoadmapforPeaceful,JustandInclusiveSocieties:ACalltoActiontoChange
OurWorld’,CenteronInternationalCooperation,2017.Availablefrom:https://cic.nyu.edu/programs/sdg16plus
Peaceisthefruitofsustainedandlong‑termpeacebuildingeffortsbycommunities,governments,civilsociety,businesses,internationalorganizationsandintergovernmentalbodies.Whilepeacebuildinginvolvesusingnon‑violentactionstostop,reduceorpreventimmediateviolence,thisisneverenoughinitself,asviolencecanall‑too‑readilyrecur.Peacebuildingthereforeencompasseslonger‑terminitiativesthatcontributetoresilience,makingconflictslesslikelyinthefuture,andstrengtheningpeople’sandsocieties’abilitytohandlethosethatdowithoutresortingtoviolence.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 3
1 Introduction
Support for local peacebuilding – the gap between rhetoric and reality
9 UnitedNations(UN),‘AnAgendaforPeace:PreventiveDiplomacy,PeacemakingandPeace‑keeping:ReportoftheSecretary‑GeneralPursuanttotheStatementAdoptedbytheSummitMeetingoftheSecurityCouncilon31January1992,A/47/277’,1992.
10 RosiePinnington,‘LocalFirstinPractice:UnlockingthePowertoGetthingsDone’,PeaceDirect,2014;SéverineAutesserre,‘InternationalPeacebuildingandLocalSuccess:AssumptionsandEffectiveness’,International Studies Review(2017)19(1):114–32;UNSecurityCouncilResolution2282(2016),SustainingPeace.
11 SéverineAutessere,The Trouble with the Congo: Local Violence and the Failure of International Peacebuilding,NewYork,NY:CambridgeUniversityPress,2010;‘LocalPeacebuilding:APrimer’,PeaceDirect.
12 UnitedNationsandWorldBank,Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict,Washington,DC:WorldBank,2018.
InternationalpeaceinitiativeshavebecomeincreasinglyprominentsincetheUNSecretary‑Generalannouncedpeacebuildingasapriorityin1992.9Thesearecriticalfornegotiatingpeaceagreements,keepingthepeacebetweenwarringparties,andinfurnishingpolitical,financialandtechnicalsupport.Internationalinterventionsalone,though,areinsufficient.Asisincreasinglyunderstoodandwidelyagreed,peaceisonlysustainablewhenitisdrivenandledlocally,thatis,bythepeopleandinstitutionsofthecountryorcountriesconcerned.10Thisisbecausepeaceisonlylikelytobesustainedwhenlocalpeopletakethelead.11Theyknowthecontextwellenoughtojudgewhatmeasuresmightwork,andhavetheknowledge,relationshipsandmotivationneededtoensuretheydowork,especiallyoverthelongerterm.
Stabilitycreatedbyoutsiders,howeverwelcomeintheshortterm,lacksboththemettleandresilienceofapeaceforgedinthecrucibleoflocaldynamicsandcompromises.
Thistruismiswidelyembeddedinpolicyrhetoric,whichoftenemphasizesinclusivepeaceprocessesandlocalengagement.However,suchrhetoricisnotsufficientlyreflectedinmoredetailedplans,muchlessintheactionsoftheinternationalorganizationsthatplaysuchadominantroleinpeaceprocesses.
Forexample,eventhoughPathwaystoPeacehighlightstheneedfor‘inclusiveengagementatalllevels’,theimportanceoflocalpeacebuildersisnotreflectedinthesamedocument’sdetailedprescriptionforhowtopromotepeace.12
Local peacebuildingLocalpeacebuildinginthisreportreferstopeacebuildinginitiativesownedandledbypeopleintheirowncontext.Itincludessmall‑scalegrassrootsinitiatives,aswellasactivitiesundertakenonawiderscale.PeaceDirectdistinguishesbetweeninitiativesthatare(1)locallyledandowned,wherelocalpeopleandgroupsdesigntheapproachandsetpriorities,whileoutsidersassistwithresources;(2)locallymanaged,wheretheapproachcomesfromtheoutside,butis“transplanted”tolocalmanagement;or(3)locallyimplemented,primarilyanoutsideapproach,includingexternalprioritiesthatlocalpeopleororganizationsaresupposedtoimplement.
Locally led & owned
More local ownership Less local ownership
Locally managed
Locally implemented
4 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
1 Introduction
Thisgapbetweenrhetoricandrealitymattersenormously,becauseinternationalorganizationshaveapreponderantinfluenceonpolicyandprogramminginconflictandpost‑conflictenvironments.Thisisduetothenatureoftheirmandates,thelargebudgetsattheirdisposal,andtherelativefragilityoflocalinstitutions.Meanwhile,forpoliticalreasons,nationalleadersoftenignoreormarginalizelocalvoicesandinitiatives,meaningtheybecomeoverlydependentonexternalsupport.Therefore,wheninternationalorganizationsfailtoliveuptotheirpolicyrhetoric,localinitiativescanbestarvedofsupport,andopportunitiestopromoteandconsolidateasustainablepeacelost.
Internationalorganizationsneglectlocalinitiativesforthreeprinciplereasons.First,manyinternationalorganizationsimplicitlybiasedtowardsformal,short‑term,output‑orientedprogramming,andsupportingorganizationstheyalreadyknow.Thisprejudiceisexacerbatedbyaninstitutionalaversiontorisk–internationalorganizationsoftenlackconfidencethatlocalorganizationswillimplementprogrammesandstewardresourceseffectively–andbythelimitationsimposedduetotheirpartnershipswithhostgovernments.
‘International peacebuilding failed in the Democratic Republic of Congo because the reigning peacebuilding culture precluded attention to local conflicts. The dominant paradigm emphasized “top down” interventions at national and regional levels and viewed local conflicts simply as a consequence of weak state authority.’
– Peacebuilding expert Séverine Autessere
Second,manyinternationalorganizationsfinditoperationallydifficulttocollaboratewithlocalinitiatives.Limitedknowledgeandunderstandingoflocalcontextmeansmanylocalactorsandinitiativesareinvisibletothem.Additionally,operationalconstraintssuchasfunding,contractingcriteria,resultsframeworksandtheneedtominimizetransactioncostsmakeitdifficulttosupportwhatareoftenquitesmall‑scaleactivities,manytakingplacefarfromthecapitalcity.
Third,thereisalimitedbodyofpublishedandpubliclyrecognizedevidencedemonstratingthesuccessoflocalinitiatives,whichmakesitdifficulttoallocateresourcestothem.Thisisexacerbatedbyaprevalentunderstandingthat‘successful’peacebuildingmeanshavinganimpactonhighlyvisible,high‑levelnationalpeaceorpoliticalprocesses.
‘[Peacebuilding is] an enduring work that needs patience, time and lifelong relationships. The international community can support this work by coming alongside us, instead of not listening and doing their own work without us. It is our communities and our people who know what we need the most.’
– South Sudanese peacebuilder
Whilethisreportwillarguethatthefirstandsecondoftheseconstraintsneedtobeaddressed,itisprincipallyconcernedwiththethird.Itpresentsclearevidenceoftheimpactsofexternallyevaluatedlocalpeacebuildinginitiativesfromdiversecontexts,withtheaimofconvincingdecision‑makersintheinternationalaidsystemtopaymoreattentionto,andprovidemoresupportto,localinitiatives.Suchinitiativesareessentialcomponentsofviolencepreventionandreduction,aswellaslonger‑termpeacebuilding.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 5
1 Introduction
Peacebuilding impact
13 PhilVernon,‘RedressingtheBalance:WhyWeNeedMorePeacebuildinginanIncreasinglyUncertainWorld’,InternationalAlert,2017;PeaceDirectandInclusivePeaceTransitionInitiative,‘CivilSociety&InclusivePeace:KeyInsightsandLessonsfromaGlobalConsultationConvenedonPeaceInsight’,February2019.
Peaceisthecumulativeimpactofmanydifferentpeacebuildingcontributions,initiatedatalllevels,whetherthatbeincommunities,nationallyorinternationally.13 Itsdurabilityisinfluencedbyglobal,regional,national,sub‑nationalandcommunity‑levelfactors,allofwhichcaneitherundermineorsustainit.Everycontextisdifferent,andeverypeaceprocessmustreflectthat.
Becauseofthiscomplexity,itisseldomclearhowdifferentinitiativesandcontributionsadduptosustainablepeaceonawiderscale,orwhathasbeencalled‘peacewritlarge’.Nevertheless,enoughisknownabouthowpeacetakesroottoidentifywithconfidenceindividualcontributionsintheshorterterm.Toprovideameasureofcoherenceintheevaluationofdiverseactions,theyareoftenevaluatedintermsofthreedomains,andatthreelevels,asshowninFigure1.Thethreelevelsaresomewhatprogressive,inthatchangesinknowledgeandattitudescanbetheprecursortochangedbehavior,whichisinturntheprecursortostructuralchanges.Thethreedomainsareanecessarysimplificationofthehighlycomplexfactorsthatenablesustainablepeace.
PeacebuildingPeacebuildingdescribesthemyriadmethodsemployedbypeopleallovertheworldtoimproveprospectsforpeace.Peacebuildingincludesawiderangeofinitiatives,frommediation,protection,reintegration,traumahealingandreconciliation,throughtolonger‑terminvestmentsinfaireraccesstogovernance,education,health,justice,securityandlivelihoods.In2018,PeaceDirectandtheInclusivePeaceTransitionInitiativeaskedpeacebuildersfromacrosstheworldtodescribepeacebuilding.Herearesomeofthethingstheysaid:
• Addressingtherootcausesofviolentconflict;
• Addressingsocio‑economicinequality;• Creatingspacesforchange;• Empoweringpeoplewiththemeansandspacetodeveloptheirownsolutionstoconflict;
• Buildingtrust,dialogueandreconciliation;
• Creatingacultureofpeace;• Anchoringglobalpoliciesinlocalrealities;
• Meetinghumansecurityneeds–fromwatertophysicalsecurity.
6 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Figure 1. Three domains and three levels of peacebuilding impact, with generic illustrations
Levels →
Domains ↓
Changes in knowledge and attitudes
Changes in behavior Structural changes (norms, systems, institutions)
Violence prevented, reduced or stopped
Improvedunderstandingoftheunderlyingcausesofviolenceamongthoseaffected
Peoplestopusingviolence,andadoptothermethodstoresolveconflicts
Violenceearlywarningandearlyresponsesystemsadopted
Horizontal relationships between and among people and peoples improved
Greaterempathytowards,andunderstandingof,peoplefrom‘other’groups
Peopleexhibitingandcallingforacceptanceofothers;activecollaborationunderway
Collaborativeapproachesinplacetomanageconflictoversharedresources
Vertical relationships between people and those with authority and power improved
Betterunderstandingamongpeopleandauthoritiesofeachother’srolesandchallenges
Governmentsconsultingpeople,andcivilsocietyengagingwithgovernments,leadingtolessconfrontation
Formalsystemsforpublicconsultation,democraticgovernanceandnon‑violentmanagementofconflictadopted
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 7
This report
14 Thisisnot,however,toignoretheimportanceandimpactofpeacebuildinginnortherncountries–forexampleinNorthernIreland,theBasquecountry,andtheUSA,wherepeacebuildingmethodshavebeenusedsuccessfullytoreducepolitical,inter‑ethnicandgang‑relatedviolence.
Thisreportarguesthatmoresupportforlocalpeacebuildingisneeded,andhighlightsexamplesofeffectivelocalinitiativesinsupportofthisclaim.Tocounterthescepticismsomedecision‑makersexpressabouttheimpactoflocalpeacebuilding,thereportisconfinedtoexamplesthathavebeenobjectivelyassessedbyexternalevaluatorsorresearchers.Asakeyconcernistoimprovetheallocationofoverseasaid,theexamplesarelimitedtotheGlobalSouth,whereaidmoneyisspent.14
Afterashortaccountofourresearchapproach,thereportexplorespeacebuildingimpactsinrespectofthreebroadheadings,withachapteroneach:
• Community‑basedpeaceinitiatives;• Initiativesledby,orengagingspecificgroups,suchaswomen,youthandtraumatizedpeople;
• Initiativesthatadvocateimprovednationalpoliciesanddiscourse,orearly‑warningnetworks.
‘A peace that is imposed on people from above is a short-lived peace, but a peace that comes from the people is a lasting peace.’
– Unnamed evaluation interviewee, Somalia
Whilethesecategoriesarefarfromexhaustive,theyreflectthemainthemesthatemergefromthedataavailable,andtogetherpaintapictureofthecreativeandcourageousapproachespeopleareusingtomakeadifferenceintheirlocalcontext.Followingthesethreechapters,thereisadiscussionofthemainfindings,whichisinturnfollowedbyrecommendationsaddressedtointernationalaidorganizations,astheyconsiderhowstepuptheireffortstomeetSDG16by2030.
8 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
2 Approach
Desk research was undertaken between February and April 2019. This comprised analysis of independent assessments of local peacebuilding initiatives, obtained as follows:
• AcallwassentoutbyPeaceDirectandtheAllianceforPeacebuilding,followedupbydirectrequests,toover1,600localandinternationalpeacebuilders,requestingcopiesofevaluations;
• Otherdatabasesweresearched,includingevaluationsheldbytheAllianceforPeacebuilding,andtheDM&EforPeaceandInternationalInitiativeforImpactEvaluationwebsites;
• Additionalmaterialsweresourcedthroughsearchesontheinternet.
Thesedocuments–251inall–weresiftedtodeterminetheirrelevanceforthestudy.Documentswereconsideredrelevantiftheyclearlyconcerned‘local’initiativesasdefinedforthisstudy,withanexplicitfocusonmakingacontributiontopeace;werewrittenbyindependentthirdparties;werecredibleinthatthereportedresultsappearedproportionatetothestrategiesused,basedontheresearchers’experience;andreflectedarigorousevaluationapproach.
Basedonthesecriteria,57reports,or23%ofthesample,wereeligible.Thesewerereviewedinmoredetail,providingthesubstancearoundwhichthereportwasprepared.Initiativesin23countriesarereferredtodirectlyinthereport.Organizationscitedinthispaperwerecontactedfortheirapproval,unlesstheinformationwasalreadyfreelyavailableinpublishedform.Insomecases,informationhasbeenanonymizedtoprotectthoseinvolved.
Localpeaceinitiativesincludetheactionsofnationalandsub‑nationalgovernments,traditionalleaders,businesspeople,religiousinstitutions,civilsocietyandindividuals.However,nineintenoftheevaluationsconcernedcivilsocietyinitiatives,andthereportisfocusedonthose.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 9
Caveats
Timeandresourceconstraintslimitedthesizeoftheresearchsample,andmadeitimpossibletoground‑truththeevaluationfindings,norestablishifimpactshadbeensustainedinlateryears.ThesamplewasskewedtowardsAfrica,whichrepresentedovertwo‑thirdsoftheeligiblereports(seeFigure2).Itprobablyalsocontainsapositivebias,giventhatthecallforevaluationswasexplainedinthecontextofasearchforevidenceofpeacebuildingimpact,whichwouldhavebeeninterpretedtomean‘positiveimpact’.Additionally,givenmanylocalinitiatives,especiallysmallerones,arenotroutinelyevaluated,thedatasetwasbiasedtowardsinitiativessupportedbyinternationalprogrammes.15
Furthermore,theresearchwaslimitedtoformalinitiativesconductedwiththemainintentionofbuildingpeace.Thisignoresthemassofinformalinitiatives,aswellasthoseconductedwithadifferentprimaryintention,bothofwhichmakeimportantcontributionstopeace.
Despitetheselimitations,thesamplewassufficientlyrobusttodevelopsomeclearconclusionsandrecommendations.Nevertheless,therecommendationssetoutinChapter6includeacallforfurtherevaluationstobothbroadenanddeepentheknowledgebaseaboutlocalpeacebuilding.
15 Unfortunately,formostoftheseitwasimpossibletotellifthelocalpartnersweregenuinelyimplementingtheirowninitiatives,oriftheyweremerely‘implementingpartners’,executingothers’plans.Thesecaseswerethereforeexcluded,eventhoughsomemaywellhaveincludedinitiativeswhichweregenuinelylocallyled.
Figure 2. Geographical distribution of initiatives analysed in this research
11%
Americas Asia
Europe
Sub-saharan Africa
Middle East/North Africa
14%
5%
3%
67%
10 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
3 Community‑based peace initiatives
Grassroots peace initiatives based on local community structures are extremely common, and well‑represented in the evaluations used for this report. The structures, which take different forms, are sometimes called peace committees, but have a variety of other names. They are ‘local’ in the purest sense of the word, typically covering a neighbourhood or district, and bring together a representative selection of voices to resolve specific problems that have the potential to cause conflict and violence. They reflect the underlying dynamics of their communities, and often collaborate with and build on existing local power structures and processes. They define and follow a set of rules and procedures to maximize objectivity and fairness. They are often inclusive, involving women and men of different ages, and members of different ethnic communities and economic interest groups, along with local leaders. Over the medium and long term, they can enhance trust and collaboration within and across communities.
ThischapterdrawsonevaluationsoflocalpeacecommitteesintheDemocraticRepublicofCongo(DRC),Burundi,Nigeria,SudanandSouthSudan.Theseoperateagainstabackgroundofchronicandunresolvedconflict,andinadequatehigher‑levelgovernance.Theyareparticularlygoodatresolvingdisputesovernaturalresources,whicharecommonineconomiesbasedonfarmingandlivestock.
Italsodrawsonaslightlydifferentcase,whichinvolvesColombianfarmersintheCararevalleysettingupanassociation(LaAsociacióndeTrabajadoresCampesinosdelCarare)designedtoprotectlocalcommunitiesfromallthreearmedgroups–rebelguerrillas,paramilitariesandthearmy–inasustained,triangularconflict.
Thechapteralsoreferstolocalpeacestructuresestablishedtopromoterecoveryandhealinginpost‑conflictenvironments,suchasLiberiaandSierraLeone,whereyearsofconflicthaveengendereddeepmistrust;andinpartsofKenya,wherethethreatofviolentextremismisanimportantconflictissue.
Below,someoftheimpactsoflocalpeacestructuresaredescribedunderthreeheadings:Localdisputeandconflictresolution;longer‑termimpactsonstabilityandpeacefulco‑existence;andsustainablepeaceandresiliencemechanisms.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 11
Local dispute and conflict resolution
16 GumaKundaKomey,‘EvaluationoftheProcess,OutcomesandImpactoftheCfPS‑RRFandPCsinLocalPeace‑buildingandConflictResolutionsinSouthandWestKordofan,Sudan’,2017.
17 MichelleSpearing,‘AddressingStateFragilityfromtheBottomUpThroughInclusiveCommunityGovernance:ExploringTheoriesofChange’,CARENederland,2016.
18 AlexisM.GardellaandEricKalaba,‘CitizenshipAndPeacebuildingInTheDemocraticRepublicOfCongo:FinalEvaluation’,March2009.19 OliverKaplan,‘ProtectingCiviliansinCivilWar:TheInstitutionoftheATCCinColombia’,Journal of Peace Research(2003)50(3):351–67.
Themandateofmostcommunity‑basedpeacestructuresistoresolvelocalconflictsnon‑violently.Amongtheissuestheydealwitharedisputesoveraccesstonaturalresources,politicalviolencelinkedtoelections,andviolenceperpetratedbyarmedgroups.
EvaluationsshowthatpeacecommitteesinSouthKordofaninSudanhavesuccessfullyresolvedmanyconflictsbetweenfarmersandherders,wherethelatter’sanimalsweredamagingvitalcrops(seeCaseStudy2).Inothercases,theyresolveddisputesbetweenpastoralistgroups,preventingoutbreaksofviolencelinkedtodisputesoverwomenand,inatleastonecase,murder.Inonesituation,theymediatedbetweentwopastoralistgroupsthathadthreatenedtoattackoneanother,preventingtheconflictfromescalating.Toputthisinperspective,anearlier,similarcasehadresultedin150deaths.16
Elsewhere,inBurundi,localpeacegroupspreventedandreducedelectoralviolence.‘Peaceclubs’inanumberofcommunitiesmobilizedcitizenstoreporttheriskorincidenceofelectoralviolenceassoonasitoccurred,callinginlocalsecurityservicesandcivicleaderstointervene.Localauthorityrepresentativesobservedasignificantreductioninviolencebetweenthe2010and2015electionsincommunitieswherepeaceclubshadbeenestablished.17
‘The conference outcomes had a direct impact on my personal and family security. My farm is a bit far from the village. Last year, and this year before the conference, I and other members of my family, while on the farm faced several incidents of threats from masked and armed men allowing their cattle to enter into the farm and damaging crops. The implementation of the conference resolution has put an end to this through public awareness raising among pastoralists, especially youth.’
– Adam Aliheimir Jibteel, farmer from El Tokmah, Sudan
Localpeacestructurestakeonparticularsignificanceinchronicallyunstablecontexts,wheretheycanfindthemselvesconductingsensitiveanddangerousnegotiationswitharmedgroups.Thisrequiresreservesofcourageandskill,butcanpaydividendsforlocalsecurity.IneasternDRC,anevaluationteamfoundthatpeacecommitteeshadengagedindialogueandadvocacywitharmedmilitiasoperatingnearby,reducingtensionsandtheriskofviolenceatrebelroadblocks.18Thiswasparticularlyimportantduetothethreatofsexualandotherviolencebymilitiamembers,andbecausefearwaspreventingpeoplefromaccessingtheirfieldsandmarkets,undermininglocallivelihoods.Inanotherexample(seealsoCaseStudy1),apeasants’associationintheCalareValleyinColombiaprotecteditsmembersovermanyyearsbynegotiatinganagreementwitharmedgroupleaders.19
12 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Longer‑term impacts on stability and peaceful co‑existence
20 GumaKundaKomey,‘EvaluationoftheProcess,OutcomesandImpactoftheCfPS‑RRFandPCsinLocalPeace‑buildingandConflictResolutionsinSouthandWestKordofan,Sudan’,PeaceDirect,2017.
21 RosemaryCairns,‘AnEvaluationof“StrengtheningLocallyLedPeacebuilding”’,PeaceDirect,May2011.22 MarkM.RogersandDrHippolytPul,‘LearningFromandAboutLocalPeaceGroups:ThematicEvaluationReport’,ConciliationResources.23 ChristianAid,‘InItFortheLongHaul?:LessonsonPeacebuildinginSouthSudan’,2018.
Asimportantasresolvingspecificdisputesis,theimpactofcommunitypeacestructuresgoesbeyondthistocreateamorestableenvironmentoftrust,stabilityandcollaboration.Bydemonstratingthatproblemscanbesatisfactorilyandfairlyresolved,theiractionsreducetheincentivefordisputingparties–andtheirrespectivenetworksandconstituencies–toactpre‑emptivelyandaggressively.Insodoing,communitystructurespreventsmalldisputesfromescalating,andcanbeinstrumentalinatrocityprevention(seeFigure3).
AnevaluationofpeacecommitteesinSudanfoundtheyhad‘contributedsignificantlytoeffectiveandsustainableprevalenceoflocalpeaceandsocialco‑existence,andtopositivechangesinattitudesandbehaviorsamongcommunitymembers’.20Studieshavenotedsimilarphenomenaelsewhere,forexampleimprovedintra‑communityrelationsineasternDRC,21betweenMuslimandChristiancommunitiesinNigeria,andbetweenclansinKenya.22
Datafromthreecontexts(seeFigure4)illustratethisfurther,highlightingchangesinattitudesandbehaviors,aswellasthehighpercentageofproblemsresolvedandofresidentswhofelttheyweresaferandhadbetterlocalrelationships.Thesearesignificantresultsincontextsofchronic,unresolvedconflict,orintheuneasypeacefollowingtheendofcivilwar.
Figure 3. Illustrating the potential consequences if a local incident is not addressed in a timely fashion23
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 13
24 Integrity,‘FinalReport:EvaluationoftheCFPSRapidResponseFundandPeaceCommitteeModelinSudan’,2012,citedinPaulvanTongeren,‘PotentialCornerstoneofInfrastructuresforPeace?HowLocalPeaceCommitteesCanMakeaDifference’,Peacebuilding(2013)1(1):1–31.
25 FambulTokmeans‘familytalk’inKrio,andisthegenericnamegiventoanetworkofcommunitypeacestructuresestablishedtofosterreconciliationbyaSierraLeoneanNGOaftertheendofthecivilwar.
26 MohammedAbu‑NimerandSusanShepler,‘FambulTokProgramEvaluation’,April2015.27 AllanaPoole,‘BarazaJustice:ACaseStudyofCommunity‑LedConflictResolutionintheD.R.Congo’,PeaceDirect,201428 JacobusCilliers,OeindrillaDubaandBilalSiddiqui,‘CantheRuinsofWarbeHealed?ExperimentalEvidencefromSierraLeone’,Impact
EvaluationReport75,InternationalInitiativeforImpactEvaluation,May2018.29 ‘Portals2PeaceandNationalActionPlanEvaluationreport,2019’,AssistanceMissionforAfricaandPAX,2019.
Figure 4. Selected statistics demonstrating the breadth and depth of local peace improvements
Kordofan, Sudan• InoverhalfofpeacecommitteeinterventionsinSouthKordofan,communitiesthathadpreviouslyfoughtalongsideoneofthepartiestoaconflict,subsequentlychosenotto;
• In80%ofinterventionswhereviolencehadoccurredandbeenbroughttoanend,nofurtherviolencewasreported;
• In94%ofinterventions,thespecificconflictwasdeemedtohavebeenpartiallyorfullyresolved;
• Inonly6%ofcaseshadtheinterventionsappearedtohavefailedentirely.24
Sierra Leone – Fambul Tok programme25 • 84%ofpeoplefelttheirlocalpeacegroupshadhelpedpreventconflicts,and96%saidthatlevelsofviolencehadbeencontained;
• 60%agreedthattheprogrammehadmadethemwanttobringpeopleclosertogether;• Over85%thoughtithadchangedtheirperceptionofotherswhomtheyhadnotpreviouslyliked,andthattheyhadlearnedtoforgiveothers.26
South Kivu, DRC• Aclusterofpeacestructuresknownasbaraza(Swahiliforcouncil)resolvedatleast1,500localdisputesinthreeyears,benefittingatleast3,000peopledirectly,and15,000indirectly;
• 90%ofcasesbroughttothebazara’sattentionhadbeensatisfactorilyresolved;• 86%ofrespondentssaidthebaraza’sinitiativeshadmadetheircommunitymoresecure.27
Improvingattitudestowardsothersoftenmeansconfrontingtheideasthatunderpinnegativebehavior.EvaluatorssawthisasoneoftheachievementsofFambulTokcommunitypeacestructuresinSierraLeone,wherelocalresidentsgainedabetterunderstandingofthehistoryandcausesofthecivilwar,andthusovercametheirprejudicestowardsothers,allowingameasureofreconciliation.Theyalsobecamemorelikelytoforgivethosewhohadperpetratedviolence,moretrustingofex‑combatants,andmorecommunity‑oriented,withstrongersocialnetworks.28
Likemanyconflicts,thecivilwarinSouthSudanhasastronginter‑ethnicelement,basedonprejudice,antagonismandviolenceagainst‘other’groups.AprogrammeimplementedbylocalorganizationAssistanceMissionforAfricawasfoundtohavehelpedlocalDinkaandNuerpeacebuildersimproverelationsbetweencommunitiesthroughawareness‑raisingactivitiesandinter‑ethnicdialogue.Thislednotonlytoimprovedattitudesandmutualtrust,butalsopracticaloutcomessuchasareductionincattleraidsandrevengekillings,thereturnofstolencattle,safermovement,andastrongercommitmenttousingpeacefulmechanismstoresolvedisputes.29
14 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
‘[Local peace groups] are very perserverant. They do not give up easily. They find creative solutions.’
– Security officer, Nigeria
Communitypeaceinitiativeshavealsoreducedtheincidenceofconflictandtheriskofviolenceassociatedwithrefugeemovements.In2016,whenSouthSudaneserefugeesarrivedinSouthKordofan’sKalogielocality,someresidentssawthemasculturallyalienandresentedtheirneedforscarcelocalresources.Asaresult,conflictsaroseoveraccesstowaterandland.Atthispoint,thelocalpeacecommitteesteppedin,conveningtherefugeesandthelocalcommunityindialogue,identifyingspecificgrievancesandconcernsonbothsides,andidentifyingsolutions.Toimprovetheunderlyingrelationship,theyestablishedajointpeacecommitteemadeupofrefugeesandvillagers.Externalevaluatorsfoundthatthishadfosteredcollaborationandco‑ownership,allowingfurtherissuestobequicklyresolved,andimprovingrelationsatadeeperlevel.30
30 GumaKundaKomey,‘EvaluationoftheProcess,OutcomesandImpactoftheCfPS‑RRFandPCsinLocalPeace‑buildingandConflictResolutionsinSouthandWestKordofan,Sudan’,PeaceDirect,2017.
31 MarkM.RogersandDrHippolytPul,‘LearningFromandAboutLocalPeaceGroups:ThematicEvaluationReport’,ConciliationResources.
‘[The District Dialogue Platform] made some of us change the way we were working. We were hard on our approach to witnesses. We have calmed down and know our place in working with the community people and this is also for some of our co-workers.’
– Security sector operative, Liberia
TheWestAfricanEbolaepidemicprovidesanotherexampleofhowlocalpeacestructurescancalmfraughtlocalrelationships.Theepidemicendedin2016,afteralongperiodofcrisis.Oneoftheobstaclestorestoringnormalitywasaresidualfearofdiseasesurvivors,amidaccusationsofwitchcraft.Thiswasacontextwheretrusthadalreadybeenweakenedbyyearsofcivilwar.SeveralDistrictDialoguePlatforms–community‑basedinitiativessetupbyLiberiancommunitiestorebuildtrustafterthewar–recognizedthissituationwasputtingtheirfragilestabilityatrisk.Theyconductedpublicawarenesscampaigns,andhelpedaffectedindividualsandfamiliestoreintegrateeconomicallyandsocially.Evaluatorsfoundthishadhelpedcommunitiesrecover,aswellasrecommittothepost‑warrebuildingthattheepidemichadinterrupted.31
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 15
Communitypeaceinitiativescanalsoimproverelationshipswithgovernmentandotherexternalplayers–playerswhosebehaviorscanhaveamajorimpactonlocalpeaceandstability.Onereportthatreviewedlocalpeacegroupsinarangeofcountriesfoundtheyhadhelpedimprovecommunityrelationswith(previouslyheavy‑handed)governmentsecurityservices.Thiscontributedtoareductioninhumanrightsabusesandcommunitydisruption,whileallowingthesecurityservicestokeepthepeacemoreeffectively.
32 MarkM.RogersandDrHippolytPul,‘LearningFromandAboutLocalPeaceGroups:ThematicEvaluationReport’,ConciliationResources.33 OliverKaplan,‘ProtectingCiviliansinCivilWar:TheInstitutionoftheATCCinColombia’,Journal of Peace Research(2003)50(3):351–67.
CommunitymembersinKenya–whereclumsyactionsbythesecurityservicestowardsyoungMuslimmenhadpreviouslysouredrelations–attributedthistochangedattitudesandbehaviorsonthepartofsecurityactors,whowerenowmorewillingtoconsultcommunitymembersbeforetakingaction.Inanotherexamplefromthesamereport,relationsbetweenacommunityinLiberiaandaminingcompanyoperatinglocallyhaddeteriorated,creatinginstability.Here,thedialogueplatformhadinitiateddialoguebetweenthecompany,thelocalcommunityandgovernmentofficials,ultimatelyallowingthecompanytocontinueitsworkandprovidelocaljobs.32
‘There are several aspects of the functioning of the noyaux de paix that are of particular note. It is clear that [they] have become permanent mechanisms for conflict resolution within their communities. This becomes especially clear in certain communities where the noyau de paix has come to be called a baraza in Sud Kivu, or a barza in Nord Kivu – both Swahili terms for the customary council of sages, headed by a chief, which in the past, and in the absence of state judicial institutions, arbitrated conflicts within the community. The traditional baraza, of course, comprised only men of notable standing from one ethnicity.’
– Evaluation of local peace structures, DRC
Case Study 1. Negotiating security with armed groups in Colombia
LaAsociacióndeTrabajadoresCampesinosdelCarare(alocalpeasants’associationintheCarareRivervalley),representingruralhouseholdslongpreyeduponbyguerrillas,paramilitariesandthearmy(allthreesidesinatriangularconflict),establishedasystemprotectinglocalcommunitiesfromthevariousarmedgroups.Armedgroupsfromallsideswereinthehabitofputtingpressureonlocalpeopleeithertojointhemorprovideintelligence,threateningthemwithdeathiftheyrefused.Thisputpeopleinaninvidiousposition.Theyknewthatiftheyaccededtothedemands,theywouldlikelybetargetedbytheotherside,whileiftheyrefusedtheywouldbeharmedorkilled.
Theassociationworkedoutacomplicatedsystem,withtheagreementofthearmedgroupleaders,underwhichtheyguaranteedtheneutralityoftheirmembers,thusgivingthemthespacetosaynotoallparties.Incaseswhereoneofthearmedgroupsaccusedanassociationmemberofsupportinganotherarmedgroup,theassociationitselfwouldundertakeafullandobjectiveinvestigation.Ifthisinvestigationexoneratedtheindividual,thearmedgroupconcernedwouldbeinformed.If,ontheotherhand,theinvestigationfoundthattheaccusationsofpartisanshipweretrue,theassociationwouldoffertheindividualtwooptions:Eitherleavetheareaimmediatelyfortheirownsafety,orrenouncetheiraffiliationandhopeforthebest.Bystickingrigidlytoitsprocedures,theassociationbecametrustedonallsides,andiscreditedbyexternalresearcherswithminimizingtheratesoftargetedviolenceduringmanyyearsofcivilwar.33
16 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Sustainable mechanisms that contribute to long‑term resilience
34 AlexisM.GardellaandEricKalaba,‘CitizenshipAndPeacebuildingInTheDemocraticRepublicOfCongo:FinalEvaluation’,March2009.35 AlexisM.GardellaandEricKalaba,‘CitizenshipAndPeacebuildingInTheDemocraticRepublicOfCongo:FinalEvaluation’,March2009.
Whencommunity‑basedpeaceinitiativesareadoptedaspartoflocalgovernancemechanisms,theirongoingcontributionissustained,representingastructuralchange.Forthistohappen,theremustbeprolongeddemandfortheirinterventions,andwidespreadsupportacrossthecommunity.
Manycommunity‑basedpeacestructuresbecomethepreferredmechanism,or‘firststop’,forpeopleseekingresolutionofdisputes.Evaluatorsfoundplentifulexamplesofcommunity‑basedinitiativescollaboratingwithandcomplementinglocalauthorities,andsawthisasanindicatorofsustainabilityandstructuralchange.Typically,traditionalcommunityleadersaremembersoftheirlocalpeacegroup.Inonecase,wherebothrebelsandthenationalarmywereactiveinpartoftheDRC,anarmycommanderstationednearbyalsosatonthecommunitypeacecommittee.34
Collaborationbetweencommunity‑basedpeacegroupsandtheauthoritiesispragmatic.Localauthoritiesreferpetitionerstothelocalpeacestructurewhenrelevant,andcommunitypeacegroupsoftenrefercasesthatarebeyondtheirremitorcapacitytothelocalauthorities.Thismutualsupportallowsbothpartiestobeeffective,andformorecasestobesatisfactorilyaddressed.ThestudyexaminingFambulTokcommunitypeacestructuresinSierraLeonefoundthat83%ofrespondentsconsideredtheirlocalchiefssupportiveoftheircommunitypeacegroup.IntheDRC,manylocalchiefsusedpublicresourcestosupportcommunitypeacegroupsinpracticalways,forexamplebyprovidingameetinghut,oraplotoflandforthegrouptocultivateinordertodefraytheirexpenses.35
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 17
Inanothersignofsustainabilityandstructuraltransformationnotedbyexternalevaluators,somecommunitypeacegroupsexpandtheirmandateandgeographiccoverage,ofteninresponsetoincreaseddemand.AdistrictpeaceinitiativeinLiberiaexpandedtocoverthewholecounty.36 PeacegroupsintheDRCreceivedandactedonrequestsfrompeopleinneighbouringareas.37SomecouncilsinBurundireached‘upwardsandoutwards’toexpandtheirelectionearly‑warningsystemsfromtheirowncolline(ward)tothecommune(district)level,andsomecreatedfunctionalnetworks,linkingupwithnearbycommunity‑basedinitiatives.38
Indeed,manyevaluatorsgiveexamplesofgrassrootspeaceinitiativesbeingencouragedbytheircommunitiestoplayaleadershiproleinlocaldevelopmentmorebroadly.PeacegroupshelpedimprovelocalyouthemploymentopportunitiesinSudan,39roadinfrastructureintheDRC,40 andcommunityradiostationsinLiberia.41 TheyalsohelpedincreasevotingratesinLiberia,particularlyamongfirst‑timewomenvoters.42
36 MarkM.RogersandDrHippolytPul,‘LearningFromandAboutLocalPeaceGroups:ThematicEvaluationReport’,ConciliationResources.37 AlexisM.GardellaandEricKalaba,‘CitizenshipAndPeacebuildingInTheDemocraticRepublicOfCongo:FinalEvaluation’,March2009.38 MichelleSpearing,‘AddressingStateFragilityfromtheBottomUpThroughInclusiveCommunityGovernance:ExploringTheoriesofChange’,
CARENederland,2016.39 GumaKundaKomey,‘EvaluationoftheProcess,OutcomesandImpactoftheCfPS‑RRFandPCsinLocalPeace‑buildingandConflict
ResolutionsinSouthandWestKordofan,Sudan’,PeaceDirect,2017.40 BangaAssumaniMonday,‘EmergencyProjectToSupportSustainableSocio‑EconomicReintegrationOfEx‑ChildSoldiersInBeni,The
DemocraticRepublicOfTheCongo:ImpactAssessmentReport’,2017.41 MarkM.RogersandDrHippolytPul,‘LearningFromandAboutLocalPeaceGroups:ThematicEvaluationReport’,ConciliationResources.42 MarkM.RogersandDrHippolytPul,‘LearningFromandAboutLocalPeaceGroups:ThematicEvaluationReport’,ConciliationResources.43 MohammedAbu‑NimerandSusanShepler,‘FambulTokProgramEvaluation’,April2015.44 MichelleSpearing,‘AddressingStateFragilityfromtheBottomUpThroughInclusiveCommunityGovernance:ExploringTheoriesofChange’,
CARENederland,2016.45 AllanaPoole,‘BarazaJustice:ACaseStudyofCommunity‑LedConflictResolutionintheD.R.Congo’,PeaceDirect,2014.
Acommonresultoftheirworkinmanycontextswasanimprovementinlocalgovernancethroughmorerepresentativeparticipationindecision‑making,richerpublicdebate,andimprovedaccountability.InSierraLeone,79%ofrespondentssaidtheircommunitypeacegroupsenabledgreatercommunityparticipationindecision‑making,43whileresearchinBurundifoundthatelectedofficialswerepayingmoreattentiontocommunityviews,inanatmosphereofimprovedtrust.44CommunitymembersintheDRCfeltcorruptionhadlessenedduetothecommunity‑basedpeacegroup’swork.45
‘The conflicts which were resolved by the chiefs of the village were unfinished and still drove people back into the same situation afterwards, because if one of the parties involved in the conflict did not have the means to give money to the chief, the chief would not judge or resolve the problem. And if he resolved it, he always gave it in the best interest of whoever had given him most. The Baraza does it free and the solutions always result in peaceful living together afterwards.’
– Muvunju (name changed), resident of Kigongo in the DRC
18 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
46 GumaKundaKomey,‘EvaluationoftheProcess,OutcomesandImpactoftheCfPS‑RRFandPCsinLocalPeace‑buildingandConflictResolutionsinSouthandWestKordofan,Sudan’,PeaceDirect,2017.
Case Study 2. Building local peace against a backdrop of chronic conflict in Sudan
ThepeacecommitteeinDelenj–thecapitalofSouthKordofan–hasbeenactiveforseveralyears.In2017,attherequestoflocaleldersfromElTokmah,around10kmaway,itintervenedinresponsetogrowingtensionsbetweensemi‑nomadiclivestockherdersandsettledfarmers.46
Situatedinafertilezoneonmajortraditionallivestockroutes,ElTokmahisacollectionofhamletsandencampmentshousingaround9,000peoplefromupto20ethnicgroups.Thepeoplelivinginandtransitingtheareahaveforalongtimefollowedanagreedcodeofpracticetohelpavoidthekindsofconflictsthatcanoccurwhenfarmersandherderssharelandandwater,butthesenormshavecomeunderincreasingpressureinrecentyears.ThesecessionofSouthSudanandthepersistenceofchronicarmedconflictintheregionhaveclosedoffmuchofthealternativegrazing,forcingnomadstospendmoretimeintheneighbourhood.Weakstateinstitutionsandtheproliferationofsmallarmshaveonlyexacerbatedtensions.
Thesituationbecameincreasinglytenseduringtheharvestseasonin2017.Theincursionoflivestockontofarmers’fieldsresultedinviolencebetweenDarNay’lanomadsandNubaAjankfarmers,causingseriousinjuries.Reportsoflivestockdamagingcropsproliferatedamidasenseofgrowingmistrust.Afarmerwasshotdeadatnightwhileguardinghisfields.Farmingcommunitiesthreatenedtotakethelawintotheirownhandsaspressureoveraccesstograzingandwatersourcesmounted.InOctober,theeldersoftheElTokmahcommunities–anxiousaboutthegrowingtension,andawarethatatleasttenpeoplehadbeenkilledinsimilarcircumstancesthepreviousyear–requestedhelpfromtheDelenjpeacecommittee.Thecommitteeagreed,andobtainedsupportfromKhartoum‑basedNGOCollaborativeforPeaceinSudantoorganizeamajormeetinginNovember,designedtodevelopandagreeasolution.
Theyproducedanagreementthat,amongothersthings,committedcommunityleaderstorestoreandenforcetraditionalcodesofpracticethathadmaintainedpeaceinthepast;tokeeplivestockinagreedpasturelandsfurtherawayfromthefarms;toestablishajointcommitteetomonitorandrespondpeacefullytofurtherinfractions;andtolevyfinesonanyonebreakingtherulesorcarryingsmallarms.
Thecommitteeknewtheunderlyingissueshadtobeaddressedaswell,andsopersuadedthegovernmenttocreateanadditionalwaterpointtoreducethepressureonexistingresources.Meanwhile,thecommitteepersuadedinternationaldevelopmentorganizationstobringnewdevelopmentinterventionstoElTokmahinordertocreatejobsforyoungpeopleandimprovehealthservices.
Sixmonthslater,researchersfoundthattheinitiativehadbeensuccessful.Therehadbeenadecreaseinreportsoflivestockinfringements,aswellasoftheuseofsmallarmsandotherviolence,whiletherehadbeenanincreaseinreportsofpeopleusingpeacefuldispute‑resolutionmechanisms.AsreportedbyIbrahimMohamedHamad,aSheikhofthepastoralBaggaragroup:‘Asacommunityleaderofthenomadicgroup,Iamoneofthedirectbeneficiariesoftheconference.Itmadeourworkeasierthanbefore,becausetheconferencehadtremendouspositiveimpactonlocalpeaceandsocialco‑existence.Thereweresignificantreductionsoffarmer–pastoralconflictsduringharvestseasonthisyearcomparedtolastyear.Precisely,thisyear,ascommunitySheikh,Ireceivedfourcasesonlywhileitamountedtoseveraltensoffarmer–pastoralconflictcaseslastyearoverthesameperiod.’
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 19
Lessons learnedFigure5summarizestheimpactsoflocalpeacestructuresreviewedinthischapter,followingthethreedomainsandthreelevelsusedinourimpactmodel.Fromthisshortreview,itiscleartheyhavecontributedtoimprovedlocalstabilityandpeace.Lookingfirstatthethreelevelsofimpact,community‑basedpeaceinitiativeshaveshowntheycanimprovepeople’sattitudesandknowledge,aswasthecaseinSierraLeone,wherelocalresidentssaidtheyhadbecomeclosertoandlessprejudicedtowardsothers.Community‑basedpeaceinitiativeshavealsohelpedchangebehaviors,asillustratedintheSudancasestudy,wherefarmersandherderswereusingpeacefuldispute‑resolutionmechanisms.
Additionally,themanycaseswherepeacegroupshavebecome‘partofthefurniture’,operatingasanintegralpartoflocalgovernanceandconflict‑resolutionmechanisms,representnewstructuralnorms.
Thecasesalsoprovideexamplesofhorizontalandverticalrelationships–thebasisofpositivepeace–beingstrengthened.Theseincludehorizontalrelationshipsbetweenrefugeesandlocals,andfarmersandherders,andverticalrelationshipsbetweencommunitymembersandsecurityservices,aswellaslocalofficials.Finally,community‑basedpeaceinitiativescanavert,reduceorstopviolence,includingpreventingunresolvedsmall‑scaleviolenceescalatingintoatrocitiesonalargerscale.
20 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Figure 5. Three domains and three levels of impact, with illustrations from community‑based peace initiatives
Levels →
Domains ↓
Changes in knowledge and attitudes
Changes in behavior Structural changes (norms, systems, institutions)
Violence prevented, reduced or stopped
Greaterunderstandingofandconfidenceinnon‑violentdisputemethods
Highpercentageoflocaldisputesresolved
Reducedviolence,includingelectoralandintercommunityviolence
Reducedharassmentbymilitias
Communitymembersfeelsafer
Newnorms,bywhichpeopleandarmedgroupsagreeonrulestokeepcivilianssafe
Horizontal relationships between and among people and peoples improved
Communitymembersgainamorethoroughunderstandingofthehistoryandcausesofconflict,thusbecomingmoretolerantandforgivingofperpetrators
Improvedattitudesandmutualtrustbetweenrivalcommunities
Increasedmovementofcommunitymembersacrossinter‑ethnicdivides
Improvedintra‑communityrelations
Improvedrelationsbetweenethnicandreligiouscommunitiesandclans
Returningrefugeeshelpedtoreintegratepeacefully
Strengthenedsocialnetworks
Increasedcommitmenttousingnon‑violentapproachestoresolvinginter‑communityconflict
Governancestructuresestablishedtomanagerelationsbetweencommunities
Community‑basedpeaceinitiativesexpandtheirmandateandterritory
Vertical relationships between people and those with authority and power improved
Improvedmutualunderstandingbetweenauthoritiesandpeople
Communitiesnegotiatetoreducetensionsbetweencommunityandarmedmilitia
Securityservicesusemorecollaborativeapproaches
Externalbusinessesandcommunitiescollaboratebetter
Communitypeaceinitiativesintegratedintolocaldecision‑makingsystems;localleadersintegratedintocommunitypeacestructures
Diverseparticipationincommunitypeaceinitiativesbreaksdownprejudicetowardswomen,minoritygroupsandyouth
Community‑basedpeaceinitiativesrefercasestotheauthoritiesandviceversa
Improvedpopularparticipationindecision‑making;improvedaccountabilityoflocalleaders;reducedcorruption
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 21
Several important conclusions emerge from this section of the report, each of which is briefly addressed below (and will be revisited in the overall conclusions in Chapter 6):
Relevance in situations of long‑term conflict and inadequate governance
Communitypeacestructuresareespeciallyrelevantinsituationsofchronicconflict.Givenhigher‑levelgovernancestructuresareoftenunableorunwillingtohelpresolvelocaldisputesfairly,theabilitytoresolveissuesbeforetheybecomeviolent–andtherebymaintainlocalstabilityandpreventatrocities–isatapremium.TheexamplesfromColombia,DRCandSudandemonstratethis.Inparticular,inSouthSudan,communitypeacestructuresimprovedrelationsbetweenDinkaandNuercommunities,evenwhilecivilwarwaspittingthewiderDinkaandNuercommunitiesagainsteachother.
Practical approaches, on a breadth of issues
Theoristshavelongarguedthatpeacecanbestrengthenedorweakenedacrossawidegamutofissues,includingaccesstoeconomicopportunity,security,justice,opportunitiestoimprovewell‑being,andparticipationingovernance.Judgingfromhowtheyoperateandtheissuestheyaddress,communitypeaceactivistsknowthis.Theydealwithdisputesovernaturalresources,fosterdiverseparticipationintransparentgovernance,andinmanycasesaredrawnintotheprovisionofjusticeanddevelopmentactivities.Communitymembersfeelsaferbecauseofwhatlocalpeacestructureshavedone.communitypeaceactivistsaddressthiswidesetofissuesinapracticalway,tacklingissuesonwhichtheyhavelegitimacyandtraction,buildingpeacefromthebottomup.
Responsiveness and adaptability
Manyevaluationscitetheresponsivenessofcommunitypeacestructuresasbeingadirectresultoftheirclosenesstothegroundandlocalknowledge,andofbeinguntiedtobureaucraticprocedures.ThisisdemonstratedbytheDelenjandKalogiepeacecommitteessteppingintoplayaleadershiprolewhentheirrespectivelocalsecuritysituationsabruptlydeteriorated.Giventheriskofsmallincidentsescalatinginsituationsofchromicconflict,thisabilitytorespondquicklyandadaptispotentiallycriticalinatrocityprevention.
Inclusion and governance
Successfulcommunity‑basedpeacestructurestendtoreflectthediversityoftheircommunities,andallowpeopleofdifferentgenders,agesandethnicitytohavetheirissuesheard.Peaceinitiativescanbemoreprogressivethantheirwidercommunities,forexampleintheirapproachtoinvolvingwomen,andprovidingmigrantsandrefugeeswithavoice.However,suchopennessisnotfullyacceptedeverywhere,andevaluationsnotethatsomelocalvoiceswereraisedagainstit.Evenwhenwomenhaveaseatatthetable,patriarchalattitudesoftenpersist.
Accordingtoevaluatorsandthecommunitymemberstheyconsulted,theinclusivenessofpeaceinitiativescanhaveapositiveimpactonlocalgovernancemorebroadly.Sinceimprovedgovernanceisoneofthekeystopositive,sustainedpeace,localpeacestructuresarethusmakingasignificantindirectcontributiontopeaceinthelongterm.
22 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Ofcourse,noteveryoneappreciatestheroleplayedbypeacebuildingstructures,andinsomecasescommunityleadershaveseenthemasusurpersoftheirowntraditional–andoftenremunerative–roleindisputeresolution.Otheractorswithaninterestinperpetuatingpoliticalconflicthavealsotriedtounderminethem.Therefore,insomecircumstances,community‑basedpeacestructurescanfacechallengesinestablishinglegitimacyanda‘licencetooperate’.47
Partnerships with NGOs
ManyoftheexamplesinthischapterhavebeenofcommunitiessupportedbyNGOs,andcommunitypeacestructuresseemwell‑suitedtocollaborationwithlocalandinternationalNGOs.Severaloftheevaluationsexplorethis,findingthatlocalknowledgeandcapacitycombinedwithexternalknowledgeandaccesstoresourcesisoftenveryeffective.Forexample,peacecommitteestoldevaluatorsthatthetrainingtheyhadreceivedinpeacebuildingtechniquesfromCollaborativeforPeaceinSudanhadmadethemmoreeffective.48
However,othershavenotedtheriskthatoutsiders–especiallyinternationalorganizations,orthenationalgovernment–canunderminecommunityinitiativesbyco‑optingthem,drawingthemintoinappropriateactivities,orprovidingthemwithformsofsupportonwhichtheybecomeover‑reliant,harmingtheirsustainabilityandeffectiveness.Outsidersmustthereforebesensitivewhenprovidingsupport.49
47 See,forexample,MichelleSpearing,‘AddressingStateFragilityfromtheBottomUpThroughInclusiveCommunityGovernance:ExploringTheoriesofChange’,CARENederland,2016;andAlexisM.GardellaandEricKalaba,‘CitizenshipAndPeacebuildingInTheDemocraticRepublicOfCongo:FinalEvaluation’,March2009.
48 GumaKundaKomey,‘EvaluationoftheProcess,OutcomesandImpactoftheCfPS‑RRFandPCsinLocalPeace‑buildingandConflictResolutionsinSouthandWestKordofan,Sudan’,PeaceDirect,2017.
49 LisaMüller‑Dormann,‘Kenya’sLocalPeaceCommittees:HowDoesTheLocalRemainLocallyOwned?’,PolisBriefNo.8,Polis180,2018.50 ReneClaudeNiyonkuru,‘BuildingthePeaceArchitecturefromtheBottom‑up:TheExperienceofLocalPeaceCommitteesinBurundi’,
OccasionalPaper,PeacebuildingSeriesNo.5,FutureGenerationsGraduateSchool,2017.
Scale
Finally,thereistheissueofscale.Almostbydefinition,community‑basedpeacestructuresoperateonasmallscale.Whilethisallowsthemtoberelevant,knowledgeableandadaptable,itcanalsolimittheirabilitytotacklewiderpeaceandconflictdynamics.
However,theimpactofcommunity‑basedpeaceinitiativesshouldnotonlybemeasuredcasebycase.Thecumulativeimpactofrepeatedlyresolvingdifferentconflictproblemsinagivenareacanbegreaterthanthesumoftheparts.Thepeasants’associationinColombiaachievedthiskindofeffect,allowingfamiliestocontinuetoobtainalivelihoodoverawideareaformorethantwentyyears.
Somelocalgroupshaveaddressedthisquestionofscalebyexpandingtheirreach,suchasthepeaceclubinoneBurundiancollinethatalsopreventedelectionviolenceatcommunelevel,ortheLiberiandistrictdialogueplatformthatexpandedtocoverthewholecounty.Othershavenetworkedwithsimilarentitiesinneighbouringcommunities,asseeninthelinkagesbeingdevelopedbetweenlocalpeaceclubsinBurundi.Thereisalsoanatural‘scalingup’thatemergeswhennetworksofsimilarbodiesoperateacrossagivenarea.In2017,oneresearcherinBurundicounted500to600localpeacestructuresatcommune,collineandcellulelevels(in40of129communes,and14of17provinces).50
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 23
AclusterofbarazapeacecouncilsineasternDRCbytheirownindividualactionsachievedincreasedaccesstojusticeacrossawideareaofSouthKivu,allowingdisputestoberesolvedbeforeawidersenseofgrievancecoulddeveloporbeexploitedfornegativepoliticalpurposes.51TheFambulTokgroupsinSierraLeonehavecombinedgrassrootslegitimacywithscale:Theprogrammehasbeenimplementedwithandbycommunitiesinallpartsofthecountry,andhasnowbeenongoingforseveralyears.52
Thesearegoodexamplesofscalingup,achievedinlocallyrelevantways.Nevertheless,manyevaluationsoflocalpeacestructuresalsoidentifyunexploitedopportunitiestoachievemoreimpactthroughscalingup.Itisthereforesomethingthatlocalpeacestructures,andtheirpartners,shouldconsiderfurther.
51 AllanaPoole,‘BarazaJustice:ACaseStudyofCommunity‑LedConflictResolutionintheD.R.Congo’,PeaceDirect,2014.52 MohammedAbu‑NimerandSusanShepler,‘FambulTokProgramEvaluation’,April2015.
24 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
4 Initiatives led by, or engaging, specific groups
Peacebuilding initiatives are often focused on addressing the needs and concerns of a particular group of people whose engagement is essential for peace but who may otherwise be excluded. These may be people with the capacity to undermine peace, or whose inclusion can help make the peace more durable. Examples include political, ethnic or geographically specific groups, women and youth, particular castes, sexual minorities, people suffering from violence‑induced trauma, displaced people and refugees, and ex‑combatants.
Localinitiativesarewell‑placedtotakeonthischallenge,astheyunderstandtheconstraintsandopportunitiesfacedbymembersofthegroupinquestion,notleastbecausetheyareusuallyledandconductedbygroupmembers.
Thischapterdrawsonexamplesofinitiativesthathaveaddressedtheneedsofthreesuchgroups–peopletraumatizedinconflict,youngpeople,andwomen–chosenbecausetheywererepresentedintheevaluationsavailabletothisstudy.Initiativesincludedpsychosocialprogrammespromotingtraumahealingofindividualsandtheircommunitiesinpost‑genocideRwanda,andinZimbabwewherepoliticalviolenceandtorturehasdividedcommunities.
ThechapteralsoincludesexamplesfromBurundi,Guatemala,Kenya,Lebanon,Liberia,SierraLeone,SriLanka,SouthSudanandSyria,ofNGOshelpingsteeryoungpeopleawayfrompoliticalorcriminalviolenceandtowardsmakingamorepositivecontributiontosociety.Additionally,ithighlightsinitiativesreducingurbangangviolenceinHonduras,Mexico,TrinidadandTobago,andSouthAfrica.
Finally,itdescribesimpactofwomen’sorganizationsonincreasedfemaleparticipationinpoliticsanddecision‑makinginBurundi,SomaliaandSouthSudan,andreducinggender‑basedviolenceintheDRCandSouthSudan.
‘Before joining this group, I used to be a counsellor who helped people during commemoration periods when [they were] traumatized. When a Tutsi child [was] traumatized, I could speedily support him, gave him a bottle of water and rapidly took him in a good place for counselling, but when a Hutu child [had a] crisis, I used to run away and didn’t care about him. Nothing I could do for him because I thought “they are not wounded”. But since joining this group I have learnt the sense of empathy, tolerance and [different] types of wounds.’
– Youth peace dialogue participant, Rwanda
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 25
Helping people who have been traumatized by conflict
53 AbiossehDavis,CelestinNsengiyumvaandDanielHyslop,‘HealingTraumaandBuildingTrustandToleranceinRwanda:LessonslearnedfromPeacebuildingApproachestoPsychosocialSupportGroupHealinginRwanda’,InterpeaceandNeverAgainRwanda,April2019.
54 TreeofLifeandMutokoTeam,andCraigHigson‑Smith,‘HealthyPeopleandHealthyCommunitiesinZimbabwe’,TreeofLifeTrustZimbabwe;AndrewIliff,‘TreeofLife:SowingtheSeedsofGrassrootsTransitionalJustice’,AfricanArgumentsblogpost,11March2010.Availablefrom:https://africanarguments.org/2010/03/11/root‑and‑branch‑tree‑of‑life‑sowing‑the‑seeds‑of‑grassroots‑transitional‑justice/;TonyReeler,KudakwasheChitsike,FungisaiMaizvaandBeverleyReeler,‘TheTreeofLife:ACommunityApproachtoEmpoweringandHealingSurvivorsofTortureinZimbabwe’,Torture(2009)19(3):180–93.
55 TreeofLifeandMutokoTeam,andCraigHigson‑Smith,‘HealthyPeopleandHealthyCommunitiesinZimbabwe’,TreeofLifeTrustZimbabwe.56 AndrewIliff,‘TreeofLife:SowingtheSeedsofGrassrootsTransitionalJustice’,AfricanArgumentsblogpost,11March2010.Availablefrom:
https://africanarguments.org/2010/03/11/root‑and‑branch‑tree‑of‑life‑sowing‑the‑seeds‑of‑grassroots‑transitional‑justice/57 TonyReeler,KudakwasheChitsike,FungisaiMaizvaandBeverleyReeler,‘TheTreeofLife:ACommunityApproachtoEmpoweringand
HealingSurvivorsofTortureinZimbabwe’,Torture(2009)19(3):180–93.
Psychologicaltraumacausedbyexposuretoconflict–asperpetrator,victim,personatrisk,survivororwitness–inflictsanimmenseburdenonindividuals,families,communitiesandsocieties,oftenpersistinglongaftertheviolenceends.Mostpeoplelackaccesstoprofessionalassistancetohelpthemrecover,whilefamiliesandcommunitiesareoftenill‑equippedtoprovidesupport.Leftunresolved,thisproblemcanpotentiallynotonlyundermineaperson’slife,itcanalsounderminetherebuildingofpeacefulsocialrelations.Thisisparticularlythecaseaftercivilconflict,whencommunitieshavebeendivided,trustseverelyeroded,andsocietyhasbecomedysfunctionalforpeace.Addressingpsychologicaltrauma,usuallywithlimitedprofessionalandclinicalresources,isthereforeacriticalpartofbuildingpeace.53
TheNGOTreeofLifeTrustZimbabwetrainsandaccompaniesmembersofthecommunitiesithelps–includingreligiousandbusinessleaders–inconductingmanagedlocaldialoguesandencounters,inpartsofZimbabwewhereyearsofpoliticalandinter‑ethnicviolencehaveleftpeopleandcommunitiestraumatized.Severalexternalreviewshavefoundithasmadeaconsiderabledifferencetopeople’slives.Participantsreportedreducedlevelsoftrauma,renewedcommunitytiesandtrust,andthatdivisionsintheircommunityduetothepoliticalviolencewerebeginningtoheal.54InMashonaland,aruralcommunityinMutokoDistrict,TreeofLife’sinterventionledtopeopledecidingtoreviveacommunalfarmtheyhadpreviouslycultivatedfortheadvantageofvulnerablefamilies,aprojectthathadlapsedamidthedysfunctionalityofcommunitytrauma.55
Afollow‑upstudyfoundthatthesymptomsofathirdofparticipantshadbeenreducedtobelowclinicalthresholds.56Inanother,36%oftorturevictimswhohadattendedtheworkshopsshowedsignificantclinicalimprovement.While44%werestillexperiencingdifficulties,56%reportedcopingbetter.Manyfelttheprocesshadhelpedthemfindanewpositivity,andhadimprovedhowtheyfeltaboutthepast.57
26 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
58 ThedataonNeverAgainRwandaisdrawnfromtwodocuments:AbiossehDavis,CelestinNsengiyumvaandDanielHyslop,‘HealingTraumaandBuildingTrustandToleranceinRwanda:LessonslearnedfromPeacebuildingApproachestoPsychosocialSupportGroupHealinginRwanda’,InterpeaceandNeverAgainRwanda,April2019;andStacyHilliard,EugeneNtagandaandKatieBartholomew,‘SocietalHealing&ParticipatoryGovernance:Mid‑TermEvaluation’,TayshaConsulting,March2017.
Case Study 3. Healing traumatized individuals and communities in Rwanda
ManyRwandesestillsufferfromtraumaduetothe1994genocide,withevenpeoplebornafterthatdateaffected.Communitiesremaindividedalongethniclines,orbetweenperpetratorsandsurvivors,andthisisanobstacletolong‑termpeace.RecentevaluationsexaminedfouryearsofworkbyNeverAgainRwanda,anNGOthatpromoteshealingthroughacombinationofdialogue,traumahealing,andpractical,collaborativeprojectsindividedcommunitiesacrossthecountry.58 Theresearchdescribeshowpeoplehadbeentraumatizedbytheirexperienceofthegenocideanditsaftermath,asrefugees,bythelossoflovedonesandincompletemourning,rape,labellingandstigmatization,thelossofidentity,transferredguilt,andwitnessingviolencefirst‑hand.
NeverAgainRwanda’sinitiativeshelpedpeoplereducetheirlevelsoftraumaandpsychologicaldistress,andtobuildresilience,forgivenessandtoleranceforsocialcohesionandpeace.Almostallparticipantsexperiencedprofoundpersonalchange,andwereabletomoveonwiththeirlivesandrelationships.Peoplebecamelessisolated,andweremorewillingtointeractwithothersacrosssociety.Theeffectsoftraumaimprovedbyanaverageof25%onatraumaindex,withtheimprovementbeingslightlygreaterformenthanwomen.Peopleexhibitedincreasedself‑esteemandlessguilt.Thenumberofpeoplefeelingdepressedwentdownbyalmosthalf,to23%.Therewasalsoasignificantdeclineinthenumberofpeoplewhothoughtaboutsuicideveryoften,from15%ofparticipantsto5%.
Theimpactwasnotonlyfeltbyindividuals,butledtoimprovedcommunityhealthandfunctionality.Levelsoftrustbetweenparticipantsandtherestofsocietysignificantlyimproved.Evaluatorsusedatrustindexthatmeasuredpeople’sreadinessforsocialinteractions,personalsharingandpartnershipsindailylife.Thisimprovedbyanimpressive57%betweenthebaselineandlaterevaluations–atransformativelevelofchange.
Socialtolerancealsoimprovedintermsofattitudinalandbehavioralfactors,suchasthefrequencyofcontactwithotherethnicandsocialgroups,beingcomfortablewithmarriagetoothergroups,aswellasvotingforandreceivingassistancefromothergroups.Allareasofthesocialtoleranceindeximproved,especiallyamonggenocideperpetrators.
Therewasmorelimitedprogressintermsofpeopleengaginginpeaceactivismandindependentpeacebuildingactivities.Nevertheless,thepercentageofparticipantsinvolvedinconflictresolutionintheircommunitiesincreasedfrom66%to82%.Participationinformal,state‑organizedgovernanceprocesses,andcollaborativecommunityworkprogrammesknownasUmuganda,aswellascivicreconciliationandcommemorationactivities,alsoimproved.Independently,somestudents–peoplewhohadn’tyetbeenbornin1994,butevensowereaffectedbythegenocide–formedgroupstopromotepeaceintheircommunities.Therewasalsoevidenceofincreasedcriticalthinking,andthedebatingofcommunityprioritieswithlocalauthorities,thusimprovinggovernanceandprovidingagreatersenseof‘membership’ofthecommunity.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 27
Young people
59 MarkM.RogersandDrHippolytPul,‘LearningFromandAboutLocalPeaceGroups:ThematicEvaluationReport’,ConciliationResources.60 AlejandraBernardoAndrés,‘YouthInspired:TodayandTomorrowandIntamenwa(Indivisibles):MobilizingYouthforPeacefulElections’,
ProgressEvaluation,SearchforCommonGround,December2014.61 ‘SummaryofEvaluationReportoftheKumekuchaPrograminMajengo,Nairobi’,February2019.
Youngpeopleformthemajorityinmanyconflict‑affectedcountries.Theyrepresentthefutureofsociety,andsotheirknowledge,attitudesandbehaviors,andtheirparticipationinpeacefulstructures,isessentialfordurablepeace.Theyoftenfeel–andoftenare–excludedfrompolitical,socialandeconomicstructures,meaningtheycanbeparticularlyvulnerabletorecruitmentbyarmedgroups.Itisimportanttoaddresstheneedsandaspirationsofalienatedyoungpeoplewhofeeltheylackprospectsandarepoorlyservedbysociety.Therefore,manypeacebuildingprogrammesworkwithyoungpeople,toprotectthembothfromcommittingandsufferingharm,andtosecuretheirengagementinapeacefulvisionoftheirfuture.
Theimpactsonyoungpeopledescribedintheevaluationsusedforthisreportfallintotwobroad,overlappingcategories.Thefirstoftheseisareductioninyoungpeople’svulnerabilitytobeingdrawnintoviolence,whilethesecondisincreasedengagementasactivecitizensinbuildingapeacefulsociety.
Reducing young people’s vulnerability to being drawn into violence
Whileyoungpeoplehavegreatpotentialtocontributetopeacefulsocieties,theyarealsoespeciallyvulnerabletobeingrecruitedforviolence,whetherasthugstointimidateorharmpoliticalopponentsduringelections,asmembersofcriminalgangs,orasparticipantsofarmedgroupsincivilwarsorextremistinsurgencies.CommunitygroupsinNigeriawerefoundtohavereducedyoungpeople’ssusceptibilitytobeingrecruitedormanipulatedforviolence.59Meanwhile,agroupofBurundianNGOsthatusedtraining,dialogueforums,mediacampaignsandcollaborativeprojects,werefoundtohavehelpedyouthleaderspreventyoungpeoplefrombeingmanipulatedbypoliticiansintopoliticalviolence.60
TheKumekucainitiativeoftheGreenStringNetworkinKenyaaimstolessentheriskofyoungpeoplebeingrecruitedbyviolentextremistgroups,byincreasingcommunityresilience.Anevaluationfoundtheywereontracktosucceed.Individualwell‑beinghadincreased,socialandcommunitysupportmechanismsweresignificantlymoreactive,trustlevelswerehigher,andreadinesstoacceptex‑membersofarmedextremistgroupsbackintothecommunityhadalsogoneup.61
28 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Peacebuildingtechniquesarebeingusedtopreventviolenceinurbansettingswherecriminalgangsholdsway.Workingwithschoolsandfamilies,theYoungMen’sChristianAssociation(YMCA)inGuatemalareducedlevelsofviolenceaffectingyoungpeople.Evaluatorsnotethattraining114youngleaders–halfofthemmaleandhalfofthemfemale–andsupportingthemintheiroutreach,hadenabledthemtoreachover16,000people,intheprocessbreakingdownstigmaandethnicbarriers,andimprovingyoungpeople’sperceptionsoftheircommunitiesandsenseofsafety.Asaresult,theyoungpeopleexperienced60%fewerincidencesofviolence,andtheirownacceptanceofviolencewasreducedby85%.62CureViolence,aninternationalNGO,haspioneeredanapproachthatmobilizestrainedcommunitymembersinUScitiestointerveneandde‑escalateviolencewhentensionsriseduetospecificincidents.63Thisapproachhasbeenadaptedbyorganizationselsewhere,oftenyieldingimpressiveresults.Figure6summarizestheresultsgivenbyexternalassessmentsoftheseprogrammesinfourdifferentcountries.
62 YCareInternational,‘ChangetheGame:EngagingMarginalisedYoungPeopleThroughSportandPlay’,2016.63 InformationontheCureViolenceModelavailable:http://cureviolence.org/the‑model/essential‑elements/64 SummaryoffindingsontheCureViolenceModel.Fullsourcereferencesavailable:www.cureviolence.com
BurundianNGOsRéseaudesJeunesenAction,CollectifpourlaPromotiondesAssociationsdesJeunes,Centred´encadrementetdeDéveloppementdesAnciensCombattants,andAppuiauDéveloppementIntégraletàlaSolidaritésurlesCollines,increasedtheproportionofyoungpeoplewhofelttheycouldresistmanipulationtoengageinviolenceto95%aheadofthe2015elections.87%ofyouthleadersclaimedtheywerecommittedtonon‑violenceinthecomingelections,andindeedtheevaluatorsfoundevidenceofactualdecreasesinviolenceaheadoftheelections,inplaceswheretheseinitiativeshadbeenconducted.
Figure 6. Evidence of urban violence reduction reported from sites where Cure Violence methods were used64
Cape Town (South Africa) 14%fewerkillings
29%fewerattemptedkillings
10%fewerseriousassaults
Juarez (Mexico) 50%fewerkillings
Fewerdisputesandconflicts
Port au Prince (Trinidad and Tobago) 67%fewercasesofwounding
33%fewerpolicecalloutsforincidentswherepersonswerearmedwithfirearms
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 29
Young people engaging as active citizens
Theotherimpactareaforyoungpeopleisincreasedcivicparticipation,whichoftengoeshandinhandwithviolencereductioninitiatives.ThegroupofBurundianNGOsreferredtoabovehavealsohelpedyoungpeoplebecomemorepositivelyengagedinsociety,65whiletheYMCAsinSierraLeoneandLiberiahavehelpedreduceviolencelevelsandimproverelationshipsbetweenyoungpeopleandtheircommunities.66
LocalorganizationsprovidingyoungSyrianswitheducationregardingtheconceptsandpracticeofpeacefulco‑existencesawimprovementsaslittleassixmonthsafterenrolmentintheprogramme.Evaluatorsidentifiedanincreaseinknowledgeaboutpeaceconcepts,aswellasfindingevidenceofincreasedoptimismandcriticalthinking,morepositiveattitudestowardspeacefulapproachestodealingwithconflict,andofyoungpeoplechallengingnotionsofgrievanceandrevenge.Thiswasinacontextwhereyearsofwarhadtraumatizedyoungpeople,andnormalizedviolence.Inonestrikingexample,achildwhoattendedpeaceeducationsessionssubsequentlyvolunteeredtohandinaknifehehadhithertoalwayscarried.Evaluatorsusedanindextomeasureyoungpeople’sresiliencetobeingdrawnintoconflict,whichhadincreasedamongrefugeesinLebanon,thoughunfortunatelynotamongparticipantsinSyriaitself.67
65 Rapportd’évaluationduprojet‘MobilisationdesjeunespouruneculturedelapaixauBurundi’,February2011,citedinLesleyConnollyandLauraPowers,eds,‘LocalNetworksforPeace:LessonsfromCommunity‑LedPeacebuilding’,InternationalPeaceInstitute,September2018.
66 YCareInternational,‘SupportingYouthLivelihoodsAndGovernanceInLiberiaAndSierraLeone’,2013.67 Thisparagraphdrawsonevaluationsseenbytheauthor,butwhichtheorganizationsconcernedpreferredtokeepconfidential.
Outcomes of peacebuilding with young people in Burundi94%ofyouthhadsoftenedtheirattitudestowardsotherswithdifferentpoliticalbeliefs,andfelttheyhadgreateropportunitiestoengagewithyoungpeoplefromotheraffiliations;93%ofyoungpeoplehadbeguntoengagemorepositivelyinthecommunity;Over90%ofyouthleadersfeltmoreabletomobilizetheirpeersforpeace,democracyanddevelopment;Youngfemaleleadersorganizedlocalpeacefestivals;Moreyoungpeoplehadbeenpersuadedtovote.
‘The project came at a time of high political tension. Currently, the youths are not under the threat of being manipulated, they can see clearly. The project has opened their eyes; there are now only those who have not taken the trainings who are susceptible to manipulation, the others not.’ ‘We are now able to identify politicians’ manipulations; their promises and the unfair advantages.’
– Participants in focus groups, Bujumbura, Burundi
30 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
AftertheendofSriLanka’slong‑runningcivilwar,theCentreforPeacebuildingandReconciliationinSriLankabroughtyoungpeoplefromdifferentreligiousidentitiestogethertotakepartinjointculturalactivities,inordertofostercollaborationandasenseofcommoncitizenship.ItsYoungVisionariesprogramme,implementedinfiveregionalcentres,wasfoundtohavecreatedacadreofyoungpeopletrainedinconceptsofpeacefulco‑existence,andwhohadgottoknowpeoplefrom‘other’identitygroups–fromwhichmanywouldotherwisehavegrownupisolated.Thisstimulatedawidespreadwillingnesstoformrelationshipswithyoungpeoplefromotherethno‑religiousgroups,whereasonlyoneintenofthemhadpreviouslyhadfriendsfromoutsidetheirowncommunity.Participantsdevisedcollaborativecivicinitiatives,suchaspublichealthcampaignsandenvironmentalclean‑ups.Inaknock‑oneffect,someoftheirparentsadoptedthetoleranceandcollaborationtheywitnessedintheirchildren.68
TheCitizen’sTheatremovementinSouthSudanalsousesculturalactivitiesasthebasisforengagingyoungpeopleforpeace.Since2012,ithastrainedaround800youngfacilitatorstoleadcommunityforumsinsixstates,andorganizedinter‑schooltheatrefestivalsinJuba,BorandAweil.Theatregroupsremainactiveinsecondaryschoolsacrossthecountry,regularlyusingperformanceanddialoguetoraiseimportantissuesrelatedtopeaceanddevelopmentintheircommunities.
68 RosemaryCairns,‘AnEvaluationof“StrengtheningLocallyLedPeacebuilding”’,PeaceDirect,May2011.69 ForthcomingevaluationreportontheCitizens’Theatreinitiatives,citedinChristianAid,‘InItFortheLongHaul?:LessonsonPeacebuildingin
SouthSudan’,2018.
Acentralelementoftheapproachisthatyoungparticipantstaketheleadinselectingtheissuesaroundwhichtobuilddialogue.Theprocesshascreatedararesafespaceforcommunities–ledbytheiryouth–toconsiderhowtheproblemstheyfacestemfromandfeedintowiderconflict.Thestyle,subjectandemphasisdiffersfromlocationtolocation,buttypicalissueshaveincludedcattleraiding,tribalism,hatespeech,moralvaluesandcorruption,allofwhichhavealinktoconflict,andthustopeace.
EvaluatorsfoundthattheCitizen’sTheatremovementhasincreasedyoungpeople’ssocialnetworksacrossethnicandculturaldivides.Ithashelpedimprovementalhealthandwell‑being,reducefear,andincreasemutualunderstandingofthe‘other’.Participantsaremorelikelytoengageinleadershipandproblemsolvingwithinthecommunity.AyoungwomaninBorattributedhersuccessinsecuringthereleaseofherunjustlyimprisonedbrothertotheskillsandconfidenceshehaddevelopedintheprogramme.Thenumberofdramaclubsinsecondaryschoolsisincreasingyearonyear,andthemovementhaspersuadedtheMinistryofEducationtoincorporatedramainschools.69
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 31
Women
70 UnitedNationsandWorldBank,Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict,Washington,DC:WorldBank,2018.71 MarkM.RogersandDrHippolytPul,‘LearningFromandAboutLocalPeaceGroups:ThematicEvaluationReport’,ConciliationResources.72 MathiasKinezero,‘Rapportd’évaluationexterneduprojet110171«RenforcementduLeadershipFéminin»’,2015.73 Portals2PeaceandNationalActionPlanEvaluationreport,2019’,AssistanceMissionforAfricaandPAX,2019.74 Life&PeaceInstitute,PeaceDirectandSomaliWomenSolidarityOrganization,‘Women,ConflictandPeace:LearningFromKismayo:AStudy
Report,’April2018.
Womenandgirlsarefrequentlyvictimsofconflict,whilepeaceprocessesinvolvingwomenaremorelikelytobesustained.70 Numerouslocalpeacebuildinginitiatives,oftenledbywomen’sorganizations,thereforeseektoincreasetheirpolitical,socialandeconomicparticipation,aswellasaddressingtheirneedsandadvocatingfortheirinterests.
Manyinitiativesfocusondemocraticparticipationandleadershiptrainingforwomen,suchasinLiberia,wherelocalinitiativeshavehelpedincreasefemalevotingrates.71Elsewhere,theBurundiLeadershipTrainingProgramwasfoundtohaveincreasedthenumberofwomencandidatesandcouncillorsinthe2015localelections.72
TheBurundiLeadershipTrainingProgram–initiallyestablishedbyaninternationalorganization,butnowfullyBurundian‑led–trainedover900womeninleadershipskillsandencouragedwomentostandinthe2015localelections.Thiscontributedtoa19%increaseinfemaleofficeholdersincolline(ward)councilsinMuramviaandGitegaprovincesfromthe2010tothe2015elections,anda33%increase,from18to24,amongchefs de colline(wardchiefs).
TheNGOAssistanceMissionforAfrica(AMA)helpswomeninSouthSudanplayagreaterroleincommunitygovernance,asmembersoftraditionalcourts,inter‑ethniccouncilsandlocalpeacecommittees.73 AcrossAMA’svariousprogrammelocations,women’sparticipationwasfoundtohavereachedatleast30%(andoftenhigher)inlocalforums,fromalowbase.Womenspokeupmoreinpublicmeetings,andwerereadiertochallengelocaladministrators,chiefsandeldersincommunityforums.Theypersuadedyoungmentostopcattlelootingandcommittingrevengekillings,speakingbothasmothersandwithacommunityvoice.Womenalsoconductedoutreachwithneighbouringcommunities,helpingtobuildpeacefulrelationsandpreventviolence.
ArecentreportexploringthepeacebuildingroleofwomeninSomaliaidentifiessomeofthewayswomenhavepreventedviolenceandbuiltpeace.Theyhavepersuadedmenandboystorefrainfromviolence,createdlinesofcommunicationwithwomeninopposingclans,raisedawareness,demonstratedinpublic,andadvocatedwithclanleadersandmediators.74
32 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Gender‑basedviolence,particularlyagainstwomenandgirls,isprevalentinconflictcontexts,bothasapracticeincommunitiesandasanoutcomeandtoolofconflictitself.Thismeansprevention,justice,andthecareandrecoveryofvictimsisacommonpriorityoflocalpeacebuildingprogrammes.Somewhatunexpectedly,therewerelimitedevaluationsofthisworkinthedatasetstudied.Thatsaid,anumberoffemale‑ledNGOswerefoundtohavebeensuccessfulinimprovingthereintegrationofwomenrapedbyarmedgroupsintheeasternDRCbackintotheircommunities.75
‘The peace committee from the other side was not able to get involved. We had to change tactics and involved the youth and women. We sat and talked. That was the time the tension reduced.’
– Local peace committee member,
75 AlexisM.GardellaandEricKalaba,‘CitizenshipAndPeacebuildingInTheDemocraticRepublicOfCongo:FinalEvaluation’,March2009.76 ‘Portals2PeaceandNationalActionPlanEvaluationreport,2019’,AssistanceMissionforAfricaandPAX,2019.
Thesewomenmightotherwisehavebeenstigmatizedandrejected.InSouthSudan,AMApromotedpublicdiscussionandawareness‑raisingregardingthepracticeofmenbeatingtheirwives.Thishelpedreducetheprevalenceofthispractice,andincreasetheproportionofmenaccusedofviolenceagainstwomenbeingtakentocourt.Policebecamemoresensitivetotheneedsofwomenvictims,whiletraditionalcourtsbecamelesslikelytoignoreaccusationsofgender‑basedviolence,partlybecausemorewomenweresittingasjudges.Thisimprovedthedynamicsofthejusticeprocess,withmoreattentionandrespectbeingpaidtofemalewitnessesandwomen’srights.Malejudgesassertedthathavingwomenjudgeshadimprovedthecourts’effectiveness.76
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 33
Lessons learnedLocalpeacebuilderswhoengagespecificsegmentsofthecommunityhaveclearlyshowntheycanmakeadifference.Bytailoringtheirinitiativestothosewhoseexperienceofconflicthasleftthemtraumatized,toyoungpeoplewhosooftenbecomethetoolsofconflictentrepreneursorgangs,andtowomenwhosepotentialtocontributetopeacehasbeenoverlooked,theyhavehelpedthesegroupsbegintoshapemorepeacefulsocieties.Theseinitiativesareseenasrelevantbythepeopletheyseektoassist,asevidencedbythelevelsofparticipation,andasacknowledgedbytheevaluationsreviewed.
Figure7showshowthesetailoredinitiativeshavehadanimpactinallthedimensionsofourimpactframework.Menhaveimprovedtheirattitudetotheinclusionofwomeningovernancemechanisms,andyoungpeople’sknowledgeofandattitudestowardsotherethnicgroupshasbecomemoreconducivetopeace.Communitiesbehavedifferentlytowardsoneanother,andtheirstructuralapproachestodecision‑makingandlocalgovernancehavebecomemoreinclusive.
Bothhorizontalandverticalrelationshipshaveimprovedasaresultoftheselocalinitiatives.Thiscanbeseenintheincidenceofinter‑ethnicfriendshipsamongyoungpeopleinSriLanka,dispute‑resolutionmechanismscrossingethniclinesinSouthSudan,andtheincreasedgovernanceparticipationoftraumatizedcommunitymembersinRwanda.
Finally,localinitiativeshavecontributedtoreducedelectoralviolenceinBurundi,aswellasreducedgang‑relatedviolenceinanumberofurbancontextsmakinguseoftheCureViolencemethodology.
34 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Figure 7. Three domains and three levels of peacebuilding impact, with illustrations from initiatives engaging specific groups
Levels →
Domains ↓
Changes in knowledge and attitudes
Changes in behavior Structural changes (norms, systems, institutions)
Violence prevented, reduced or stopped
Increasedreadinesstoacceptex‑fightersbackintothecommunity
Improvedknowledgeofpeacefulapproaches,andoptimism,amongyoungpeoplelivingincontextswhereviolenceisnormalized
Reducedvulnerabilityofyoungpeopletorecruitmentbyextremists,orforelectionviolence
Reducedelectionviolence
Reductioningangviolence
Rapevictimsacceptedandreintegratedintotheircommunity
Youngpeopletakingtheleadtoorganizepeacebuildingactivities
Womenadvocatingpeacefulbehavioramongyoungmen
Courtstakinggender‑basedviolencemoreseriously
Horizontal relationships between and among people and peoples improved
Acknowledgementthatfellowcitizenshavebeentraumatizedbytheirexperiencesandneedhelp
Improvedattitudestocommunityfollowingtraumahealing
Increasedtolerancetowards‘other’groups
Improvedcommunityties,collaborationandmutualsupportfollowingtraumahealing
Newlybuiltrelationshipsacrossreligiousorethnicdivides
Inter‑communitycouncils
Vertical relationships between people and those with authority and power improved
Menacceptingthatgender‑basedviolenceisunacceptable
Moreengagementincivicactivities
Increaseinyoungpeopleandwomenvoting
Morewomenstandingforelectedpublicofficeandincourts
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 35
Three important lessons emerge from analysis of the examples used in this chapter (and will be revisited in Chapter 6):
77 JacobusCilliers,OeindrillaDubaandBilalSiddiqui,‘CantheRuinsofWarbeHealed?ExperimentalEvidencefromSierraLeone’,ImpactEvaluationReport75,InternationalInitiativeforImpactEvaluation,May2018.
78 Youth,Peace&Security,‘TheMissingPeace:IndependentProgressStudyonYouthPeaceandSecurity’,UNFPAandUNPBSO,2018.
Community‑based trauma healing initiatives are effective, and need to be sustained
Low‑costinitiativesthataddressindividuals’traumaaswellasthatoftheircommunitiescanbehighlyeffective,asshownbytheexamplesfromZimbabweandRwanda.However,thedataalsoimpliesaneedforgreatersustainedaction.Despiteconsiderableimprovements,23%ofRwandeseparticipantsstillsufferedfromdepression,andinZimbabwe64%oftorturevictimshadnotyetshownsignificantclinicalimprovement.ThiscorroboratesfindingsfromtheFambulTokprogrammeinSierraLeone,wherecommunityreconciliationappearedtobeassociatedwithindividualsexperiencingincreasedanxietyanddepression,perhapssuggestinganimbalancebetweenthefocusoncommunityandonindividuals’needs.77Allthisindicatesthatwhileeffective,relativelylow‑costtraumahealingmodelsdoexist,theyneedtobesupportedbyappropriatelytrainedpeople,achieveawell‑judgedbalancebetweenafocusontheindividualandthecommunity,andbesustainedoverseveralyears.
Young people can be agents of change
Justaslocalviolenceentrepreneurscanreadilyrecruityoungpeopleforviolence,localinitiativescanreadilydiverttheirenergiesfromviolenceanddisruptionintoplayingapositiverole.Youngpeople,giventhechance,demonstratethattheycanplayleadershiprolesindefiningthefutureofthesocietiestheywillinherit.Thedemographicprofileinmanyconflict‑pronesocietiesistiltedtowardsyouth,andtheiralienationandsusceptibilitytobeingdrawnintoconflictshouldtherefore,astheUNhasstated,beamajorpriority.78Moresupportshouldthereforebegiventolocalinitiativesthathelpyoungpeoplechanneltheirenergiesintopeacefuldevelopment.
There is a lack of data on the effectiveness of local initiatives to prevent violent extremism, and of local women’s initiatives
Thepeacebuildingliteraturerightlyemphasisestheneedformorewomen’sengagementinpeacebuilding,andincreasedattentiontoissuesexperiencedbywomenandgirlsasvictimsofviolentconflict.Similarly,inrecentyearstherehasbeenawidespreadcallforprogrammesthatworkwithyoungpeoplewhoarevulnerabletobeingrecruitedforviolentextremismandthataddresstheunderlyingreasonsforthisvulnerability.Despitethis,veryfewevaluationsexaminedforthisstudyaddressedthesequestions.Whilethismaysimplybeduetothetimingoftheresearchandnatureofthecallforevidence,itwouldbeworryingifitindicatedalackofvisiblesupportfor,andevaluationof,localinitiativesworkingontheseissues.
36 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
5 Shaping public discourse and policy, and early‑warning networks
This report demonstrates that even relatively small‑scale initiatives and impacts matter for peace. Beyond this, though, many local peacebuilding initiatives also have an impact on a wider scale. Indeed, many of the oft‑rehearsed narratives of successful peacebuilding fit into this category. Examples include the Borama political dialogue process in Somaliland;79 mediation by the Inter‑religious Council of Sierra Leone in peace talks between the Revolutionary United Front rebels and the state;80 women activists who shaped the speed and content of the Liberian peace process;81 and the Otpor! student movement,82 which mobilized thousands of young people and influenced Serbia’s political direction towards peace.83
79 AlexdeWaal,The Real Politics of the Horn of Africa: Money, War and the Business of Power,Cambridge:PolityPress,2015.80 MariaJessop,DianaAljetsandBetsieChacko,‘TheRipeMomentforCivilSociety’,International Negotiation(2008)13:93–109.81 GlobalNonviolentActionDatabase,‘LiberianWomenActtoEndCivilWar,2003’.Availablefrom:
https://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/liberian‑women‑act‑end‑civil‑war‑200382 Отпор,or‘resistance’inSerbian.83 DylanMathews,War Prevention Works: 50 Stories of Conflict Resolution,London:OxfordResearchGroup,2001.
However,thesewerenot‘projects’,andlikemanylocally‑driveninitiativesitishardtofindformalevaluationsoftheirimpact.Thismeanstheyareoutsidethescopeofthisreport,despitetheirimpactbeinginlittledoubt.AsshownbyFigure8,thedatasetforthisreportdidhowevercontainexamplesofinitiativeswithimpactsatahighlevelandonawidescale.
Theexamplesfallunderthreeheadings:Effortstoreshapepublicdiscourse;advocacythatledtochangedgovernmentpolicies;andnetworksofearly‑warninginterventionsthatpreventedviolence.
Figure 8. Proportions of initiatives reviewed for this report, per the scale of impact they achieved
Individual/household Local community
District
National International
State/province
23%
35%14%
12%
15%1%
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 37
Shaping public discourse
84 TatianaKyselova,‘UnderstandingDialogueinUkraine:ASurvey‑BasedStudy,AnalyticalReport2018’,MediationandDialogueResearchCenter,Kyiv,2018.
Languagehasenormouspower.Thewayleadersandelitesframeissuesinfluenceshowothercitizensinterpretandengagewiththem.Publicdiscourse–howpeopleviewandspeakofothers,andofconflictissues–affectshowconflictsarehandledinsociety.Thissectiondescribesattemptstoinfluencepublicdiscourseinsupportofpeace.ItcitesexamplesofdialogueinitiativesinUkraine,GuineaBissauandSomalia;ofchangesinhowjournalistsapproachpeaceandconflictissuesinNepalandSomalia;andofapproachestoreconciliationandtolerancebetweenethnicandreligiouscommunitiesinSriLankaandIndonesia.
Dialogueisfrequentlyusedbypeacebuilderstoimprovecollaborationandreducetensions.Yetsomedecision‑makersdoubtitsutility.Withthisinmind,theMediationandDialogueResearchCenterinKyivstudied157dialogueprocessesconductedbyover60organizationsinUkraineduring2014–18.Theyfoundthatdialoguepractitionersfacedmanypracticalobstacles,linkedtosecurity,facilitationandthedifficultyofgettingpeoplewithextremeviewstotakepart.TheyalsofoundthatfewdialoguesdirectlyaddressedthedeeperquestionsofidentityunderlyingmanyconflictsinUkraine.
Nevertheless,dialoguesthataddressedverypracticalissuesenabledparticipantstoachieveconsensusontangibleoutcomes,suchasagreeingawayforwardtoresolvetheissueunderdiscussion,orgettinglocalauthoritiestopaymoreattentiontopeople’sneeds.Bothmenandwomenwerefoundtoparticipatefully,with76%ofrespondentsassessingtheirparticipationpositively,and89%sayingthatdialoguehadimprovedtheirunderstandingoftheviewsofand/orrelationswithotherparticipants.GivendialogueisusedfrequentlyacrossUkraine,thesefindingsimplythatithashelpedsoftenintra‑andinter‑communityrelationscumulativelyandwidely.84
Inmorethan150dialogueprocessesinUkraine,76%ofparticipantssaidtheexperiencewaspositive,while86%saiddialoguehadimprovedtheirunderstandingofand/orrelationstowardsothers.
‘I began to better understand those who have different opinions and to make efforts to see the situation through the eyes of different participants. And I practise it now. This dialogue clearly influenced my understanding and attitude towards everything that was going on, not only with respect to the dialogue topic but also in general, with respect to relations between the people in the country. This helps me now in my work as a tourist guide, when I have to talk about complex historical issues with people from different parts of the country and from abroad.’
– Dialogue participant, Ukraine
38 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
GuineaBissauhasbeenaffectedbyconflict,underpinnedbyinadequategovernance,sincebeforegainingindependencein1973.LocalorganizationVozdiPazbeganpeacebuildinginitiativesadecadeafterthe1998/99civilwar,aimingtofosteracultureofdialoguewherenoneexisted,andtoovercomewhatitsawastheelite’shabitualdisregardofcitizens’needs.Itranaseriesofregionalandnationaldialoguestoexplorevisionsofpeaceanddevelopment,witha2011evaluationconcludingthatgoodprogresshadbeenmade.Peoplehadtakenadvantageofthedialoguestoresolvelocalconflictsandimprovelocalgovernance–goingbeyondwhatVozdiPazhadintended.ThedialogueapproachusedbyVozdiPazwasalsoformallyadoptedforaNationalConferencedesignedtoformalizenewgovernancearrangements.Thus,theuseofdialoguewasbecomingnormalized.85
Journalistsalsoplayaroleinshapingpublicdiscourse,influencinghowcitizensperceiveandcomprehendconflictissues.Theycansometimescontributetoconflict,eitherintentionallythroughskewedanalysisandexaggerateduseoflanguage,orunintentionallythroughlazy,ill‑informedorconflict‑insensitivereporting.SeparateinitiativesinNepalandSomaliaaimedtoimprovetheconflict‑sensitivityofmediareporting.Todothis,andprofessionalizethesector,theFederationofNepaliJournalists(FNJ)traineditsmembersinethicalandconflict‑sensitivereporting.
85 AnnetteEnglert,‘ConsultancyontheEvaluationoftheINTERPEACEVozdiPazProgrammeinGuinea‑Bissau(2009–2010)’,June2011.86 RuthSimpson,‘EvaluationReportforSAFEMediaNepal:ASafe,Able,FreeandEmpoweredMediaforthePromotionofHumanRights,
DemocracyandPeaceinNepal’,InternationalAlert,August2014.87 PhilipThomas,‘PillarsofPeace&Democratization:FinalExternalAssessment’,FinalReport,D3Associates,2016.
A2014evaluationfoundthatmostjournalistswhohadtakenpartdemonstratedincreasedunderstandingofthelinkbetweenreportingandsecurity.Almostallreportedchangingtheirbehaviorasaresult–improvingtheirreporting,beingmoresecurityconscious,andpayingmoreattentiontotheunderlyingcausesofconflictandtheimpactofwhattheybroadcastorwrote.TheFNJestablishedapermanenttrainingwing,andpersuadedthegovernmenttosubsidisethis.86
EvaluationsfoundtwoorganizationsinPuntlandandSomalilandhadachievedsimilarimprovements.TheAssociationforPeaceandDevelopment(APD)andthePeaceandDevelopmentResearchCenter(PDRC)providedtrainingtojournalists,helpingthemmakedemonstrableimprovementsintheirethicalstandardsandconflict‑sensitivity,aswellasbroadeningtheirawarenessofwomen’sissuesandtheissuesconfrontingremote,peripheralcommunities,wheremanyconflictsarise.87
Reconciliationisanotherissuestronglylinkedtopublicdiscourse.TheCentreforPeaceBuildingandReconciliation(CPBR)promotedreconciliationinSriLankaafterthebrutalmilitarydefeatoftheLiberationTigersofTamilEelamin2009broughtthe26‑yearcivilwartoanend.Thoughthewarwasover,underlyingconflictsremainedunresolved,includingconflictsbetweendifferentethno‑religiouscommunities,andbetweentheTamilcommunityandthestate.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 39
TheCPBR,basedinColombo,initiatedaprogrammepromotingreconciliationandhealing,withafocusonimprovingrelationsbetweenethno‑religiousidentitygroups.Itbroughtreligiousleaderstogetherforaseriesofworkshops.TheseimprovedcommunicationandtrustbetweenHindu,Muslim,ChristianandBuddhistleaders,allowingthemtoexploretheunderlyingreasonsforthecivilwar,andtotakeactionsintheirowncommunitiestoaddressthem.88
IntolerantreligiousdiscoursealsosustainsconflictinIndonesia,wherenetworksoflocalorganizationshavecollaboratedtoincreasefreedomofreligiousbelief.Religiousintoleranceisbothculturallyandpoliticallyingrainedinmanypartsofthecountry,andsometimessupportedbythestate.Thismeansthepotentialforconflictisstructurallymaintained.Tocounterthis,civilsocietyorganizationshavebeenconductingawareness‑raisingandadvocacyforreligiousfreedominthreeprovinces–WestTimor,AcehandJava–amidaclimateofgrowingreligiousintolerance.
88 RosemaryCairns,‘AnEvaluationof“StrengtheningLocallyLedPeacebuilding”’,PeaceDirect,May2011.89 AsfinawatidanTatiKrisnawaty,‘FacilitatingFreedomofReligionandBelief:EvaluationReportofTheAFSCProgramPeriodof2013–2015’,
AmericanFriends’ServiceCommittee,2016.
‘Now, as a result [of the Centre for Peace Building and Reconciliation’s work], you can see that children from all communities are staying together and playing. Since the nature of the activities was made known to families, so they desire the same kind of relationship with other communities. Even some of the other religious communities are coming to Hindu kovils, and we go to their worship places for some functions. We have really changed – you can see.’
– Siva Sri Sivabalan Anjaz, retired civil servant from Batticaloa, Sri Lanka
A2016evaluationoftheirworkfoundtheywerebeginningtomakeprogressinchangingattitudesbetweenpeoplefromdifferentreligiouscommunities.TheiradvocacyhelpedallowthreechurchesinYogaykartatoobtainlicencestore‑open,aftertheauthoritieshadclosedthemdown.Additionally,governmentagenciesinAcehhadbeguntoreachouttocivilsocietyasapotentialpartnerinchangingthediscourse,afterseeinghowinterfaithgroupshadworkedtogethertoresistintolerance.However,evaluatorsalsonotedthatprogresshadbeenslowandincremental,andwouldlikelyremainsogiventhestructuralnatureofpublicattitudes.89
40 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Changing public policy and decision‑making mechanisms
90 FrancoisLenfant,‘MakingWomen’sVoicesHeardinPeacebuildingandReconciliationinBurundi’,InternationalAlert,2013.91 PhilipThomas,‘PillarsofPeace&Democratization:FinalExternalAssessment’,FinalReport,D3Associates,2016.
Governmentpolicydefinesinstitutionalbehaviorsthateithersupportorundermineprogresstowardspeace,meaningpeacebuildinginitiativesfrequentlyincludeadvocacydesignedtoinfluencechanges–orpreventnegativechanges–inpublicpoliciesanddecision‑makingmechanisms.ThissectiondrawsonexamplesofadvocacythatimprovedpoliciestowardswomeninBurundi,andpersuadedstategovernmentstoadoptnewgovernanceapproachesinSomalia.
InBurundi,thewomen’speacebuildingnetworkDushirehamweandtheumbrellabodyforwomen’sorganizationsCollectifdesAssociationsetONGsFémininesauBurundi(CAFOB)workedtogethertoembedwomen’sconcernsinthenationalpolicyagenda.Theyspecificallytargetedthe2012PovertyReductionStrategy,asetofpoliciesdevelopedtoguidepublicanddonorresourceallocation.Dushirehamweisanationwidenetwork,withmembersimplementingpeaceinitiativesincommunitiesacrossthecountry.Exploitingthisreach,itorganizedabroadandparticipatoryconsultationprocessinordertoagreeasetofpolicyprioritiestohelpwomeninsupportofpeace.Theseincludedimprovedmeasuresagainstsexualandgender‑basedviolence,equalrightsandgreaterrepresentationforwomen,andeconomicpoliciesdesignedtosupportruralwomen.Asaresultoftheiradvocacy,13peaceanddevelopmentprioritieswereincludedingovernmentpolicy,outof18demandsraised.90
IntheBurundiexample,womenactivistsarguedtheircaseaspoliticaloutsiders.Anotherroutetoadvocacyisthroughprovidingpracticalassistancetothegovernment,usingthisasanopportunityforinsiderinfluence.TheAPDandthePDRC,workinginSomalilandandPuntlandrespectively,bothsecuredchangesingovernmentpoliciesandprocessesthatweredesignedtoimprovestabilityandpeace.Theorganizationsprovidedpracticalsupportoveranumberofyears,facilitatingconsultationanddialogueprocessesthathelpedtheirrespectivegovernmentsclarifycriticalneedsandpoliciesonpeace‑relatedissues,suchaslandandelectoralreform.Byengaginginsupportofthestate,theywereinapositiontohelpedshapetheresultingpoliciesinlinewiththeneedsofpeace.Furthermore,bydemonstratingtheeffectivenessofdialogue‑basedconsultationmechanisms,theypersuadedtheSomalilandandPuntlandgovernmentstoadoptandinstitutionalizeparticipatoryconsultationandanalysisapproaches.91
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 41
TheAPDfacilitatedaconsultativeprocessthatrevisedthelegalmandateofthepoliceinSomaliland,whilethePDRChelpedcreateaneighbourhoodwatchprogrammeinPuntland–bothstepstowardsgreatertrustbetweenpoliceandcommunities,providingastrongerfoundationfortheruleoflaw.TheAPDfacilitatedmulti‑stakeholderdialoguesinSomalilandthatresultedinDiyaEnforcementCommittees,designedtopreventclandisputesescalatingintoviolence.ItalsoorganizedandsupportedlocaldialoguesandanationalLandManagementConference,leadingtotheinstitutionalizationofadecision‑makingprocessaimedatreducingthefrequencyandescalationoflanddisputes–acommonsourceofviolentconflict.AsimilarinitiativebySomaliPeaceLineinSomalia’sLowerShabelleregionalsointroducednewdialogueandnegotiationapproachesinordertoresolvelocaldisputesoverlandandothernaturalresources.92
92 AbdifatahMohamedHikamandMarkM.Rogers,‘Community‑BasedBottom‑UpPeacebuildingProject:ImplementationEvaluationReport’,TheLife&PeaceInstituteandSomaliPeaceLine,2017.
42 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Early warning, early interventionThissectionpresentstwoexamplesofinitiativesthatsuccessfullypromotednon‑violencebyidentifyingsituationsatriskandthenmobilizingpeopletopreventit.Thefirstoftheseisanonymizedbecauseofpoliticalsensitivities,butdrawsonanumberofindependentevaluations(seeCaseStudy4).
Case Study 4. Boendoe Early‑Warning Network93
Inthiscase,anetworkwasformedbyseveralcivilsocietyorganizations,andalmost200individuals,coveringalldistrictsofachronicallyunstablecountrythathadundergoneseveralcyclesoforganizedviolence,andwasparticularlyatriskfromelectionviolence.Collaboratingunderthesharedgoalofbuildingamorepeacefulsociety,thenetworkoperatednationally,whilesupportingmemberswhowereactiveintheirlocalareas.
Thenetworkprovidedtrainingandsupporttomembers,helpingthemmobilizelocalactionstopreventorde‑escalateviolence,and,whereappropriate,toinitiatelonger‑termpeacebuildingactions.Italsohelpedthemtolinkupwithandmobilizelocalgovernmentandothersincivilsociety.Additionally,itconductedlobbying,aswellasorganizingreconciliationprocessesbetweenpoliticalparties.Inasituationwherecooperationamongcivilsocietyactivistswasoftenmadedifficultbythetensionsinthewidersocietytheyrepresented,thenetworkmodelledeffectivecollaborationthroughitsdecentralizedgovernanceoflocalchapters.
Inatwo‑yearperiod,almost5,600incidentswerereportedbynetworkmembers.Itsactionsareacknowledgedashavingreducedviolencelocally,aswellashavinginfluencedinternationalactionsandapproachestothecountryinquestion.
Asoneoftheinstigatorsandleadersofthenetworksaid:
‘Iidentified40organizationsthatweredoingreallyimportant,goodworkinthecountrybutwereisolated;therewasnospacereallyforthemtocometogethertocollaborate,andtheywantedto!Somewereworkingwithyouthinoneprovince,othersworkingwithwomenintheirlittlecorner,othersalsoworkingwithex‑combatantsbutonlyinoneprovince—yousee?Therewasalotofwillingnesstocollaborateandtocoordinateefforts.Thenetworkofferedthatspace.’
93 KielyBarnard‑Webster,‘”StrengthIsFromAUnion;WorkingTogetherYouGoFar”:UnderstandingCollectiveImpactUsinganAnalyticFramework’,CDA,2018.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 43
AsecondcaseconcernsunarmedcivilianprotectionvolunteersoperatinginseveraldifferentpartsofMyanmar.AlthoughtrainedandsupportedbytheinternationalorganizationNonviolentPeaceforce,thesewerelocalvolunteersoperatingontheirowninitiative.Operatinginacontextofunstable,long‑termceasefirearrangementsbetweengovernmentforcesandrebels,theyintervenedwhenpotentialoractualoutbreaksofviolenceriskedpeople’slives,aswellasthefragilepeaceitself.AswiththeBoendoenetwork,theirabilitytointervenelocallywasstrengthenedbybeingpartofawidernetwork.
‘There was a heavy attack near Moenyin city. We successfully negotiated with the army chief. So the civilians can go free from war zone.’
– Civilian protection volunteers from Kachin, Myanmar.
94 EllenFurnari,‘StrengtheningCivilianCapacitiesforPeace’,NonviolentPeaceforce,July2018.
A2018evaluationreportednumerousincidentsinwhichvolunteershadhelpedsustainthepeaceacrossdifferentpartsofthecountry.Actionsincludedrescuingciviliansfromcrossfire;organizingdialoguetopreventimminentoutbreaksofviolence;obtainingthereleaseofforciblyrecruitedyouthandillegallydetainedcivilians;helpingdisplacedpeoplefleeoutbreaksoffightingandconnecttohumanitarianaid;stoppinganillegalminingoperation;addressinglandissues;andraisingawarenessofthepeaceprocessamongthousandsofpeople.
Manyofthevolunteerswerealreadyleadersintheircommunity,andothers,especiallywomen,becameleadersthroughtheirparticipation.94
44 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Lessons learned‘Local’peacebuildinghasimpactsonawiderscopeandscalethanthenameinitiallyimplies,acrossthethreelevelsanddomainsoftheproposedimpactframework(seeFigure9).Itsrelevanceisconfirmedbytherelativelyrapiduptakeofadvocacysuggestionsbygovernments,andbypeople’swillingnesstoparticipateindialogueandotherprocesses.InUkraine,localdialogueapproacheshavesuccessfullychangedpeople’sknowledgeof,andattitudestowards,others,whileinitiativesinIndonesiaandSriLankahavechangedattitudestowardspeopleofotherreligions.
MembersoftheFederationofNepaliJournalistshaveadoptednewbehaviors,changinghowtheyreportedconflict‑relatedstories.InSomalilandandPuntland,newapproachestodecision‑makingandconflictresolutionhavebeenformallyadoptedasstructuralchanges.Theanonymizedcivilsocietynetwork,alongwithpeaceactivistsinMyanmar,havereducedtheriskofviolenceintheirrespectivecontexts.Meanwhile,verticalrelationshaveimprovedinGuineaBissauandSomalia,andhorizontalrelationsimprovedinUkraineandSriLanka.
Figure 9. Three domains and three levels of peacebuilding impact, with illustrations from national and early‑warning initiatives
Levels →
Domains ↓
Changes in knowledge and attitudes
Changes in behavior Structural changes (norms, systems, institutions)
Violence prevented, reduced or stopped
Journalistshaveimprovedunderstandingofhowtheirwordscandriveconflictorpeace
Volunteersmediatebetweenwarringpartiestopreventoutbreaksoffighting
Journaliststakemorecaretoavoidexacerbatingviolence
Early‑warningmechanismspreventviolence
Localauthoritiesandsecurityservicesrespondtoearly‑warninginformation
Horizontal relationships between and among people and peoples improved
Improvedunderstandingoftheviewsofothers
Increasedtolerancetowardsotheridentitygroups
Betterrelationshipswithothers
Religiousleadersbuildimprovedrelationsbetweentheircommunities
Interfaithactivismreducesintolerance
Agreedsolutionstoconflictissuesachievedindialogue
Vertical relationships between people and those with authority and power improved
Authoritieswillingtotrynew,moreopen,governanceapproaches
Authoritieslisteningtocitizens’viewsmore,duetodialogue/consultationapproaches,andrespondingtoreportsofviolence
Newformalapproachesforpolicyconsultationandconflictresolutionadoptedbythestate
Governmentsadoptpro‑peacepolicies
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 45
Four lessons in particular emerge from this chapter (which will also be picked up again in Chapter 6):
Scaling up
Ifoneoftheconstraintsforlocalpeacebuildingisthedifficultyofachievingscale,thenthischapteroffersideasonthiscanbeachieved.Theexamplesstudiedillustratethreemodelsofscalingup:• Advocatingforpolicychanges,andthushavingapotentialimpactacrosstheentirepolity;
• Usingfederationsornetworksofindividualmembers,asisthecasewiththejournalistsinNepalorthecivilianvolunteersinMyanmar;
• Collaboratinginnetworksofcomplementaryorganizationsinordertoachieveagreaterimpactlocally,whilecombininggrassrootswithnationalaction.ThisisthemodelusedbytheBoendoenetwork,byCSOsinIndonesia,andbythewomen’sadvocacyorganizationsinBurundi.
The attractions and limits of dialogue
Thischapteroffersintriguinginsightsabouttheattractionsandlimitsofdialogueapproaches.Ontheonehand,governmentsandcitizensinUkraine,GuineaBissau,SomalilandandPuntlandsawtherelevanceofdialogueapproachestotheirneeds,whichsuggeststhatdialoguemethodscanbereadilyadoptedandachievepolicygainsforpeace,evenintheshortterm.Theisespeciallythecasefortangibleissuesrequiringaconsensusonaconcreteplanofaction.Ontheotherhand,researchersinUkrainefoundthatdialogueprocessestendedtoexcludethosewithmoreextremeviews,andthatdialoguewaslessaptfordealingwithdeeper,underlyingaspectsofconflict–suchasquestionsofidentity–whichcanobstructpathwaystopeace.
Thisimpliesachoiceforlocalpeacebuilders.Theycaneithercontinueusingdialoguetechniquestohelppeopleresolvetangiblequestionsrequiringtangibleplans,ortheycandeveloptheskillsandmethodstoaddressthedeeperquestionsonwhichmoreextremeviewstendtobeheld.
The slow, incremental nature of influencing public discourse
Severaloftheevaluationsstudiedforthischaptereitherstateexplicitlyorimplythatachievingmajorpolicychange,orinfluencingpublicdiscoursesustainably,isalong‑termenterpriserequiringasustainedapproach.GainsinreligioustoleranceinIndonesiawereseenassmallstepsonamuchlongerpath;itisnotclearwhetherthepolicychangesinBurundi,GuineaBissau,SomalilandandPuntlandweretranslatedfullyfrompapertoaction;andtheveryfactthatBoendoenetworkmembersprefertoremainanonymousspeakseloquentlyabouttheincompletenatureoftheirachievementssofar.Allthisindicatedtheneedforcontinuedandcarefulsupportoflocalpeacebuildingactions,overmanyyears.
The lack of evaluations of national‑level peacebuilding
Thischapteropenedwithareferencetoseveralsuccessful,national‑levelpeacebuildinginitiatives.Despitebeingwell‑known,theyhavenotnecessarilybeenevaluatedanddocumentedobjectively.Itwouldhelpmaketheargumentinsupportofhigh‑levellocalpeacebuildingactivitiesifalargercorpusofobjectiveevaluationswasavailable.
46 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
6 Findings and recommendations
Asthereportdemonstrates,localpeacebuildinginitiativesareoftenhighlyeffective.Therefore,atatimewhendonorsandinternationalorganizationsarediscussinghowtoredoubletheireffortstoachieveSDG16by2030,itiscriticalthatlocalvoicesbeincludedandtheirachievementscelebrated.Moreover,localpeacebuildinginitiativesneedtobebetteracknowledgedandbettersupported.
TheimpactsdiscussedinChapters3–5aresummarizedinFigure10below.Theydemonstratethatlocalinitiativesimprovetheknowledge,attitudesandbehaviors,aswellasthenormsandstructures,onwhichpeaceisbuilt.Itisnotablethat,whilechangingattitudesandknowledgeisoftenseenaseasierthanchangingbehavior,allthreecolumnsinFigure10containstrongexamplesofimpact.Clearly,localinitiativesmakeasubstantialdifference.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 47
Figure 10. Summary of some of the impacts in this report, in three domains and at three levels
Levels →
Domains ↓
Changes in knowledge and attitudes
Changes in behavior Structural changes (norms, systems, institutions)
Violence prevented, reduced or stopped
Improvedoptimismandknowledgeofpeacefulapproachestoaddressingproblems
Opinionformersbetterunderstandhowtheirwordscanshapepeaceorconflict
Increasedreadinessincommunitiestoacceptbackex‑fighters,refugeesandothers
Localdisputesresolved
Mediationbetweenconflictpartiespreventsfighting
Opinionformerstakemorecarewiththeirwordsandactions
Early‑warningmechanismspreventviolence
Reducedvulnerabilityofyouthtorecruitmenttoviolence
Communitiesaresafer
Armedgroupsacceptandfollowviolencereductionmechanisms
Women,youngpeopleandothersproactivelyadvocatenon‑violence
Gender‑basedviolencetakenmoreseriouslyincourts
Horizontal relationships between and among people and peoples improved
Improvedunderstandingoftheviewsandproblemsfacedby‘others’
Increasedtrust,toleranceandforgiveness
Improvedunderstandingofunderlyingreasonsforconflict
Improvedattitudestowards/reducedalienationfromthecommunity
Proactivepeaceactionsbyethnic,religiousandcommunityleaderstoimprovehorizontaltiesandcohesion
Mutualsupportactions
Peopleactivelybuildpracticallinksandimprovedrelationswith‘other’groups
Reintegrationofreturningrefugees
Practicalsolutionstoconflictsachievedthroughdialogue
Increasedcommitmenttousenon‑violentmechanismstoresolveconflicts
Intra‑andinter‑communitybodiesarepetitionedtohelpsolvedisputesandbuildpeace;someexpandtheirgeographicandsectoralmandate
Vertical relationships between people and those with authority and power improved
Improvedmutualunderstandingbetweenauthoritiesandcitizensonconflictualissues
Dialogueandothermechanismsallowauthoritiestolistenandconsultmorereadily
Problemsandrelationswithsecurityservicesandarmedgroupsresolved
Increasedengagementin‘civic’activities
Increasedvotingrates
Newgovernanceapproachesforconflictresolutionandpolicyadoptedbycommunities,localandnationalgovernment,andotherswithpower
Community‑basedpeaceinitiativesandothermechanismsintegratewomen,youngpeopleandminoritiesintodecision‑making
Morewomenstandingforandachievingoffice
Improvedpopularparticipationindecision‑makingandaccountability
Governmentsadoptpro‑peacepolicies
48 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
What helps local peacebuilding succeed?Thisreportreviewedavarietyofinitiatives,fromdiversecontexts.Basedonthese,thefollowingconclusionsaboutthequalitiesofsuccessfullocalpeacebuildinginitiativescanbedrawn:
Cumulative impact
Small‑scalepeacebuildinginterventionscananddohaveacumulativeimpact.Thisisespeciallythecasewhentheypersistoveralongperiodoftime,expandthescopeoftheiractions,wherethereisaclusteringeffect,orwheninitiativeslinkup.TheactionsoftheColombianpeasants’associationcreatedameasureofsustainedstabilityovertwodecades,withallpartiesacceptingasetofrulesthatallowedlocalcommunitiesrelativesecurityindifficultcircumstances.Manylocalinitiativeshaveaknock‑oneffect,improvinginclusionandgovernance.Somecommunity‑basedinitiativesgrowinscopeorscale,includingpotentiallyexpandingtheirmandate–forexampletoincludeawider‘developmental’rolethanthenarrowerviolencepreventionmandatetheystartedwith.Othersexpandgeographically,attherequestofneighbouringcommunities.Whilefewoftheevaluationsexplicitlyorthoroughlyexaminetheeffectofclustering,somedofindevidenceofthis.Forexample,thecombinedimpactofvariouslocalpeacestructurespresentacrosspartofSouthKivuintheDRCwasgreaterthanthesumoftheparts.Finally,theexamplesofDushirehamweandCAFOBinBurundi,andoftheBoendoenetworkelsewhere,showthebenefitsthatcanbeachievedbyformalcollaborationbasedonasharedgoal.
Cost‑effectiveness
Localinitiativesuselow‑cost,technicallyappropriateapproaches.Localentitiesarebynaturelesscostlythaninternationalorganizations,cantapintolocalvolunteerism,andemploytechniques–suchasthenon‑clinicalpsychosocialmethodsusedbyTreeofLifeinZimbabwe,andgrassrootsmobilizationofadvocacyideasthroughtheDushirehamwenetworkinBurundi–thatarerealisticallyreplicableinaconstrainedbudgetenvironment,andthusscalable.
Practical orientation
Localinitiativestendtobepracticallyoriented.Theyapplypracticalapproachestoaddresstangibleissuesrequiringconcreteoutcomes,ratherthanbeingframedintermsofabstracttheoreticalconceptssuchas‘peace’,‘stability’and‘inclusion’.Whilenotexplicitlytestedintheevaluationsconsideredforthisreport,itisreasonabletospeculatethatthisfocusonpracticalactionisoneofthereasonspeoplefindlocalinitiativestoberelevant,andwhytheysupportandparticipateinthem.TheexamplefromColombia,inwhichrepresentativesofpeasantfamiliesdevisedacomplexsecurityschemerequiringagreementfrom,anddisciplinedapplicationby,communitiesandarmedgroups,standsoutasapowerfulillustration.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 49
Relevance
Localinitiativesareseenasrelevantbylocalstakeholders,andthisallowsthemtoachievehighlevelsofparticipationandsupport.Mostevaluationsfoundtheactivitiestheyexaminedtobebothrelevantontheirownterms,anddeemedrelevantbylocalactors.Thisisparticularlytrueofgrassrootsinitiatives,andofinitiativesconductedbyandwithparticulartargetgroups.Theseareabletotapintocommunitysupport,especiallyfromthosewhoseintereststheyrepresent.Therelevanceofadvocacyisdemonstratedbytherelativelyrapiduptakeofmanyadvocacyproposals,whiletherelevanceofdialogueisdemonstratedbythereadyadoptionofdialogueoutcomes.
Localpeacebuildingisalsorelevantthroughouttheconflictcycle.Forexample,localpeacebuilderspreventedoutbreaksofviolenceinBurundi,reducedlevelsofviolenceinsituationsofchronicconflictinColombiaandSudan,andenabledcommunitiestorecoverfrom,andbuildtheirresilienceto,conflictinSierraLeoneandRwanda.
95 ‘Portals2PeaceandNationalActionPlanEvaluationreport,2019’,AssistanceMissionforAfricaandPAX,2019.
Local knowledge
Localpeacebuilders’contextualknowledgeandnetworksallowthemtomobilizecourageandleadership,aswellastheconsiderablecapacityandpotentialthatexistswithinsociety.Togivejustoneexample,whenSouthSudanesewomenwereempoweredbynewpeacebuildingknowledgeandskills,andbytheirparticipationinlocalpeacecommittees,theyproceededundertheirowndirectiontoconvinceyoungmenincattlecampstorefrainfromviolencetowardsotherethnicgroups.95Manyoftheinitiativesreviewedforthisreportalsoshowedevidenceofrapidadaptability,especiallygrassroots,community‑basedactions.Thisstemsfromtheirclosenesstotheground,theirresponsivenesstolocalstakeholders,andperhapsalsoalackofbureaucraticrestrictionswhencomparedwithinternationalprojects.
Working with the grain, to change the grain
Localinitiativesmobilizelatentpopularenergyforbehavioralandstructuralchange.Manyevaluationsreviewedforthisreportnotedthehighlevelofsupportforchangeamongcitizensandleadershipfigures.People’spotentialtocontributetopeacebuildingisoftenuntapped,butlocalinitiativescanprovidethemwithopportunitiestomakeacontribution.Inparticular,bycreatingopportunitiesforwomenandyoungpeople,peacebuilderswereabletomobilizetheiruntappedenergyandsupport.Localleaderswerealsomobilizedtoparticipateinnewapproachestopeacebuilding,whichsuggeststhatlocalpeacebuildinginitiativescaninspireandcreateopportunitiesevenforthoseinpositionsofapparentpowerwithinthestatusquo.
50 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Inotherwords,whilelocalinitiativesengagewithandbuildonexistingnormsandmechanisms,theycanalsochangethem.ExamplesincludepartneringwiththeSomalilandgovernmenttohelpitdevelopnewpro‑peacepolicies,orcollaboratingwithcommunitychiefsongrassrootsinitiativesintheDRC.Thereisalwaysariskinsuchcircumstancesthattheirmorepowerfulcollaborators,andthenormsandsystemstheyrepresent,willobstructchange.However,localpeacebuildersarewell‑placed‘toworkwithgrain,tochangethegrain’,thatis,tocarrytheseactorsalongwiththemaschampionsofchange.Thisisevidencedbythewidespreadacceptanceofwomenandminoritiesincommunity‑basedpeaceinitiatives,ofteninapparentlyconservativeruralareas,andbythewillingnessofthoseinpowertoexplorealternativegovernancemechanisms.
Connections
Localinitiativesreflectthebreadthandinterconnectednessofpeaceandconflictfactors.Peacebuildingtheorytellsusthatpeacecanbebuiltandsustainedthroughimprovementsacrossaverybroadrangeofissues,andlocalpeaceinitiativesconfirmthis.Fromtheexamplesreviewedforthisreport,itisclearthatlocalpeacebuildersattributepeacetoawidevarietyoffactors,includingpersonalandcommunitysecurity,accesstoeconomicopportunity,improvedgovernanceandjustice,andsocialwell‑being.
Restoring trust
Localinitiativescanoftenleadtoimprovementsinrelationsandtrustwithinandbetweencommunities.Theimpactofcommunity‑basedinitiativesinpost‑warSierraLeone,wherecommunitiesregainedasenseofmutualtrust,andofDinkaandNuergroupsbuildingmutualtrustinSouthSudan,illustratethiswell.Thisreadinesssuggeststhattrustisalatentpublicgood,andthatlocalactorsarewell‑placedtobringittothesurfacewhencircumstancesallow.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 51
Challenges
96 StacyHilliard,EugeneNtagandaandKatieBartholomew,‘SocietalHealing&ParticipatoryGovernance:Mid‑TermEvaluation’,TayshaConsulting,March2017.
97 JacobusCilliers,OeindrillaDubaandBilalSiddiqui,‘CantheRuinsofWarbeHealed?ExperimentalEvidencefromSierraLeone’,ImpactEvaluationReport75,InternationalInitiativeforImpactEvaluation,May2018.
98 MarkM.RogersandDrHippolytPul,‘LearningFromandAboutLocalPeaceGroups:ThematicEvaluationReport’,ConciliationResources.99 TatianaKyselova,‘UnderstandingDialogueinUkraine:ASurvey‑BasedStudy,AnalyticalReport2018’,MediationandDialogueResearch
Center,Kyiv,2018.100 MarkM.RogersandDrHippolytPul,‘LearningFromandAboutLocalPeaceGroups:ThematicEvaluationReport’,ConciliationResources.
Whilethereisplentyofevidenceofsuccessfullocalpeacebuilding,anyapproachtobuildingpeacehaslimits,andlocalinitiativesdonotalwaysfullysucceed.Somearepoorlyconceivedorexecuted,whileothersareunderminedbyexternalcircumstances.Someoftheevaluationsstudiedsoundnotesofcaution,withonesimplystatingthattheinitiativeinquestionhadfailedbecausetheorganizationhadoverreacheditself.
Evenapproachesthatworkdonotsucceedineverycase.Forexample,noteveryonesufferingfrompost‑traumaticstresscanexpecttobehealed.AsoneRwandeseparticipantsaid,‘Theprogrammecan’taddressallconsequencesofgenocide.Ilostmyfamilymembersandtheywillnevercomeback.Isometimesdon’tgohomebecauseIhavenoonetofindthere.’96
InSierraLeone,meanwhile,whilereconciliationwassuccessfulatacommunitylevel,someindividualsreportedincreasedanxietyanddepressionfor,suggestingtheprocesshadstirredupfeelingsandmemoriesithadnotaddressed.97Thisisareminderoftheneedtoevaluateregularly,identifychallengesasearlyaspossible,andprovidetechnicalsupporttomeetsuchchallengeswhentheyareidentified.
Somecommunity‑basedpeaceinitiativesareunderminedbylocalleaderswhofeartheirroleisbeingusurped,andtheirstatusandincomeputatrisk,orbyspoilerswhoseinterestsareill‑servedbystability.Ontheothersideofthecoin,someinitiativesriskbeinginstrumentalizedandco‑optedforpoliticalgain.98
Therelianceonvolunteerismisadouble‑edgedsword.Ontheonehanditensuresownershipandlocalknowledge,whileontheotheritpotentiallyexcludesthosewholackthetimeorresourcestogetinvolved.DialogueprocessesinUkraineprovideanexampleofinadvertentexclusion,withdialogueorganizersunabletoinvolvepeoplewithextremeviews.99Elsewhere,attemptsatinclusionareresistedduetopatriarchalattitudes,orprejudiceagainstminorities.
Wheninitiativesgaverisetonewbodies–newcommunity‑basedpeacestructures,forexample–theserisksupplantingexistinggovernancemechanisms,therebyweakeningthelatter’sabilitytoundertakeitsgovernanceandsecurityfunctionsinpursuitofpeace.100Citizens’willingnesstogetinvolvedshouldnotbetheexcusefortheauthoritiestodisengage.
52 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Finally,incommonwithothersocialchangeactivists,localpeacebuilderswerenotalwaysabletoconvertattitudinalandknowledgechangeintonewbehaviorsandpractices.Forexample,54%ofparticipantsinasurveyinSierraLeonefeltthat,whiletheycouldacknowledgewhattheyhadlearnedabouthowtoco‑existpeacefully,theyhadyettodrawonitconsciouslytoinformtheirownrelationships.101Otherinitiativesfoundpeople’sintolerancehardertoshiftthanhadbeenhoped,102orthatthecynicismofeliteleaderswashighlyresilienttoadvocacy.103Thestructuralobstaclestopeaceoftenneedtobeaddressedovermanyyearsbeforetheybegintoshift.
101 MohammedAbu‑NimerandSusanShepler,‘FambulTokProgramEvaluation’,April2015.102 AsfinawatidanTatiKrisnawaty,‘FacilitatingFreedomofReligionandBelief:EvaluationReportofTheAFSCProgramPeriodof2013–2015’,
AmericanFriends’ServiceCommittee,2016.103 AnnetteEnglert,‘ConsultancyontheEvaluationoftheINTERPEACEVozdiPazProgrammeinGuinea‑Bissau(2009–2010)’,June2011.
Thesefindingsdonotunderminetheimportanceoflocalpeacebuilding,butmerelyunderlinetheneedforlocalpeacebuilderstoensuretheymatchtheirambitionswithappropriateresourcesandcapacity,andemployeffectivemonitoringandevaluation.Giventhatmonitoringandevaluationapproachesarestillbeingexploredinthepeacebuildingsectorasawhole,thisisapotentialareaforexternalsupportandcollaboration.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 53
Areas and mechanisms for supportFourareaspotentialareasofexternalsupportcanbeidentifiedbasedontheevaluationssurveyedforthisreport:Increasedsupportinsituationsofchronicviolence,scalingup,sustainabilityandevaluation.Thishasimplicationsforwhichmodelsofsupportareappropriate.
Increased support to local initiatives in situations of chronic violence
Howshouldweconsiderlocalinitiativesthat,althoughsuccessfulontheirownterms,arevulnerabletodeteriorationinthewidercontext?DoesthefactthattheDRC,forexample,remainsdeeplyaffectedbychronicandviolentpoliticalconflictsunderminetheimportanceoflocalinitiativesthere?Suchinitiativescannot,afterall,beexpectedtobringsuchconflictstoanendintheshortterm.
Theresearchreviewedsuggeststhatlocalinitiativesremainimportant,andmaybeevenmoreimportant,incaseswherehigher‑levelorwiderconflictspersist.Localpeacebuildershavedemonstrablyimprovedpeople’saccesstopeaceincountriessuchasBurundi,DRC,Myanmar,SouthSudanandSudan,evenwhilewiderconflictsremainunresolved.Suchconflictsmaytakemanyyearstoresolve,andmayrecurevenafterformalpeaceagreementsandsettlementshavebeenachieved.Theabilitytopreventviolence,therefore,aswellasimprovingrelationsbetweenandamongpeople,andbetweenpeopleandthoseinpower,remainscritical.Thisimpliesincreasedsupportforlocalinitiativesisneededinsuchcontexts.
Scaling up
Nevertheless,theimpactsoflocalpeacebuildinginitiativescansometimesseemisolated,andtheyriskbeingoverwhelmedbyexternaldynamics.Whilethisisnotareasontodismissthem,itdoessuggesttheneedforscalingupwherepossible.Theevaluationssurveyedidentifyseveralwayslocalinitiativeshavedonethis,forexamplebyformalandinformalnetworking,orexpandingtheirmandateorscale.
Manyevaluations,though,identifyunexploitedscale‑upopportunities,particularlyopportunitiesforsynergybetweendifferentinitiatives.Evenso,itwouldbeamistaketoassumethatalllocalinitiativeshavethecapacitytoexpandorreachouttoothers.Anyattemptatscalingupshouldbebasedonaclear‑eyedassessmentofcapacityandopportunity,anddrivenbytheorganizationsorcommunitiesthemselves,ratherthanbyexternaldemands.Nevertheless,opportunitiesforlinkingandscalinguppeacebuildingactionsandimpactsmeritfurtherexploration.Thisispotentiallyanareawherecarefulexternalsupportcouldhelplocalinitiativesincreasethescopeanddepthoftheirimpact.
54 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Sustainability
Thisresearchconductedforthisreportwasunabletoassesstheongoingsustainabilityoflocalinitiativesbeyondthetimeframeinwhichtheywereevaluated.Whilemanyarereportedasalreadybecomingembeddedinlocalbehaviorsandstructures,anumberofevaluationreportsrecommendfurthereffortstoimprovesustainability.Convertingknowledgeandattitudinalchangeintobehavioralchangeisnotagiven,andconvertingbehavioralchangeintonewnormsandstructurescanbeevenmoreofachallenge.Thereisthereforeaneedtosustainlocalinitiativeslongenoughfortheirimpactstobecomefirmlyembedded–forseveralyears,atleast.
The evaluation deficit
ThisreportidentifiedsuccessfulexamplesoflocalpeacebuildingbasedonadatasetofevaluationssubmittedinresponsetoacallthatwassentoutinEnglish,primarilytoformalpeacebuildingorganizations.ThiswassupplementedbyinternetsearchesandthroughexistingDM&Edatabases.Whilethisestablishedadatasetsufficientfortheresearch,italsoexposedgapsinreadilyavailableevaluationdata.Thereappearstobeadeficitofindependent,objectiveevaluationsoflocalpeacebuildingimpact,andespeciallyofeffortsthat:• Contributedtostabilizationandsustainablepeaceataprovincialornationallevel;
• Areunconnectedtonationalorinternationalprogrammes;
• Areinformalinnature,i.e.notimplementedbyorganizationsassuch;
• Aredefinedintermsotherthanpeacebuilding,yethavehadasignificantimpactonpeace;
• Arecontinuedoveralongperiodoftimeandthusprovideanopportunitytoevaluatetheirsustainability.
Furthermore,theevaluationsreviewedtendtostopatthelimitsoftheactionsunderreview,andseldomaskwiderquestionsabouttheinfluenceoftheinitiativeonpeacewritlarge,i.e.peaceonawider,societalscale.Askingthisquestioninevaluationswouldnotonlyallowreviewerstoexplorethewiderimpactsofaspecificlocalinitiative,itwouldalsohelphighlightopportunitiesforsynergyandscalingup.
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 55
Partnership and support models
Whilethisreportisnotspecificallyfocusedonmodelsofsupportforlocalinitiatives,severaloftheevaluationsrevieweddiscussthis.Indeed,manyoftheevaluationswerecommissionedbyinternationalagenciesasaresultoftheirsupporttolocalorganizations.104Inafewcases,thelocalorganizationshadthemselvesbeenestablishedby,oremergedfrom,programmesrunbyinternationalNGOs.Thesewereconsideredeligibleforthereport,providedtheyhadsubsistedindependentlyforanumberofyears,andwerelocallyled.
Broadly,theevaluationscontaintwomainfindingsaboutsupportmodels.Thefirstisthatthecombinationoflocalandinternationalhasmuchtorecommendit.Partnersareabletoblendlocalknowledge,capacityandinterestswithskillsandknowledgegainedfromotherconflictzones,andinternationalsarealsoabletosecurefinancialresources.Thesecondisthat,insomecases,localvoicesarebeingdrownedoutinplanningandreporting,unabletotaketheinitiativeastheyshould.Theevaluationsrecommendedmoreequalpartnershipstopreventthisformofdisempowerment.
104 Amongthese:AmericanFriendsServiceCommittee,CARE,ChristianAid,ConciliationResources,Cordaid,CureViolence,InternationalAlert,Interpeace,Life&PeaceInstitute,NonviolentPeaceforce,PAX,PeaceDirect,PeacefulChangeInitiative,SearchforCommonGround,andYCareInternational.
Itisalsoworthrepeatingthatevaluationscommissionedbyinternationalprogrammesoftenfailtodifferentiatetheimpactsorrolesoflocalpartnersfromthoseoftheirinternationalcollaborators.Evenwhentheydo,manyfailtoclarifytheextenttowhichtheformerareingenuineleadershippositions,devisingtheirowninitiativesratherthanmerelyimplementingothers’priorities.Internationalorganizationshaveanincentivetopresentoutcomesandimpactsastheirs,evenwhentheyshouldrightlybeattributedtolocalpartners.Evaluationreportsshouldthereforedifferentiaterolesandimpactsmoreclearly,andreportexplicitlyontheindependenceoflocalpartners.
56 / Local peacebuilding – What works and why
Recommendations
105 UNSustainableDevelopmentGoalsKnowledgePlatform.See:https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg16106 InstituteforEconomics&Peace,‘GlobalPeaceIndex2018:MeasuringPeaceinaComplexWorld’,June2018.Availablefrom:
http://visionofhumanity.org/reports107 UNSecurityCouncilResolution2282(2016),SustainingPeace.108 Youth,Peace&Security,‘TheMissingPeace:IndependentProgressStudyonYouthPeaceandSecurity’,UNFPAandUNPBSO,2018.109 CharterforChange:LocalisationofHumanitarianAid.See:https://charter4change.org/
SDG16requirestheworldtohavemadesignificantprogresstowardssustainablepeaceby2030.105Meanwhile,thedatashowsthattheworldisgoingintheoppositedirection.106UNSecurityCouncilResolution2282onSustainingPeacemandatestheUNanditsmemberstatestoimplementandsupportpeacebuildinginitiativesatallstagesoftheconflictcycle,and‘reaffirmstheimportanceofnationalownershipandleadershipinpeacebuilding,wherebytheresponsibilityforsustainingpeaceisbroadlysharedbytheGovernmentandallothernationalstakeholdersandunderlinestheimportance[…]ofinclusivity’.107Italsoreaffirmsthatwomen’sleadershipandparticipationisessential,whiletherecentUNreport,‘ProgressStudyonYouth,PeaceandSecurity’,calledforyoungpeopletobeatthecentreofpeacebuildingapproaches.108 Thesestatementsarematchedbyotherinternationalpolicies,andbypeacebuildingtheory,whichconsistentlystatethatlocalinitiativesareessentialforpeace.
Whilethereisnosharedpolicybenchmarkfortheminimumproportionofpeacebuildingaidthatshouldbegiventolocalinitiatives,noraccuratedataabouttheproportionthatiscurrentlyflowingtolocalinitiatives,theCharterforChange–whichcallsforthe‘localization’ofhumanitarianaid–hassettheinitialbenchmarkat20%oftotalhumanitarianfunding.109
Implementationofthesepoliciesandprinciplesatscalehasbeenconspicuouslylackingsofar.Asthisreportclearlydemonstrates,localpeacebuildersaremakingasubstantialimpact,butneedmoresupporttoexpandanddeepentheirefforts.TheUNisinthemiddleofamajorreformofitsapproachestopeacebuilding,andofitsimplementationapproachesmoregenerally.ProgresstowardsSDG16isunderreviewin2019.Thefollowingrecommendationsarethereforetimely,andareaimedprimarilyatdonors,multilateralsandinternationalNGOsintheaidsystem:
Local peacebuilding – What works and why / 57
1. Increase levels of sustained funding to local peacebuilding initiatives at all stages of the conflict cycle, in ways that respect their leadership and autonomy
• Supportlocalpeacebuildersindevising,leadingandimplementingtheirowninitiatives,usingfundinginstrumentsthatallowthemtoremainresponsivetolocalstakeholders,andadapttheirapproachesrapidlyandindependentlywhennecessary;
• Useflexiblefundingmodelsincludingcorefunding,andsustainthesethroughrepeatedfive‑yearfundingcycles,toallowlocalinitiativestimetohaveameasurableimpactandconvertchangedknowledgeandattitudesintonewbehaviorsandstructuralchange;
• Auditthevolumeoffundingcurrentlyappliedtolocalpeacebuildinginitiatives,andmaketimeboundpubliccommitmentstoincreasethistoatleast20%ofallpeacebuildingfunds.
2. Collaborate with and support local peacebuilders to help maximize their direct and indirect impact
• Supportlocalpeacebuilderswhowishtotestandevaluatemodelsforscalinguptheirinitiativesandimpacts,forexamplebyexpandingtheirscopeandscale,andlinkingupwithothers;
• Providetechnicalsupporttolocalpeacebuilders,basedonacollaborativeanalysisoftheiropportunitiesandneeds,andonthecomplementarityoflocalandinternationalknowledgeandcapacity;
• Supportlocalcivilsocietyinvolvementinandinfluenceovernationalpeaceprocesses;
• Usepoliticalinfluencetoprotectandenlargethespaceforcivilsociety.
3. Support local peacebuilders to generate and take advantage of learning about what works locally
• Collaboratewithlocalpeacebuilderstofundanddisseminatemoreexternalevaluationsoftheirinitiatives,consideringinparticularinitiativesthatarelessformalorvisible,thoseconductedatnationallevel,thosethatpreventviolentextremism,andthoseundertakenbywomen;
• Commissionanddisseminateresearchintoprogresstowards‘peacewritlarge’inspecificcontexts,disaggregatingthevariouscontributionsoflocalandexternalinitiatives,andidentifyingtheimpactofsynergiesbetweenthem;
• Requireevaluatorstospecifythedistinctroleandimpactsoflocalpeacebuildersinassessmentsoflargerprogrammesinwhichtheyplayapart,andtoassessthedegreetowhichtheyhavespacetoexerciseleadershipandautonomy.
4. Adapt the way donors, multi‑lateral organizations and international NGOs work, to make it easier to collaborate with and support local peacebuilders, and for local peacebuilders to access support
• Simplifygrantallocationandmanagement,withastrongerfocusonmutualtrustandcollaboration;useadaptiveprogramming;lightenthecomplianceburdenonbothpartiesbyadoptingagreatertoleranceofrisk;andtailorprogrammedesignandgrantapplicationprocessessothatlocalinitiativesarewelcomedandincluded;
• Re‑alignperformancemanagementsystemssostaffareincentivizedtospendmoretimewithlocalcivilsocietyactors,andprovidemoresupporttolocalinitiatives;
• Alignrecruitmentandprovidetrainingsostaffhavetheknowledge,skillsandexperiencetoworkeffectivelyandconflict‑sensitivelywithlocalpeacebuilders;
• Designcountrystrategiesandprogrammestobemoreinclusiveoflocalvoicesandactions,andreflectiveoftheirrolesandpriorities;
• Makegrantstointernationalorganizationscontingentontheirsupportforandcollaborationwithlocalinitiatives.
The online interactive version of this report can be found at: www.peaceinsight.org/reports/whatworks
About the Alliance for PeacebuildingTheAllianceforPeacebuilding(AfP)istheleadingglobalpeacebuildingnetwork,withmorethan100memberorganizationsworkingin153countriestoendviolentconflictandsustainpeace.Webringtogethercoalitionsinkeyareasofstrategy,policy,andevaluationtoelevatetheentirepeacebuildingfield,tacklingissuestoolargeforanyoneorganizationtoaddressalone.www.allianceforpeacebuilding.org
About Peace DirectPeaceDirectworkswithlocalpeopletostopviolenceandbuildsustainablepeace.Webelievethatlocalpeopleshouldleadallpeacebuildingefforts,andthisreportexplorestheeffectivenessoflocalpeacebuilding,sharingrealandimpactfulinitiativesfromaroundtheworld.www.peacedirect.orgwww.peaceinsight.org
Registeredcharity1123241.Registered501(c)(3)