Peace Education

Independent Research Project

Stephanie Knox Cubbon

Exploring the Culture of Peace at the University for Peace

June 29, 2010

Virginia Cawagas, Advisor

The concept of a culture of peace has been developed in recent years, and has gained greater attention through the United Nations (UN) declaration of the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Nonviolence for the Children of the World, 2000-2010. While the concept of a culture of peace is well-developed and researched, the area of culture of peace assessment is relatively new. The University for Peace (UPEACE), as a UN-mandated graduate level institution, has a mandate to contribute to international peace and security by providing humanity with an institution of higher education devoted to peace-related studies. The current research explores the culture of peace at UPEACE at the local, institutional level, in order to elucidate the strengths and weaknesses of the UPEACE, and to contribute to local- and institutional-level culture of peace assessment. To conduct this research, a culture of peace framework was developed in conjunction with a community working group and literature review. This framework was then used to develop a comprehensive questionnaire, which was administered to the student body in order to explore students’ experiences of the culture of peace. Following the preliminary survey results, a discussion forum was held. Research results revealed a general trend that community members

University for Peace

Acknowledgements

To all who have taught me.

To all UPEACE community members, who contributed more to this project

than I could have ever hoped. I extend my deepest gratitude to you.

To my Peace Education classmates, who supported and encouraged me

throughout the year, and from whom I learned so much.

To Virginia Cawagas, Swee-Hin Toh, and Dina Rodriguez, for their constant

support, generous spirits, and deep commitment to peace education.

To my parents, for giving me every opportunity in life, including this one.

To my husband Alistair, for his support, encouragement, love, and for helping

me to reach my highest potential each day.

2

Table of Contents

1. Introduction....................................................................................................7

2. History of a Culture of Peace.........................................................................9

2.1 Culture of Peace as it Evolved at the United Nations............................9

2.2 Evolution of culture of peace: Analysis by Groff and Smoker (1996). 11

3. The University for Peace..............................................................................12

3.1 UPEACE and contributions to the UN Culture of Peace programme. .12

3.2 UPEACE: The setting............................................................................13

4. Statement of the Research Topic.................................................................14

4.1 Purpose.................................................................................................14

4.2 Statement of the problem.....................................................................15

4.3 Research questions...............................................................................15

5. Research Methodologies..............................................................................15

5.1 The Researcher’s Role..........................................................................16

5.2 Worldviews...........................................................................................16

5.3 Data Collection.....................................................................................16

5.4 Sampling...............................................................................................17

5.5 Data Analysis........................................................................................17

5.6 Assumptions, Ethical Issues and Constraints.......................................17

6. Literature Review.........................................................................................18

6.1 Culture of Peace Conceptual Frameworks...........................................18

6.1.1 UNESCO framework...................................................................19

6.1.2 The flower model........................................................................20

6.1.1 The Integral model.....................................................................21

6.2 Culture of Peace Indicators and Assessment.......................................22

6.2.1 David Adams...............................................................................22

6.2.2 Other culture of peace indicators and assessment tools............24

6.3 UPEACE related documents.................................................................24

6.4 UPEACE independent research projects..............................................25

7. Culture of Peace Framework for this study.................................................25

7.1 Education..............................................................................................26

7.2 Environmental sustainability................................................................27

7.3 Human rights........................................................................................28

7.4 Democratic participation......................................................................29

7.5 Equality between men and women.......................................................29

7.6 Understanding, tolerance, and solidarity.............................................29

7.7 Participatory communication and the free flow of information and

knowledge...................................................................................................30

7.8 International peace and security.........................................................30

7.9 Local peace and security......................................................................31

7.10 Inner peace.........................................................................................31

8. Working group on culture of peace framework and indicators...................32

9. Questionnaire: Findings and analysis...........................................................37

9.1 Personal information for statistical purposes.......................................38

9.2 A culture of peace through education..................................................41

9.3 Environmental sustainability................................................................46

9.4 Human rights........................................................................................47

9.5 Equality between men and women.......................................................51

9.6 Democratic participation......................................................................52

9.7 Understanding, tolerance and solidarity..............................................55

9.8 Participatory communication and the free flow of information and

knowledge.........................................................................................................61

9.9 International peace and security.........................................................63

9.10 Local peace and security...................................................................64

9.11 Inner peace........................................................................................67

9.12 Culture of peace................................................................................68

4

10. Feedback session and discussion...............................................................72

10.1 Discrimination...................................................................................72

10.2 Culture of peace comparison.............................................................73

10.3 Communication..................................................................................73

10.4 Inner peace........................................................................................73

11. Conclusions.................................................................................................74

12. UPEACE Culture of Peace Action Plan.......................................................78

12.1 Policy................................................................................................78

12.2 Further research..............................................................................80

12.3 Education and trainings...................................................................80

13. References..................................................................................................87

12. Appendices.................................................................................................93

A. Summary of UPEACE contributions to UN Decade Reports 2001-2005

..........................................................................................................................93

B. Proposal for the Community Liaison Office........................................99

List of Figures

Figure 1: Flower Model....................................................................................20

Figure 2: The Integral Model of Peace Education............................................21

Figure 3: Participants by Programme..............................................................39

Figure 4: Participants by Region......................................................................40

Figure 5: Participants by Gender.....................................................................41

6

List of Tables

Table 1: Summary of Culture of Peace Indicator Working...............................32

Table 2: Teaching Methods...............................................................................42

Table 3: Programmes at UPEACE.....................................................................43

Table 4: Environmental Sustainability..............................................................46

Table 5: Human Rights.....................................................................................47

Table 6: Equality between Men and Women....................................................51

Table 7: Democratic Participation at UPEACE.................................................52

Table 8: Democratic Participation in the Classroom........................................54

Table 9: Understanding....................................................................................55

Table 10: Tolerance..........................................................................................56

Table 11: Solidarity...........................................................................................57

Table 12: Peer Pressure for School-related Events..........................................58

Table 13: Institutional Pressure for School-related Events..............................59

Table 14: Peer Pressure for Social Events........................................................59

Table 15: Harassment.......................................................................................60

Table 16: Communication at UPEACE..............................................................61

Table 17: Interpersonal Communication at UPEACE.......................................62

Table 18: International Peace and Security.....................................................63

Table 19: Safety................................................................................................64

Table 20: Personal Security Violations.............................................................65

Table 21: Conflict Resolution............................................................................66

Table 22: Inner Peace.......................................................................................67

Table 23: Awareness of a Culture of Peace Prior to UPEACE..........................68

Table 24: Knowledge, Values and Skills for Cultivating Peace Acquired at

UPEACE............................................................................................................69

Table 25: Culture of Peace at UPEACE............................................................69

Table 26: Summary of Participants’ Recommendations...................................71

Table 27: Summary of UPEACE Culture of Peace Strengths and Weaknesses74

1. Introduction

     One of the greatest challenges humanity faces today is to create a

culture of peace, a world free from violence, poverty, injustice, inequality, and

fear. A world free from conflict is not necessarily possible nor desirable, as

conflict itself is not inherently negative, and can lead to positive change and

transformation; rather, we must find peaceful ways of handling conflict.

However, creating a peaceful world is more than simply finding peaceful

solutions to conflict, or in other words, achieving negative peace. It also

requires cultivating positive peace, which encompasses the elimination of

structural violence and the promotion of principles such as equality, justice,

and understanding. A culture of peace encompasses both negative and

positive peace, and is a process of dismantling the current culture of war and

promoting human rights, multiculturalism, solidarity, respect, and

environmental stewardship from local to global levels. 

    A culture of peace is not an endpoint, but rather a process and a vision;

it is not static, but rather dynamic, always changing based on how a

community changes (Adams, 2009). According to Adams (1995), "a culture of

peace consists of values, attitudes, behaviors and ways of life based on

nonviolence, respect for human rights, intercultural understanding, tolerance

and solidarity, sharing and free flow of information and the full participation

of women" (16).  This process does not imply the absence of conflict. Diverse

communities will always encounter conflict, and it is not the conflict itself that

is negative, as conflict can create tension that leads to creative solutions and

actually improve our lives; it is when we handle conflict violently that it

becomes problematic. A culture of peace is a constantly evolving process of

nonviolence, in contrast to the current culture of war in which violence and

injustice are pervasive. 

Education is a key tool in both dismantling the culture of war and

cultivating a culture of peace, and this is the primary goal of peace education.

According to the United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural

Organisation (UNESCO) charter (1945), “Since war begins in the minds of

8

men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be

constructed.”  Through education, we can learn the knowledge, skills, and

values necessary for creating a culture of peace.

The principle that education is crucial to creating global peace is the

foundation of the United Nations-mandated University for Peace (UPEACE),

an institution of higher learning devoted to master’s degree programs in

peace-related specializations. The present research explores the culture of

peace in this unique environment.

2. History of a culture of peace

2.1 Culture of peace as it evolved in the United Nations    

   While the concept of a culture of peace has been developed over the

past two decades at the UN, the founding of the UN itself was a major step

towards building an international culture of peace. The UN's mission

statement includes the negative peace element of saving "succeeding

generations from the scourge of war," as well as human rights, justice and

social progress (United Nations, 1945). At its inception, the UN's concept of

peace was broader than merely the cessation of violent conflict.

In 1986, UNESCO convened a meeting of scientists in Seville, Spain to

discuss the question of whether violence is a natural human tendency. The

attending scientists agreed upon five principles, which are:

    1. It is scientifically incorrect to say that we have inherited a

tendency to         

    make war from our animal ancestors.

    2. It is scientifically incorrect to say that war or any other violent

behaviour is

    genetically programmed into our human nature.

    3. It is scientifically incorrect to say that in the course of human

evolution     

    there has been a selection for aggressive behaviour more than

for other kinds of        behaviour.

    4. It is scientifically incorrect to say that humans have a 'violent

brain'. 

    5. It is scientifically incorrect to say that war is caused by

'instinct' or any                    single motivation (Adams, et. al.,

1986).

From these principles, the scientists concluded that "the same species who

invented war is capable of inventing peace" (Adams, et. al., 1986). It followed

that that war and peace are essentially cultural, human-created phenomena,

and that humanity has the power to set our course, which led to the

development of the concept of a culture of peace

     This concept was first elaborated at the International Conference on

Peace In the Minds of Men, held in Yamoussoukro in 1989. The document that

resulted from the meeting was the Yamoussoukro Declaration on Peace in the

Minds of Men, which elaborated a programme for peace. Through this

declaration, the Congress invited states, intergovernmental and

nongovernmental organizations, the scientific, educational, and cultural

communities of the world, and all individuals to "help construct a new vision

of peace by developing a peace culture based on the universal values of

respect for life, liberty, justice, solidarity, tolerance, human rights, and

equality between women and men" (International Conference on Peace In the

Minds of Men, 1989). This declaration directly referenced the Seville

Statement, and recommended that UNESCO should work towards

disseminating the Statement and developing explanatory material (ICPIMM,

1989). Furthermore, the document stated that the endorsement of the Seville

statement was the first stage in refuting the myth that organized human

violence is biologically determined (ICPIMM, 1989). Heeding this call,

UNESCO began to mainstream the culture of peace concept into the

organization's work, which included the publication of From a culture of

violence to a culture of peace (1996), and in 1997, the adoption of "Towards a

culture of peace" as the theme for its transdisciplinary program. 

Subsequently, in 1998, the UN General Assembly drafted a resolution

entitled Culture of Peace (A/RES/53/13, 1998), which acknowledged

UNESCO's work towards a culture of peace, and called for the promotion of a

culture of peace based on the principles established in the Charter of the

United Nations. The General Assembly then proclaimed 2000 to be the 10

International Year for a Culture of Peace (A/RES/52/15, 1998), and 2001-2010

to be the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-violence for the

Children of the World (A/RES/53/25, 1998; henceforth referred to as "The

Decade"). To further elaborate the concept, the UN General Assembly passed

the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace

(A/RES/53/243, 1999), which created eight program areas under the culture of

peace theme: a culture of peace through education; promoting sustainable

economic and social development; respect for all human rights; promoting

equality between men and women; promoting democratic participation;

advancing understanding, tolerance, and solidarity; promoting participatory

communication and the free flow of information; and promoting international

peace and security.

     As part of the International Year of a Culture of Peace, UNESCO (1999)

launched an awareness-raising campaign with Manifesto 2000, a personal

commitment by Nobel Peace Prize laureates that put the culture of peace

principles into a form that can be integrated into observance and practice in

daily life. The principles of the Manifesto 2000 are to:

“Respect the life and dignity of each human being without

discrimination or prejudice;

Practise active non-violence, rejecting violence in all its forms:

physical, sexual, psychological, economical and social, in

particular towards the most deprived and vulnerable such as

children and adolescents;

Share my time and material resources in a spirit of generosity to

put an end to exclusion, injustice and political and economic

oppression;

Defend freedom of expression and cultural diversity, giving

preference always to dialogue and listening without engaging in

fanaticism, defamation and the rejection of others;

Promote consumer behaviour that is responsible and development

practices that respect all forms of life and preserve the balance of

nature on the planet; and

Contribute to the development of my community, with the full

participation of women and respect for democratic principles, in

order to create together new forms of solidarity” (UNESCO, 1999).

The Manifesto was signed by over one percent of the world's population (75

million people) during the year (UNESCO, 1999). 

  The Decade initiated a concerted, unified effort among the UN bodies,

Member States, international organisations, and civil society to promote a

global culture of peace. The emphasis of the Decade, according to its initial

report, was to put children at the centre and to priority to be given to

education, and more specifically, education for peace (UN General Assembly,

A/55/377, 2000). For each year of the Decade, UN bodies, as well as some

States and civil society organizations, reported their efforts to the UN General

Assembly and indicated the actions they had been taking in the culture of

peace framework. These formal reports indicate the patterns within the

Decade, and show trends of greater involvement throughout the UN, and

greater collaboration between UN agencies. 

  While the UN has played a key role in promoting action for a culture of

peace, civil society movements have also been instrumental in taking actions

and implementing programs for a culture of peace. Some civil society efforts

were documented in the UN Mid-term report (A/RES/60/279, 2005), as well as

an independent civil society world report (Culture of Peace Foundation, 2005).

Certainly for all the efforts that were reflected in the report, more efforts

existed that were not accounted for in these reports.

This year, 2010, is the conclusion of the Decade, and will be concluded

with final reports by the UN and civil society, as well as a civil society

conference to be held in December in Spain. These reports and events will

show the progress that has been made in the Decade, and the areas that

require emphasis for moving forward.

2.2 Evolution of culture of peace: Analysis by Groff and Smoker

(1996)

    In the UNESCO publication From a culture of war to a culture of peace

(1996), Groff and Smoker use six perspectives of a culture of peace that are

based on the evolution of the peace concept. These perspectives of the culture

12

of peace evolve as: the absence of war; the balance of forces in the

international system; for negative (no war) and positive peace (structural

violence); for feminist peace on macro and micro levels; for peace with the

environment; and for holistic inner and outer peace (1996). Their analysis of

the culture of peace concept traces how the concept of peace has evolved over

time in Western peace research, from the absence of war to the more holistic

perspectives that include dimensions of gender, the environment, and inner

peace. Groff and Smoker also propose working on culture of peace initiatives

at local and global levels as a key strategy for creating global cultures of

peace (1996).

As the concept of peace has evolved over time, so has the concept of a

culture of peace. The concept of a culture of peace varies across cultures and

across time. By simultaneously working at the individual and international

levels, and applying a holistic approach, we can create an international

culture of peace. The University for Peace operates at both levels, by

educating individuals to promote international peace.

3. The University for Peace  

     In efforts to strengthen efforts for international peace, the UN General

Assembly established the University for Peace in Costa Rica through a petition

by then-president of Costa Rica, Rodrigo Carazo (General Assembly, 1979).

The university's mission explicitly states that it exists to

"…provide humanity with an international institution of higher

education

for peace and with the aim of promoting among all human beings

the spirit of understanding, tolerance and peaceful coexistence, to

stimulate cooperation among peoples and to help lessen obstacles

and threats to world peace and progress, in keeping with the

noble aspirations proclaimed in the Charter of the United

Nations". (Presidential Commission for the University for Peace,

1982: 251).

During its first twenty years of existence, UPEACE went through periods

of high and low activity, but did not maintain a consistent student body. The

UPEACE Council is the governing body of the university, as established in the

UPEACE Charter (A/RES/35/55, 1980). The Council includes the Rector, two

representatives appointed by the UN Secretary-General and UNESCO

Director-General, two representatives of the host country government, the

UPEACE Chancellor, and ten representatives “of the academic community or

other persons eminent in the field of peace and security” (A/RES/35/55,

Annex, Article 6, 1980). In 2001, the UPEACE Council adopted a 5-year

revitalisation plan that included four major goals:  the development and

teaching of a coherent academic programme and its dissemination through

state-of-the-art technologies; building up a critical mass of students and

faculty at UPEACE Headquarters; the extension of UPEACE activities into

major regions of the world in response to its global mandate; and the

establishment of a sound financial and management structure (University for

Peace, 2005).  This revitalisation marked a new beginning for UPEACE, in

which it would expand its reach and impact towards increasing international

peace.

    

3.1 UPEACE and contributions to the UN Culture of Peace

Programme

Simultaneously, the Decade began, and the 2001 report highlights the

role of UPEACE in the Decade (UN General Assembly, A/56/349). Education

for peace was established as a priority of the Decade (A/55/377, 2001), and

UPEACE, as one of the UN bodies involved with education, along with

UNESCO and UNICEF, was called on to play a key role in the Decade and

efforts towards education for peace in a culture of peace. The 2001 report

outlines the university's plans during the Decade as they correspond to the

eight program areas. Through the Decade reports, UPEACE's efforts towards

a global culture of peace can be traced, and it is apparent that the university

undertook many efforts and actions that contribute to promoting an

international culture of peace (See Appendix A: Summary of UPEACE

contributions to the UN Decade Reports 2001-2005).

       These reports show how UPEACE has been contributing to UN efforts

towards a culture of peace at the international level, indicating clear actions

in all culture of peace programme areas that the university has initiated.

However, they do not tell us what the culture of peace at UPEACE is like, nor

if there is a culture of peace at UPEACE at the local level. As noted by Groff

and Smoker (1996), it is important to work towards a culture of peace at all 14

levels, and hence a further exploration of how UPEACE is working towards a

local culture of peace is needed.

3.2 UPEACE: The setting

     UPEACE is a place where creating a culture of peace is not only

desirable but necessary for its greater aims. UPEACE is a unique, UN-

mandated graduate-level institution which offers master’s programmes

focused on peace, and which draws students from approximately 60 different

countries and even more cultures. The university's setting, about 30

kilometers outside of San José, Costa Rica in the small farming community and

protected area of El Rodeo, provides a unique opportunity for cultivating a

culture of peace.  The isolation and natural beauty of the campus contribute to

its uniqueness and tranquility, and while it is situated in the Costa Rican

context, the overall culture is very international due to the diverse population

of its student body, faculty and staff. UPEACE has a unique ability to have a

culture of peace at the local, campus level, and for community members to

develop skills in promoting a culture of peace and to return to their home

countries to implement these skills. Just as individuals can cultivate inner

peace so that they can act more peacefully, communities can cultivate peace

in order to contribute to peace in the wider world.

UPEACE has the potential to promote both a local and international culture of

peace. 

     Another unique aspect of the community is that its composition is always

changing. The one-year master’s programmes result in very little continuity

within the student body, with the exception of the American University

students, who overlap with two different graduating classes. Staff are also

primarily on one-year contracts, although many are renewed every year, and

some students are hired as staff upon graduation. The ever-changing

population of the community means that the culture of the community is also

frequently changing; however, this does not preclude it from developing a

distinct culture, a culture of peace or a sense of community. While there are

many sub-cultures at UPEACE, for example between programmes, or between

students, staff and faculty, there is also a unifying, overarching community

culture. This would be similar to other diverse communities, whose cultures

are also be dynamic and include subcultures, and are in constant contact with

other cultures. As Avruch (1998) notes, individuals in a population are

organized in many different groupings, and each group has the potential for

its own culture; thus no population can be described by a single culture, and

hence the need for the notion of subculture. This does not mean that we

cannot talk about the culture of a population; it means that we need to be

specific that this culture will be experienced differently and to a different

degree by individuals within that population. Thus while at UPEACE there are

many different subcultures, there are some factors that lead to a community

culture. Some institutional factors may contribute to a culture of peace, such

as policies, programmes, and practices, and through institutional memory,

may contribute to a certain level of cultural continuity. Furthermore, as the

UPEACE mission is to promote peace throughout the world, it could be

assumed that members who are drawn to the community are seeking to

cultivate global peace. UPEACE is a multicultural community whose members

are seeking professional development in order to promote international peace.

     Another remarkable factor about UPEACE is that it is at a very

interesting stage of its development as it marks its thirtieth anniversary.

Although it has existed for 30 years, it is only since 2001 that it has been

granting master’s degrees on a regular basis to a significantly sized student

body. Since 2000, the university has been growing at a very rapid rate, both in

the student population and in the programs offered. From 2003 to 2009, the

student enrollment increased from 22 to 164 students, and over the course of

the decade, the number of programmes offered increased from two to ten

(University for Peace, 2008). At this stage in its growth, it would be an ideal

point in time for the university to develop self-awareness, to better understand

its present situation, so that it can move forward to a clear vision of the

future. As UPEACE alumnus Rizzi Carlson (2009) notes, it is “a most

opportune moment for...the formal establishment of a culture of peace on

campus, as well as the transformational shift that will add even more meaning

to UPEACE’s 30th birthday.”

    A culture of peace at UPEACE is desirable in and of itself, and because

the students, staff and faculty have the opportunity to create at UPEACE what

they would like to see in the outside world. UPEACE, as a learning lab, can be

a center where we learn to create a culture of peace, and are better equipped

to foster one when we leave to our respective regions. Not only is this 16

desirable, it is critical for UPEACE to embody the culture of peace that it

seeks its learners to build in the outside world.

     The year 2010 signifies two important events for a culture of peace: the

final year of the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence

for the Children of the World and the 30th anniversary of the founding of the

UN-mandated University for Peace. It is a timely opportunity to study the

culture of peace at UPEACE. 

4. Statement of the Research Topic

4.1 Purpose    

     The purpose of this research is to explore the culture of peace at the

University for Peace, and to contribute to the larger field of community-level

and institutional-level culture of peace analysis. In investigating the culture of

peace at UPEACE, the strengths and weaknesses of the current culture of

peace at UPEACE can be determined, and recommendations can be made for

interventions based on a culture of peace analysis in order to strengthen the

culture of peace. With respect to the strengths that are found, they can be

further supported and also shared with other communities so that their

culture of peace may become stronger as well. Weaknesses that are found can

also be addressed and areas which are weaker can be improved upon. This

research will also contribute to the field of local culture of peace assessment,

as this is a new field. The audiences that will profit are the UPEACE

community, as well as any community or institution that is seeking to assess

its progress towards cultivating a culture of peace. 

4.2 Statement of the Problem

The problem that this research is addressing is that while a culture of

peace may exist at the University for Peace, we do not know to what extent it

exists because it has not yet been studied. In order to progress towards a

culture of peace, we need to know the current status of the culture of peace to

move forward in a holistic, coherent, intentional way.

4.3 Research questions    

    To accomplish the purposes of this research, I seek to answer the following

central questions:

• Is there a culture of peace at UPEACE?

• What are students' experiences of a culture of peace at UPEACE?

• What policies, practices and behaviors contribute to cultivating a

culture of peace at UPEACE? 

• What policies, practices and behaviors are detrimental to the culture

of peace at UPEACE?

• How can we assess or measure the culture of peace at UPEACE?

5. Research Methodologies and Assumptions

The research methods used to answer these questions are summarized

as follows:

1. Culture of Peace Framework and Indicator working group

2. Questionnaire (qualitative and quantitative data)

3. Presentation/Feedback session

To answer these questions, first I engaged in a literature review, and

compiled a conceptual framework for a culture of peace to begin my study. I

then held a working group in the UPEACE community on the culture of peace

framework and indicators. After this, I designed a comprehensive qualitative

and quantitative survey to gauge students' experiences of a culture of peace

at UPEACE. Then I conducted a presentation/feedback session with the

members of the community to present the preliminary results and to receive

feedback from the community as to what these results mean and the process

as a whole. Simultaneously, I analysed relevant UPEACE documents and

policies, such as the Student Bill of Rights and the Non-Discrimination Policy.

5.1 The Researcher’s Role

As I am a member of the UPEACE community, and thus know personally

most participants, and my role as a community member could compromise my

objectivity. However, I address this by making clear my conscious partiality

from the outset, which Creswell (2009) says is a technique to clarify the bias

of the researcher, and which creates a more open and honest narrative. I also

feel that my role as a UPEACE student will increase my effectiveness as a 18

researcher because I am familiar with the community and its culture. My role

as community member/researcher is also consistent with Adams' (2009)

recommendations for culture of peace assessment, that the assessment should

come from within the community and be conducted by community members

rather than outsiders.

5.2 Worldviews 

     The worldviews that are informing my research are a combination of

constructivism, pragmatism, and participatory action. Pragmatism arises out

of actions, situations and consequences rather than conditions, and is problem

focused, thus using all available tools to analyze the problem (Creswell, 2009).

The pragmatic worldview is conducive to the mixed methods approach that I

will be using. The participatory action world view is in line with the nature of

this research, as I tried to involve community members in each step to explore

the culture of peace at UPEACE. The participatory action world view is also

compatible with culture of peace assessment principles (Adams, 2009; see

Literature Review).

5.3 Data collection   

      In order to explore the culture of peace at UPEACE, I used a mixed

methods approach, applying both quantitative and qualitative data collection

and analysis.  The participants in this study are current UPEACE community

members, with a primary focus on students through the questionnaire, and

inclusion of staff and faculty in the working group and feedback session.

     I began with a two-hour working group to look at the culture of peace

framework and collectively develop indicators for the UPEACE environment.

Participation of community members in the development of indicators ensures

that the culture of peace assessment reflects the campus community.  The

indicators were then used to develop the questionnaire questions.

     Following the indicator working group, I developed a questionnaire to

assess students’ experiences of a culture of peace. Through the questionnaire

I accumulated quantitative data, using a Likert scale (for example, strongly

agree/strongly disagree statements), several yes/no questions, as well as

qualitative data, through open-ended comment boxes at the end of each

section.

     Following the questionnaire collection, I presented the preliminary

results at a gathering of students, staff, and faculty (called a "brown bag" in

UPEACE parlance; see Chapter 10).

5.4 Sampling

For the working group, I used convenience sampling, which was most

appropriate here, as participants contributed up several hours of their time. I

compensated participants by providing coffee, tea, snacks so as to encourage

participation. For the questionnaire I used voluntary response sampling, as I

sent the survey to the entire student body, and participants had the choice to

participate. For the presentation and feedback session, I again used

convenience sampling, based on community members who were available,

able and willing to attend the session.

5.5 Data analysis

     I used Survey Monkey to analyze the quantitative data, which allowed

me to get an overall picture of how community members view the culture of

peace at UPEACE. For the qualitative data, which will provide greater detail

about the culture of peace at UPEACE, I coded the data by clustering by

themes in my analysis.     

5.6 Assumptions, Ethical Issues and Constraints

      A key assumption to this project is that cultivating a culture of peace is

desirable to the UPEACE community. This is based on the idea that all

students, staff, and faculty have chosen to work and/or study at this institution

which bears "peace" in its name, which has a mandate to support world peace,

and which is affiliated with the United Nations.

     Another key assumption is that there is some degree of continuity with

the community composition over time. While the student body changes year to

year, and certainly has a different culture every year, I am assuming that

there are some characteristics that will be similar from one population to the

next. For example, the student body is always highly diverse, coming from an

ever-increasing number of countries and cultures as the student body grows.

For these reasons, I assume that while the student body changes overall,

students are consistently culturally diverse and have an interest in peace.20

I assumed that respondents were familiar with the concepts in the

questionnaire, and it was up to the respondents to interpret the terms, and

thus I did not provide definitions of terms used in the questionnaire. I thought

it was important for respondents to identify with the terms as they understood

them. However, this may affect the results, as what one term (for example,

"discrimination") means to one person might mean something else to another,

particularly of a different cultural-linguistic background. However, as all

participants are master’s degree candidates in the field of peace and conflict

studies, I assumed that they were familiar with these terms.

      In order to ensure ethical treatment of all participants, I clearly

communicated the goals and objectives of the research in the working group,

questionnaire, and presentation. I asked participants for their consent, and

guarantee anonymity and confidentiality. Participants had the opportunity to

withdraw at any time.  I also gained approval to conduct this research from

the Vice-Rector. 

   A constraint of this survey was its focus on the student population.

While the students make up the largest percentage of the UPEACE

community, they are the component of the community which changes the

most. The staff and faculty are the more consistent, stable part of the

population. Due to time limitations, as well to the limitation of length of this

research project, I chose to focus on students, although staff and faculty

contributed to the working group and feedback session. Ideally, in future

culture of peace assessment projects, all community members should be

included. This will be explored in greater detail in the recommendations

section (Chapter 12).

    

6. Literature Review

In order to study the culture of peace at the University for Peace

(UPEACE), I have identified four main areas for theoretical research:

frameworks for a culture of peace, culture of peace indicators and

assessment, UPEACE-related documents, and relevant independent research

projects written on UPEACE by alumni relating to a culture of peace.

6.1 Culture of Peace Conceptual Frameworks    

    A number of different frameworks have been developed to conceptualize a

culture of peace. For this research, I have identified three key models for

investigation: UNESCO (1999), the flower model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002), and

the Integral Model of Peace Education (2004).

While these frameworks provide useful guidelines for a culture of peace,

it is important to note that there is not a singular concept of culture of peace.

Groff and Smoker (1996) discuss the existence of different definitions for

"culture" and "peace", noting that definitions can be narrow or broad for both

terms. These terms are inherently ambiguous and can be interpreted in many

different ways, ranging from a narrow definition focusing on the arts, to

broader definitions that include all socially learned behavior, and hidden

elements such as values and underlying assumptions (Groff and Smoker,

1996). 

     As such, the concept of a “culture of peace” may have different

meanings across cultures. Brenes (2004) notes that the values and principles

of a culture of peace "can be expressed in diverse ways in different cultures"

(79). According to Wessells (1994), "it would be culturally insensitive to

prescribe an exact meaning of 'culture of peace'" (6). As there is not a singular

definition for culture, nor a single definition of peace, there is not a singular

concept for a culture of peace, which should have flexibility for cultural

interpretation.

These issues are particularly relevant with respect to the UPEACE

community, which has a very high level of cultural diversity, and requires the

concept of "culture of peace" at UPEACE to have room for cultural plurality.

For this reason, the UPEACE community was consulted before deciding upon

the culture of peace framework and indicators used in this study, which are

elaborated in Chapter 7. 

The following models provide frameworks for conceptualizing a culture

of peace.

6.1.1 UNESCO Framework

According to the UN Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture

of Peace, a culture of peace is:

"a set of values, attitudes, traditions, and modes of behaviour and

ways of life based on:22

a) Respect for life, ending of violence and promotion and practice

of non-violence through education, dialogue and cooperation;

b) Full respect for the principles of sovereignty, territorial

integrity and political independence of States and non-intervention

in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of

any State, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations

and international law;

c) Full respect for and promotion of all human rights and

fundamental freedoms;

d) Commitment to peaceful settlement of conflicts;

e) Efforts to meet the developmental and environmental needs of

present and future generations;

f) Respect for and promotion of the right to development;

g) Respect for and promotion of equal rights and opportunities for

women and men;

h) Respect for and promotion of the right of everyone to freedom

of expression, opinion and information;

i) Adherence to the principles of freedom, justice, democracy,

tolerance, solidarity, cooperation, pluralism, cultural diversity,

dialogue, and understanding at all levels of society and among

nations;

and fostered by an enabling national and international

environment conducive to peace" (A/RES/53/243, Art. 1, 1999). 

From this definition, the UN General Assembly elaborated the

programme of action, which includes the eight areas of education, sustainable

social and economic development, human rights, gender equality, democratic

participation, participatory communication and the free flow of information,

advancing understanding, tolerance and solidarity, and international peace

and security (A/RES/53/243, 1999). As UNESCO was named the lead agency

for promoting the culture of peace, this framework is henceforth referred to

as the UNESCO model throughout this paper.

     The UNESCO model is perhaps the most widely-known framework for a

culture of peace, as it is disseminated by the UN. The framework is

comprehensive in its breadth, international in its scope. An important addition

to this model is the area of participatory communication and the free flow of

information, which is not explicitly found in the other models.

6.1.2 Flower model

  Figure 1: Flower Model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002)

 The holistic flower-shaped culture of peace model developed by Toh and

Cawagas (2002) has "educating for a culture of peace" at the center, and six

petals for: 1) dismantling the culture of war; 2) promoting human rights and

responsibilities; 3) living with justice and compassion; 4) building cultural

respect, reconciliation and solidarity; 5) living in harmony with the earth, and

6) cultivating inner peace.

      This model offers several notable contributions. First is the area of

dismantling a culture of war, which most closely corresponds to promoting

international peace and security in the UNESCO model. Ideally, in a culture of

peace, international security would be equated with total disarmament. The

flower model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002) goes farther by explaining that real

international peace and security will require dismantling the culture of war,

ranging from disarmament at an international level, to nonviolent conflict

resolution at micro levels, such as in communities and schools, as well as

promoting attitudes and values of non-violence. This petal includes

disarmament education.

     Secondly, the idea of "living in harmony with the earth" correlates to

"sustainable social and economic development," but goes deeper by 24

highlighting the harmonious relationship with the environment. The word

"development" has very different connotations and definitions, and the

growth-centered approach to development is arguably the source of much

environmental degradation. While these two themes imply similar ideas, the

flower model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002) emphasizes the need to live in a way

that is not only sustainable, but in union with the natural world.

Finally, the inclusion of inner peace as a component to a culture of

peace is an important addition of this model. The petal of inner peace is not in

the UNESCO framework, and is a notable omission. The UNESCO framework

touches on interpersonal relations, between people, but not intrapersonal

relations, within one’s self.

6.1.3 Integral Model of Peace Education

    Figure 2: Integral Model of Peace Education (Brenes, 2004: 83)

Another model for a culture of peace is the Integral Model of Peace

Education (IMPE; henceforth referred to as “the Integral model”), which was

developed by the University for Peace and Central American governments

during the first phase of the Culture of Peace and Democracy Program, from

1994 to 1996 (Brenes, 2004). The Integral Model is a mandala-shaped, person-

centered framework, which incorporates the contexts of peace with oneself,

with others, and with Nature, at ethical, mental, emotional and action levels

(Brenes, 2004). This model "considers 'peace' as a state of integrity, security,

balance and harmony" (Brenes, 2004: 83), and essentially considers the

individual as the starting point for peace. According to this model, an

individual lives within three relational contexts: to the self, to others, and to

nature, and violence or peace can be expressed in each one. 

     This model also emphasizes the importance of personal or inner peace,

with respect to the body, heart and mind, and also includes more public

spheres, and explicitly includes political and social participation, democratic

participation, and a culture of democracy. Its approach to ecological peace is

similar to the flower model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002), although more explicit in

its definition, but explaining that peace with nature encompasses ecological

consciousness, biodiversity, and natural balance. It is interesting that this

model was actually developed at the University for Peace, indicating that

these themes are important to the university, and that the university is

contributing to a culture of peace by facilitating the development of such

theoretical models. Another interesting component of this model is that it

explicitly includes health, which is unique to this model compared to the other

models. 

The Integral model includes principles from the Universal Declaration of

Human Rights (1948) and the Earth Charter (1997), which takes an ecological

sustainability-focused approach to a culture of peace. According to the Earth

Charter preamble (1997), at this critical moment in Earth's history, "we must

join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for

nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace." The

Earth Charter contains sixteen principles, guided by the following themes:

respect and care for the community of life, ecological integrity, social and

economic justice, and democracy, nonviolence and peace. Each of the sixteen

themes is elaborated with more specific actions for how the principle

translates into action. In the Earth Charter, the principle of universal

26

responsibility goes beyond our relationship one another to include future

generations and the biosphere (Brenes, 2004). 

In Chapter 7, I will discuss how these conceptual frameworks informed

the development of the conceptual framework used for this study.

6.2 Culture of Peace Indicators and Assessment      

     While the area of culture of peace indicator research is quite new, a

number of indicator and assessment tools have been developed to assess a

culture of peace at local, national, and global levels. 

6.2.1 David Adams

David Adams, one of the scientists who developed the Seville Statement

(Adams, et. al, 1986), director of the UNESCO Culture of Peace program from

1992, and coordinator of the 2005 civil society World Report on a Culture of

Peace (Culture of Peace Foundation, 2005), writes extensively on assessing a

culture of peace in his book World Peace through the Town Hall (2009). This

book was highly influential in the development of this research project.

    Adams writes that

 "it is essential to measure progress toward a culture of peace at

the local level. But it should not be reduced to a simple formula, or

calling in experts to do the job. Instead, it needs to be a process of

regular assessment to know if the initiatives we take are

successful or not, what works and what doesn't work, and whether

we are making progress" (2009: 93). 

In measuring progress at the local level, the assessment, he elaborates, should

be "participatory and educational," involving the people who are concerned

with the various areas of a culture of peace (2009: 93). Adams states that "this

reflects the fundamental nature of culture itself which is a process that

involves the entire society and in which everyone is constantly learning and

teaching at the same time" (2009: 93). Thus the process of assessing a culture

of peace should be a learning experience for all participants.

     Furthermore, the assessment of progress towards a culture of peace

should not be used to "'prove' that one entity...is better than another" (Adams,

2009: 94), but rather should be used to compare the entity to itself year after

year, to see if progress is being made or not. 

     Beyond the measuring of progress, another useful outcome of will be of

new ideas that emerge for initiatives to address the weaknesses (Adams,

2009: 94). In the case of the present research, numerous ideas came out in

the student survey, which will be elaborated in Chapter 9.

     Adams also advocates for basing the assessment on the UNESCO

programme areas. He asserts that "this is the only way to attain universally

valid results in a subject which otherwise would be politicised and

controversial" (2009: 95).

     As the process is educational, “citizens involved in measuring a culture

of peace will come to learn what the culture of peace is all about" (Adams,

2009: 98).  Many members of the UPEACE community have heard of the

concept of a culture of peace prior to enrollment (to be elaborated Chapter 9),

and a culture of peace is discusses briefly in the foundation course, which is

mandatory for all masters students, and for which Toh (2007) is required

reading. While members have some initial knowledge and familiarity with the

concept, UPEACE provides great opportunity to learn more from one another

about a culture of peace.

     Adams (2009) also notes that while holistic culture of peace assessment

is a new area, each of the programme areas have been studied through

indicators. For example, another institution may develop indicators on

sustainability or human rights that could be modified for the UPEACE context,

or could serve as a guide. 

     It is also important, in looking at the different programme areas, to not

lose sight that the programme areas are interrelated parts of the broader

culture of peace. Adams writes that "in distinguishing the various programme

areas, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that they are all interrelated

to a general overall culture of peace (2009: 109). While exploring the culture

of peace, the programme areas are useful for analysis and the development of

projects and interventions; however it is important to retain an awareness that

they are interrelated parts of a holistic conception of a culture of peace.

6.2.2 Additional culture of peace indicators and assessment

tools

    At the local, institutional level, Cawagas and Toh (1987) developed a

checklist to assess the culture of peace at schools in the Philippines. While the 28

context for this research – UPEACE - is very different from the setting for their

questionnaire - primary and secondary schools in the Philippines - this

checklist helped to inform the structure of my questionnaire. Their

questionnaire uses the flower model as a conceptual framework, and

addresses knowledge, values, and practices, within the curriculum,

administrators, teachers, students and community. Candice Carter (2005) has

developed peace education standards for students, teachers, teacher

educators and administrators, grouped by knowledge, skills, and disposition.

While these standards are education-specific, can be used to explore the

education practices of the university. 

     Joseph de Rivera (2004) developed a template for assessing a culture of

peace at a national level, and has used this template to assess the culture of

peace the United States. De Rivera proposes using “objective” national

indicators such as GDP and crime rates, in addition to questionnaires that

measure attitudes, norms, and “emotional climate” to examine a national

culture of peace (2005: 2). To address the objectivity of national indicators

such as GDP, infant mortality, and crime, which I question, is beyond the

scope of this research. While these particular statistics are not relevant to the

local, institutional level, the areas that he looks at can be used as a guide for

areas that can be explored at UPEACE. The current research thus focused on

his second recommendation, the survey of attitudes, norms, and emotional

climate of the community in regards to a culture of peace, which I explored

through the student questionnaire.

     Robyn Webster (2007, 2008), UPEACE alumnus and Director of

Canadian Centres for Teaching Peace has developed a culture of peace

assessment tool/report card based on the principles of the UNESCO Culture of

Peace Program (see Appendix 2). This assessment tool served as a guide for

the working group on indicators (to be explored in Chapter 7). For her

master’s thesis at UPEACE (2007), Stewart conducted a thorough analysis of

correlates of peace cultures.

6.3 UPEACE-related documents

    Also relevant to this study are UPEACE documents, such as the founding

documents of the university (Presidential Commission for the University for

Peace, 1981) and including UN documents that relate to the university and to

a culture of peace. The UPEACE Charter includes its mission statement, as

declared in Article 2 under "Aims and Purposes," which is clearly in line with

contributing to a global culture of peace through higher education (UN

General Assembly, 1980).  Furthermore, in a provisional report by Reardon &

Diallo (1980), the authors asserted, "in that the human mentality is primarily

conditioned by culture, it is suggested that University for Peace add to its

integrity principles the concept of culture." These documents help to verify

that a culture of peace is important to the University for Peace and provide

support for the culture of the university to be examined in greater detail. The

aforementioned UN documents relating to the Decade (see Chapters 2 & 3)

further strengthen the importance of a culture of peace to UPEACE, its

mission, and the greater mandate of the United Nations, but do not reflect the

culture of peace at UPEACE. Another key document is the Student Handbook,

which includes policies such as the Student Bill of Rights and the Non-

Discrimination Policy (UPEACE, 2009).

6.4 UPEACE independent research projects

     In addition to Webster (2007), other UPEACE students have

incorporated the theme of culture of peace at into their independent research

projects, several of whom have examined the UPEACE context. Rizzi Carlson

(2009) carried out focus-group research on creating a peacebuilding centre on

campus, which would serve as an institutional centre for the culture of

peace. His research (2009) indicates that a centre for a culture of peace is

desired by the community. By examining the culture of peace at UPEACE, we

can better determine what aspects of the culture of peace need greater

support, perhaps through such a center or other institutional entities.  

     Wichman (2009) conducted a survey on inner peacefulness with

students, faculty and alumni, and found that 68% of participants perceive

individual peacefulness as important to the creation of cultures of peace.

Vaughn Chaverri (2007) explored health initiatives toward a culture of peace

at UPEACE, and made health-specific recommendations to increase a culture

of peace at UPEACE. 

     This research indicates the importance and desire of the UPEACE

community to have a culture of peace on campus. As these research efforts

reflect the UPEACE community from 2006-2009, they indicate a continued 30

interest within the community on a culture of peace, not only by the

researchers but by the participants, all of whom are community members.

While the community itself changes membership to a certain degree each

year, the interest in developing a campus culture of peace remains

continuous.

     Through this literature review, I found that little research has been done

in developing indicators for a culture of peace, and that the culture of peace at

UPEACE has not been measured or studied in detail. Through the present

research, I intend to contribute to the greater field by further developing

indicators for a culture of peace at a community or institutional level, and to

contribute to the UPEACE community by measuring the culture of peace so

that we can strengthen it.

7. Culture of Peace Conceptual Framework for this Study 

     With respect to the culture of peace framework for this study, I have

adapted and expanded the UNESCO model. I chose this model to adapt

because it is the most universally recognized, and has been used as a model

for other culture of peace assessments (Webster, 2008; Adams, 2009). Adams

(2009) also emphasised the relevance of the UNESCO model in attaining

universal valid results. However, I will also include inner peace practices in

my study, as I and others (Toh & Cawagas, 2002; Brenes, 2004) feel that this

is extremely important in the cultivation of a culture of peace, and is an

omission of the UNESCO model. Toh notes that “there is a growing consensus

that the inner dimensions and sources of peaceful values and practices should

not be ignored” (2007: 12). With respect to the sustainable development

program area, I will focus on the environmental practices and policies of the

university, incorporating the ecological emphasis of the flower (Toh &

Cawagas, 2002), and Integral (Brenes, 2004) models.

     Another area of the UNESCO framework requiring adaptation is

international peace and security. For most communities and institutions, the

area of international peace and security might not apply directly. However, to

UPEACE, it does, as the mission of UPEACE aims to provide "humanity" with

an institution of higher education and to "lessen obstacles and threats to

world peace and progress" (UN General Assembly, A/RES/35/55, 1980). Thus

rather than omit this category in its entirety, I chose to keep it and add an

additional element of "local peace and security," focusing on campus, but

including El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon, where most community members live.

Thus while the UNESCO framework is the primary source used to inform my

study, ultimately the framework is a unique combination of the UNESCO

framework and others to provide a holistic approach to analysis. 

  For this study, a culture of peace will be assessed in the following areas:

1. Education

2. Environmental sustainability

3. Human rights

4. Democratic participation

5. Equality between men and women

6. Understanding, tolerance and solidarity

7. Participatory communication and the free flow of information and

knowledge

8. International peace and security

9. Local peace and security (i.e. campus, El Rodeo, Ciudad Colon)

10. Inner peace

Below I will examine each of these areas in more detail.

7.1 Education

According to the UNESCO framework, a culture of peace through

education entails “revising the educational curricula to promote qualitative

values, attitudes and behaviours of a culture of peace, including peaceful

conflict-resolution, dialogue, consensus-building and active non-violence”

(UNESCO, 2010). This educational approach should also encompass the other

seven programme areas. Although UNESCO does not refer to this as “peace

education,” Adams (2009), who has been a key figure in the development of

the UN Culture of Peace initiatives, uses “peace education” to describe the

education section in his chapter on Assessing Progress Towards a Culture of

Peace at the Local Level (106).

The field of peace education has been deeply influenced by the work of

Brazilian pedagogue and educator Paolo Freire. According to Freire (1970),

key elements of the educational process are reforming the student-teacher

relationship to be horizontal and equal; using dialogue as a pedagogical tool;

valuing the knowledge and experience that students bring to the classroom; 32

and praxis, or continuous engagement with theory and practice. These

elements are elements are crucial to peace education, and as such, are crucial

to education for a culture of peace.

In referring to the UNESCO report to the UN Secretary General in 2000,

Adams writes:

It also proposes that the culture of peace should be modeled in the

policies and practices of the classroom, the school, and other

learning environments, providing opportunities for all members of

the school community to participate in democratic decision

making and governance processes (2009: 107).

Thus, when learning about peace, it is important for the policies and

classroom practices of UPEACE to reflect the values of a culture of peace.

According to Cawagas (2007), educating for a culture of peace requires

four crucial pedagogical principles: holism, or viewing multiple dimensions of

conflict and violence with a holistic vision; values formation, or explicitly

teaching for preferred values such as compassion, justice, equality and

nonviolence; dialogue, which entails a more horizontal teacher-learner

relationship as both educate and learn from one another; and critical

empowerment, through which learners develop critical consciousness and

seek to take transformative action. Cawagas emphasizes values development

for a culture of peace, and dialogue as a pedagogical tool.

Notably, the UN Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace

(A/RES/53/243, 1999) directly refers to the University for Peace in the

education section, in which it calls to:

Expand initiatives to promote a culture of peace undertaken by

institutions of higher education in various parts of the world,

including the United Nations University, the University for Peace,

and the project for twinning universities and the United Nations

Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Chairs

Programme (6).

This illustrates UPEACE’s direct call from the UN to expand its efforts

towards a culture of peace through education.

While education itself is a programme area, education for a culture of

peace will include educating for all other programme areas.

7.2 Environmental sustainability

According to UNESCO (2010), sustainable economic and social

development includes “reducing economic and social inequalities, by

eradicating poverty and by assuring sustainable food security, social justice,

durable solutions to debt problems, empowerment of women, special

measures for groups with special needs, environmental sustainability...”

However, issues of social inequality, poverty, social justice, and special

measures for groups with special needs can be incorporated into the human

rights section, and empowerment of women in the equality, section. Therefore

I chose to focus this section explicitly on environmental sustainability, as I felt

other aspects of social and economic development were captured by other

areas. Furthermore, the flower model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002) and Integral

Model of Peace Education (Brenes, 2004) also focus more explicitly on

environmental sustainability.

Environmental sustainability is extremely important to a culture of

peace, and is integrally linked to all other aspects of a culture of peace. Toh

(2006) analyzes how education for sustainability relates to education for a

culture of peace by examining the role of sustainability in each of the areas of

the flower model for conceptualizing a culture of peace (Toh & Cawagas,

2002). The current pace of environmental degradation is related to the culture

of war, as militarism and overconsumption lead to resource depletion and

inequitable distribution, and resulting in environmental destruction. The

relationships between environmental degradation and physical and structural

violence are complex and intertwined, and Wenden (2004) notes the links

between social and ecological peace. Thus environmental sustainability is a

key component of promoting a culture of peace.

7.3 Human Rights

According to UNESCO (2010), “human rights and a culture of peace are

complementary: whenever war and violence dominate, there is no possibility

to ensure human rights; at the same time, without human rights, in all their

dimensions, there can be no culture of peace.” The link between human rights

and a culture of peace is so imbedded that they cannot be separated one from

the other. All three culture of peace frameworks discussed above include a

human rights component. 34

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN General Assembly,

1948) is the most fundamental international human rights document, which

outlines basic rights of all human beings. The document states that the

“recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of

all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and

peace in the world” (UN General Assembly, 1948). Cawagas & Toh (2004)

discuss five major types of human rights: civil, political, economic, social and

cultural.

According to Brenes, fraternity is a key value necessary for human

rights, which entails “a recognition of the need to balance the universal

protection of each person, with each person’s consciousness of his/her

universal responsibility towards others, towards other living beings, and

towards the natural systems of the Earth” (2004: 81). Human rights

necessitate responsibility, and it is through a balance of exercising rights and

responsibilities that human rights are promoted.

Human rights, as universally valid principles to which all humans are

entitled, are inextricably part of a culture of peace.

7.4 Democratic participation

The UNESCO model and Integral Model both explicitly incorporate

democratic participation as being a component of a culture of peace. UNESCO

states that democratic principles, practices, and participation in all sectors of

society are “indispensable foundations for the achievement and maintenance

of peace and security” (2010). According to Brenes (2004: 85), “culture of

democracy refers to the critical and responsible participation of all citizens in

promoting the common good and security of all humans and the community of

nature.” Brenes goes on to say that as we do not live in isolation, “we need to

be able to participate critically and autonomously in the making of decisions

at all…levels” (2004: 85). Democratic participation is important for a culture

of peace so that all participants can be empowered to contribute to this

culture.

7.5 Equality between men and women

The UN General Assembly explained the importance of this programme

area to a culture of peace as follows:

“As recognized by the Fourth World Conference on Women

(Beijing 1995), there is an inextricable linkage of peace with

equality between women and men. Only this linkage of equality,

development and peace can replace the historical inequality

between men and women that has always characterized the

culture of war and violence” (A/53/370, 1998).

As inequality between men and women is a major component of the culture of

war, equality between men and women is a crucial part of a culture of peace.

Synott (2004: 27) writes that “the situation of women around the world

remains one of the most important challenges to the development of an

egalitarian society where relationships are based upon concepts of universal

human rights.” Synott also notes that domestic violence is represents the most

common form of violence in the world (2004). In order to promote a culture of

peace, promoting equality between men and women is absolutely necessary.

7.6. Understanding, tolerance and solidarity

“Advancing understanding, tolerance, and solidarity” is a program area

from the UNESCO framework, and these concepts are implicitly and explicitly

included in the Integral (Brenes, 2004) and flower (Toh & Cawagas, 2002)

models. UNESCO states that “to abolish war and violent conflicts we need to

transcend and overcome enemy images with understanding, tolerance and

solidarity among all peoples and cultures. Learning from our differences,

through dialogue and the exchange of information, is an enriching process”

(UNESCO, 2010).

Numerous United Nations documents note the importance of

understanding. The Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (UNESCO,

2001) asserts that “respect for the diversity of cultures, tolerance, dialogue

and cooperation, in a climate of mutual trust and understanding are best

guarantees of international peace and security.” Understanding is critical for

preventing intercultural conflict, and for promoting local and global cultures

of peace.

According to the UNESCO’s Declaration on Principles of Tolerance

(1995), tolerance is defined as

36

“…respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our

world's cultures, our forms of expression and ways of being human. It is

fostered by knowledge, openness, communication, and freedom of

thought, conscience and belief. Tolerance is harmony in difference. It is

not only a moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement.

Tolerance, the virtue that makes peace possible, contributes to the

replacement of the culture of war by a culture of peace.”

This document goes on to include solidarity as an integral part of

education for tolerance. UNESCO itself was founded on the principle of

solidarity, and its constitution states that “peace must therefore be founded, if

it is not to fail, upon the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind”

(UNESCO, 1945). Toh (2007) writes that, “in situations of unequal power

relations and

injustices, cultural groups that are already economically and politically

advantaged have a social

responsibility to be in solidarity with marginalized groups and communities”

(10). Here the emphasis is not solidarity within a group, but rather with other

groups, and specifically groups that are disadvantaged. The principles of

understanding, tolerance and solidarity are deeply intertwined and are

necessary components of a culture of peace.

7.7. Participatory communication and the free flow of information

and knowledge

Communication is crucial for peace, as miscommunication is so often a

source of conflict. When knowledge and information can flow freely,

communication is clearer, and misunderstanding is less likely to happen.

According to UNESCO, “freedom of information and sharing of knowledge and

information are indispensible for a culture of peace” (UNESCO, 2010).

Furthermore the free flow of information is directly linked to democratic

participation, as participants require knowledge and information in order to

make informed decisions, and also facilitates understanding.

7.8. International peace and security

International peace and security is the macro-level of a culture of peace.

In order to create long-lasting, global peace, it is necessary to address

international peace and security issues. In a culture of peace, security would

be achieved through dialogue and international understanding, rather than

through armed force. As Renner (2005) notes, “weapons do not necessarily

provide security” (5). Renner outlines a new security policy for a more secure

world, which must be preventative in nature, cross-cutting, integrative and

understanding of the root causes of conflicts (2005). It is important to note the

links between militarized security and structural injustices which occur when

national resources are diverted from meeting basic human needs to military

spending. As the global military complex is related to human rights violations,

gender inequalities, environmental degradation, disarmament is a critical

component of a culture of peace.

7.9. Local peace and security

This component to a culture of peace is similar to 7.8, but examines

security issues in a local context. Adams (2009) notes that international peace

and security does not generally apply to local contexts, and can be applied as

two separate programme areas: security (public safety) and solidarity with

other communities on an international level. In the UPEACE context, both

international and local peace are relevant to a culture of peace. For the

purposes of this research, local security will include campus security, local

security (including El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon), and conflict resolution on

campus.

7.10. Inner peace

Inner peace is the micro-level component of the culture of peace. While

not addressed in the UNESCO framework, this is a component of both the

flower (Toh & Cawagas, 2002) and Integral (Brenes, 2004) models. Nhat Hanh

(2003) calls on individuals to cultivate nonviolence by practicing mindfulness

in our daily lives so that we can transform not only ourselves, but our nations

and the world, thus illustrating the link between inner peace and international

peace. Toh (2007) explains that cultivating inner peace is important to

creating a culture of peace, but cautions against cultivating inner peace in a

self-centered way, without examining and continuing to work towards justice

for all. In the Integral Model (Brenes, 2003), there are three kinds of peace

with one’s self: peace with the body (bodily health); peace of heart 38

(satisfaction of psychological needs; and peace of mind (potential for self-

realization based on a consciousness of universal responsibility (84). As a

culture is made up of individuals, more peaceful individuals who are living

peaceful values and exhibiting peaceful behavior can help create more

peaceful societies. Inner peace is thus an integral component of promoting a

culture of peace.

This framework is a start for an initial exploration of the culture of peace

at UPEACE. As the concept of a culture of peace is dynamic, this framework

should be adapted over time to ensure its relevance and applicability to the

UPEACE community.

8. Working group on culture of peace framework and indicators

     As mentioned previously, community members participated in the

development of the framework and indicators in order to inform the definition

of a culture of peace for this diverse community, and to make the process of

culture of peace assessment as participatory as possible. An invitation to the

working group was sent out to the community email list, and thus all

community members were invited to attend and share input. Nine community

members - one faculty, one non-academic staff, and seven students - attended.

The above framework was presented to the working group, and the culture of

peace assessment tool developed by Webster (2008) was given to participants

to help guide the discussion.

Table 1 summarizes the group’s discussion.

Table 1: Summary of Culture of Peace Indicator Working Group

What is a culture of peace?

Complex – includes many different people, personalities, cultures, values

People comfortable to be themselves

Values and behaviors

Tolerance, understanding, agreement, equality, solidarity, participation

Conflicts resolved peacefully

Respectful communication

A way of life without conflict

A process

Peace of mind

Recognizing others' identities

Respect the rights of others

Education What educational standards exist?

Is there intercultural training?

What pedagogies are used?

What programs exist at the university? Are they important? Holistic?

Is there sharing between programs?

Is gender mainstreamed in all programs?

Is there informal education modeling in classroom and structure?

Number of theories studies/learned

Are the values taught consistent with behaviours?

What are the intentions of students post-graduation?

Skills indicators: Can students ____?

Are teachers trained?

Evaluation: students being evaluated; students evaluating their own programs; external evaluation

Is the students’ knowledge valued?

40

Participatory Communication

and the Free flow of information and

knowledge

Are there consistent procedural messages?

Look at communication at different levels - personal, interpersonal, between departments

What are attitudes and behaviors towards other programs (stereotypes)?

What is the language of instruction compared to the language of students, faculty and staff?

How is participation evaluated

Is it easy to meet with faculty

What publications exist?

What mechanisms exist for feedback/evaluation?

What are the communication channels (mediums)? (e.g., Town Hall, SFS, email, conferences; formal vs. informal)

Are the communication channels effective (what is the quality of the communication channels)?

Does the intended audience receive the message?

Does the intended audience receive the message in time?

Are there communication standards? If so, do standards incorporate multiculturalism?

Are there trainings for communications skills?

Are there informal discussion groups? Are there institutionally supported discussion groups?

Is there transparency?

What role do rumors play?

How to measure miscommunications (i.e., double-booking of rooms)?

Democratic participation

Universities (in general, as institutions) are not historically democratic

What is the impact of course evaluations?

Examine SFS, council - governing structures

Are participants aware of goals, objectives? Is their duty described?

Is there a consensus on guidelines for decision making?

What is decision-making at the institutional level? classroom level?

What are the processes for selection, election, appointment of representatives of different governing structures?

Understanding, tolerance, solidarity

What skills are required for understanding?

How well do students work in groups?

Linking understanding to communications – if you are able to communicate differences, you can promote deeper understanding

What is participation like at different events/activities (i.e. this workshop)?

What student initiatives exist for helping each other?

Do community members have an awareness or understanding of others?

How to measure social skills

How do you engage those less willing to talk in this discussion?

social skills? How does UPEACE support students in dealing

with culture shock?

42

Human Rights What are community members’ experiences of inequality, discrimination?

How can we measure the domination of cultural values (i.e. hugging)?

What are the policies about human rights (look at student handbook, non-discrimination policy)?

Are human addressed in your classes?

Is there a community consensus on human rights? on behaviours?

Use Universal Declaration of Human Rights Articles as basis for indicators

What mechanisms exist that promote human rights (e.g., Human Rights Center, Office for Diversity and Equality)

What are the processes or mechanisms for solutions to human rights issues?

Use “Measuring the Human Rights Temperature of Your School” as indicators (Shiman & Rudelius-Palmer, 1999)

Gender equality Why gender equality, and not other kinds of equality (e.g. ability, linguistic, cultural)?

Is gender equality ethnocentric? Generational?

Is equality the ideal term? What about equity?

Is gender-neutral language used?

Is gender mainstreamed at UPEACE?

Is there affirmative action in the enrollment process? Scholarships?

Are there maternity/paternity benefits for staff/faculty members?

Environmental Sustainability

What policies does the cafeteria have relating to environmental sustainability?

What are the campus policies for energy, paper, recycling?

What happens to the vegetables from the UPEACE garden?

What is the sustainability of student initiatives vs. institutional?

Is the university’s funding sustainable?

What is the sustainability of peace? Need for continuous improvement, progress

There was adequate time to discuss seven of the programme areas, as

the dialogue began with a broader discussion about the meaning of a culture

of peace, which resulted in the topics of international peace and security, local

peace and security, and inner peace not being discussed in the session. While

the topics were presented to the participants, participants chose the sequence

of discussion. The discussion generated concrete indicators (such as “What

pedagogies are used?”), and also generated further questions that need to be

elaborated, and may be beyond the scope of this paper (such as “What is the

sustainability of peace?”).

     One particular programme area that caused debate was the "equality

between men and women" category. Participants noted that many inequalities

exist other than gender, such as inequality experienced by those with physical

disabilities, or different linguistic groups, and questioned whether this

category should be expanded to include other types of equality. There was

also debate as to whether "equality" or "equity" was the desirable

term. Ultimately, the group did not reach a consensus, and I decided to

maintain the category to remain consistent with the UNESCO framework.

     One of the key findings of the working group was the difficulty in

developing indicators. Many of the culture of peace concepts are hard to

quantify, and much discussion centred around the idea of a culture of peace

and the conceptual framework. While this discussion was enriching and an

educational experience for all involved, it could have gone on endlessly, and in

fact the entire research project could have been about developing the

framework and definition for a culture of peace at UPEACE. Ultimately, I

decided to continue with the UNESCO adapted framework, for its wider

applicability and validity.

9. Questionnaire: Findings and analysis

     Following the working group, I developed a questionnaire entitled

"Culture of Peace at UPEACE" and posted it on Surveymonkey.com. All

questions are included in the current chapter. Prior to releasing the

questionnaire, I pilot tested the survey with 6 students from different regions,

who provided feedback as to the clarity, readability, and cultural sensitivity of

the survey which was incorporated into the final draft of the survey. The

UNESCO culture of peace definition, as well as the work of Toh and Cawagas 44

(1987), Carter (2005) and Webster (2008) were used to guide the development

of questions, and thus the questions primarily addressed knowledge, skills,

values, attitudes and behaviours with respect to the ten areas.

     The survey consisted of 110 questions relating to the culture of peace

framework described in Chapter 7. Most of the questions, with the exception

of three, were closed-ended quantitative, used a 5-point Likert scale of

Strongly disagree/Strongly agree or Never/Always, and several

Yes/No/Undecided questions. Each section also included a comment box which

stated "Please add any additional comment about any aspect of this section."

Thus participants were welcome, though not required, to give qualitative

information and explain their answers to each section. 

     The survey link was sent via individual email to 209 students from the

2009-2010 academic year. I chose this method rather than send the email via

the community email list, as many students either disregard email to this list

or opt not to receive it. Later I used the community email list to send reminder

emails about the survey deadline. The survey was open for a period of 2

weeks, from March 23 to April 9, 2010. This overlapped with the UPEACE

spring break, which I hoped would result in more surveys completed, as

students would have more time to complete it than during the intensive 3-

week class periods. In addition to all students enrolled in classes at the time of

administering the survey, I included the American University Natural

Resources and Sustainable Development (AU/NRSD) students who had left in

November, the new AU/NRSD who arrived in January, as well as the Asian

Leaders Program (ALP) students who attended UPEACE from August 2009

through February 2010. In this way, I was able to reach all students who were

present during the 2009-2010 academic year, which is the focus of this

project.

    I provided an additional incentive to complete the survey through a

raffle. Each student who completed the survey had the opportunity to follow a

link to enter their name into the raffle, the prize for which was dinner for two

at a popular local restaurant, Che's. Surprisingly, only 29 respondents entered

the raffle. The 29 names were placed in a hat and a neutral third party drew

the winning name. The prize was delivered at the end of May.

     Of 209 students, 134 completed the survey, which is 64% of the 2009-

2010 student population. This is a significant number, and indicates the

interest in and importance of this topic to the community. Of the 134 students

who started the survey, 99 (73.9%) completed the survey in its entirety. This

is most likely due to the length of the survey. While students were told in the

initial email that the survey would take approximately 15-20 minutes to

complete, it is possible that it took longer for some, and this may have caused

incomplete surveys.

It is important to note the sheer quantity of data, both quantitative and

qualitative, that participants contributed to this survey. Due to the breadth of

the information, the analysis will include highlights, rather than analysing

each individual question. Similarly, with the qualitative information, highlights

will be discussed.

     In discussing the survey, I will refer to the number of participants who

responded with a particular answer or combination of answers, followed by

the percentage. In general, when I say “participants agreed,” this will mean I

have added the numbers and percentages for the responses “agree” and

“strongly agree,” unless otherwise stated. Likewise, when I say “participants

disagreed,” this will mean I have added the numbers and percentages for the

responses “disagree” and “strongly disagree.” The terms “respondent,”

“participant,” and “student” are used interchangeably.

9.1 Personal information for statistical purposes

    The first section involved three questions about demographics:

program, gender, and region. These questions were asked for the purposes of

cross-tabulation so that I could make a more thorough analysis if needed.

However, after an initial cross-tabulation analysis, I found that there were no

noticeable anomalies, and thus this analysis will focus on the overall university

profile, rather than by gender, programme, or region. This data was not used

to identify participants individually in any way.

46

    Figure 3: Participants by Programme

These numbers correlate proportionally to the number of students in

programs, with the largest proportion of students in International Peace

Studies and Natural Resources and Sustainable Development.

Figure 4: Participants by region

Figure 4: Participants by region

Again, these numbers correspond to the proportions of the overall student

population, with the largest proportions of students from Asia and North

America, which partially relates to the joint degree programmes with

American University and the Asian Leaders Programme.

48

Figure 5: Participants by Gender

According to the Department of Academic Administration (Ortiz, 2010), there

were 114 females enrolled at UPEACE during the 2009-2010 year, which is

57% of the total population. This corresponds directly to the proportion of

females who responded to this questionnaire, also 57%. I was unable to obtain

any additional data from UPEACE on population statistics.

9.2 A Culture of Peace through Education

This section consisted of two main question blocks about teaching

methods and students’ programmes, and two comment boxes for qualitative

responses.

Table 2: Teaching Methods

To what extent are the following teaching methods used in your program? Please choose one

response per line.

Answer Options Never

Rarely

(few

days)

Sometim

es

Usually

(most

days)

Always

(everyda

y)

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

Lecture 0 3 19 54 42 0 118

Discussion 0 0 15 54 49 0 118

Group activities 2 17 55 36 7 0 117

Reflective exercises 4 46 42 16 4 5 117

Student-led activities 10 35 38 23 7 0 113

Additional Comments 24

answered question 119

skipped question 15

As shown in Table 2, 87% of respondents claim that discussion is usually

or always used as a teaching method, and 81% claim that lecture is usually or

always used. The teaching method never or rarely used is “reflective

exercises” according to 42%.

In the qualitative section, 24 participants wrote comments. Sixteen

respondents described the teaching methodologies used in their classes, and 8

students stated a combination of lecture, discussion and group activities as

being most common. In the qualitative data, one participant noted too much

discussion and too little instructor-led activity, while one participant noted the

opposite (too much lecture and too little discussion). One participant wrote

“Finding the balance between lecture, discussion, and student-led activities is

a work in progress.” This statement aptly captures the challenge in balancing

these pedagogies. Three participants also noted how the pedagogies varied

greatly from class to class, with one student noting that “it’s hard to answer

because it is very different from one class to another.”

Three students also wrote about field trips; one student noted that field

trips were part of the methodology in their program; two students noted that

field trips were not a part of the methodology of their program. Field trips or

50

field work were not included as a methodology, and this is an omission of this

questionnaire. Field work or study is an important element in peace

education pedagogy, in the process of praxis, which is moving between theory

and reality (Freire, 1970). In future surveys, field trips should be included in

such a survey as a pedagogical practice for peace education.

The UNESCO framework does not explicitly state what methodologies

should be used in a culture of peace. However, as discussed in Chapter 7, a

culture of peace through education would require the implementation of the

values and principles that are being taught, such as nonviolence, equality, and

democratic participation. Teaching in a culture of peace also means

developing equality between the professor and students through a process of

dialogue (Freire, 1970; Cawagas, 2007). A lecture, while at times a necessary

part of education, is the type of methodology with the least amount of student

input, whereas discussion and group activities would allow for more space for

dialogue. For education in a culture of peace, more dialogic activities, such as

group work, reflective exercises and student-led activities should be

integrated.

Ultimately, the variability between classes and professors made it difficult to answer

these questions, as some participants noted. There appears to be significant variability

from class to class and professor to professor, and students have varying opinions as to

whether there is too much lecturing and not enough discussion or vice versa. Thus it is

hard to make a conclusion about the overall teaching methods used at the university.

Table 3: Programmes at UPEACE

How do you feel about the following statements in regards to your program at UPEACE?

Please choose one response for each statement

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

The relationship between

teacher and students is equal

in my program.

3 23 26 51 8 6 117

We develop knowledge about

peacebuilding in my program.4 24 22 58 9 1 118

We develop skills for

peacebuilding in my program.4 30 32 44 6 2 118

The amount of work (reading,

assignments, etc.) assigned in

my program is reasonable.

1 17 17 77 5 1 118

Different viewpoints (cultural,

political, etc.) are represented

in the assigned readings for

my program.

2 14 21 68 10 2 117

There is a diversity of

viewpoints (cultural, political,

etc.) among the professors

who teach in my program.

4 10 20 66 16 1 117

Different viewpoints are

respected in my program.1 8 14 63 30 1 117

Students' knowledge is

respected in my program by

other students.

1 7 11 66 31 1 117

Students' knowledge is

respected in my program by

professors.

2 4 14 62 31 2 115

The way I am evaluated (i.e.,

grades, assignments,

participation) is fair.

9 18 24 54 9 4 118

Overall, I am satisfied with my

academic program at

UPEACE.

8 14 18 57 19 2 118

Additional Comments 41

answered question 119

skipped question 15

    As shown in Table 3, 57% of participants agreed that they developed

knowledge about peacebuilding in their programs, 79% agreed that different

viewpoints are respected, 83% agreed that students’ knowledge is respected

by other students, and 81% agreed that students’ knowledge is respected by

professors. Regarding the student-teacher relationship, 50% agreed that the

relationship is equal. The statement with the most disagreement was “We

develop skills for peacebuilding in my programme,” to which 29% of

participants disagreed.

52

In the qualitative data, 41participants wrote comments. Six participants

commented that the literature and views presented are too Western-centric.

One participant commented that “the most of the literature introduced by the

professor is US and European-centric”. One participant commented that their

programme lacked a Latin American perspective in the literature, and one

participant commented that their programme lacked an Asian perspective in

the lectures and readings.

With respect to different viewpoints, three students wrote comments

that they were absent in their programmes, while one student wrote that they

were not respected. One student commented “I’ve never heard too many

conflicting viewpoints in my program (outside the confines of debates).” One

student wrote “I miss really challenging views from the other side, not only

expressed by teachers coming from the northern part of the world or that type

of education.” Regarding disrespect, one student wrote, “the classmates

within our programme respect each others’ differing viewpoints, but we have

had a number of disrespectful incidents involving other UPEACE students

from other programmes invited into our class session.”

With respect to the student-teacher relationship, one participant wrote

that “I think in general the nature of student teacher dynamics makes it

slightly uneven.” In the qualitative data, 22% of participants disagreed that

the relationship between students and teachers is equal. However, one of the

key principles of peace education, based on the pedagogy of Freire (1970) is

the development of a horizontal student-teacher relationship. Furthermore,

Freire asserts that the way oppression seems inevitable is one of the ways that

oppression is perpetuated, saying that “until they [the oppressed] concretely

discover their oppressor, and in turn their own consciousness, they nearly

always express fatalistic attitudes towards their situation” (1970: 61). While

an unequal, hierarchical relationship may be more prevalent and hence seem

natural, the process of promoting a culture of peace involves transforming

hierarchical, unequal, and oppressive relationships. That an unequal

relationship seems “natural” is no justification for its existence.

With respect to grading and evaluation, 14 students wrote comments.

Seven participants commented that the evaluation is subjective. Three

participants wrote that they wanted more feedback, rather than just a

numerical mark. One of these participants wrote that “it makes me sad to

think about all the work I put into my papers and do not receive constructive

criticism so that I may improve my writing style and arguments.” Two

participants wrote that it is too easy to get good grades. One specifically said

“Grading is not serious here – always will pass, doesn’t really mean anything.”

With respect to of participation, one participant wrote

“I actually discovered that Asian students tend not to participate

because in their culture this would mean to question the hierarchy

(and a student is not supposed to question a professor. I am not

sure if professors are aware of that and as a consequence the

discussions are lead by North American students.”

While there is little literature on educational evaluation in a culture of

peace, presumably the evaluation process would involve some exchange of

ideas (verbal or written) between the teacher and learner. Incorporating more

feedback, in a more dialogic manner, would allow students to learn more and

be more empowered through the evaluation process (Freire, 1970; Cawagas,

2007). While the system of numerical grades and corresponds to the banking

system of education (Freire, 1970), a system of evaluation that is consistent

with culture of peace values still needs to be developed. UPEACE should

develop a more transparent, cohesive system of grading, so that students

understand how they are being marked. This is especially important with

respect to the participation marks, which often make up large percentages of

the student’s overall mark for a course.

The issue of participation evaluation is of concern, as the only guideline

for participation in the student handbook is “Students who fail to attend more

than 20% of the class will not be approved to complete the class” (University

for Peace, 2009: 29). There are no other policies on how participation is

evaluated, and it is unclear as to whether cultural sensitivities are taking in

consideration during participation evaluation.

Through providing ten masters programmes relating to peace, UPEACE

is advancing a culture of peace through education. However, in order to

progress towards a culture of peace, the principles of a culture of peace, such

as equality, diversity, and cultural respect need to be further integrated into

these programmes. It should be noted that the following nine sections all

contain questions about knowledge and learning, and thus all of the remaining

54

sections also include an educational element, as education is the primary goal

of the institution, and a fundamental aspect of a culture of peace.

    

9.2 Environmental sustainability

Table 4: Environmental Sustainability

What do you think about the following statements about environmental sustainability at

UPEACE? Please choose one response for each statement.

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

In my program, we learn

about environmental

sustainability.

11 35 18 29 24 0 117

In my experience, UPEACE

community members behave

in ways that are

environmentally responsible.

8 41 36 25 3 2 115

At UPEACE, I have developed

skills for sustainable living.12 38 26 33 7 0 116

UPEACE is an

environmentally-friendly

institution.

13 28 42 30 2 1 116

Comments 36

answered question 117

skipped question 17

  As shown in Table 4, 45% of participants agreed that in their program,

they learn about environmental sustainability, while 39% disagreed with this

statement. Forty-two percent (42%) of participants disagreed with the

statements "In my experience, UPEACE community members behave in ways

that are environmentally responsible," and 43% disagreed with "at UPEACE, I

have developed skills for sustainable living." With respect to the statement

"UPEACE is an environmentally friendly institution," results were very mixed,

with 35% disagree, 36% neither agree nor disagree, and 28% agree, and 1%

don't know/undecided. 

Four out of ten masters programmes at UPEACE relate to the

environment or sustainable development (Environment, Security and Peace;

Natural Resources and Peace; Natural Resources and Sustainable

Development; and Responsible Management and Sustainable Development),

and in this survey, 37% of respondents belong to one of these four programs.

The number of students who said they learn about sustainability in their

programmes is 8% greater than the number of students in these programmes.

While my analysis does not include a programme-by-programme breakdown,

this indicates that the percentage of students who learn about environmental

sustainability is greater than the number of students in the aforementioned

programmes.

     In the qualitative section, 36 participants wrote responses. Fifteen

students wrote about specific unsustainable environmental practices at

UPEACE, such as: paper cups (which, since this survey, have been replaced by

mugs in the cafeteria and removed from most water coolers); single-use items

in the cafeteria; the use of bottled, filtered water in the water coolers; too

many photocopies; transport inefficiencies resulting in unnecessary waste; use

of air conditioning in the Council Room, and energy waste overall. Four

participants discussed the contradiction between the academic theory that is

being taught and daily practice at the university. One student wrote, “What

UPEACE is teaching us and what UPEACE is doing has so much gap, and I

always felt that the theory and reality is quite different.” One participant

wrote, “subjects are taught but not lived up to here. In this way we are just

again educated to tolerate hypocrisy.” Four participants noted that UPEACE

was more environmentally friendly than other institutions. One participant

wrote, “UPEACE can be a lot more environmentally friendly, but as far as

institutions go, it’s doing pretty well.” One respondent noted the need to

clarify the term “environmental sustainability,” which could have many

definitions.

This section reflects a need for improvement with respect to

environmental sustainability at UPEACE. While the subject of environmental

sustainability is studied in many programmes, these theories are not 56

integrated into the practices of the university or community members. It was

very helpful that participants elucidated specific practices where the

university could make progress. By mainstreaming the principles of

environmental sustainability, such as those elaborated in the Earth Charter

(1997), into the university’s policies and practices, the culture of peace would

be enhanced by aligning academic theory with daily life.

    

9.4 Human rights

Table 5: Human Rights

What do you think about the following statements regarding human rights at UPEACE?

Please choose one response for each statement.

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagree

Disagre

e

Neither

agree nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

I am familiar with the

Universal Declaration of

Human Rights.

0 6 10 66 31 0 113

Human rights are culturally

relative.12 16 22 47 13 3 113

In my program, we learn

about human rights.0 15 16 52 30 0 113

UPEACE community

members promote the human

rights of others.

2 5 33 52 13 8 113

UPEACE community

members promote their own

human rights.

0 6 26 61 13 7 113

UPEACE community

members respect the human

rights of others.

1 4 24 64 17 3 113

Human rights are valued at

UPEACE.1 3 16 68 22 2 112

In my program, we develop

skills to promote human

rights.

2 15 28 51 14 1 111

I have experienced

discrimination at UPEACE.15 47 13 28 9 1 113

At UPEACE, I have been

treated unequally due to any

aspect of my identity

(language, culture, gender,

sexuality, ability, etc) by

UPEACE as an institution.

23 52 18 13 4 2 112

At UPEACE, I have been

treated unequally due to any

aspect of my identity

(language, culture, gender,

sexuality, ability, etc) by

other students.

17 46 18 27 3 2 112

At UPEACE, I have been

treated unequally due to any

aspect of my identity

(language, culture, gender,

sexuality, ability, etc) by

staff.

20 15 13 1 2 112

At UPEACE, I have been

treated unequally due to any

aspect of my identity

(language, culture, gender,

sexuality, ability, etc) by

professors.

24 60 10 13 3 1 111

I have witnessed

discrimination at UPEACE.12 33 16 38 10 3 112

Freedom of speech is valued

at UPEACE.6 9 17 54 22 4 112

Comments 30

answered question 114

skipped question 20

As shown in Table 5, 86% of respondents agreed that they are familiar

with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and 73% of respondents

agreed that they learn about human rights in their programmes. With respect

to the cultural relativity of human rights, 53% agreed that human rights are

culturally relative. This section also included discrimination, and while 55% of

58

participants disagreed that they had experienced discrimination at UPEACE,

33% agreed that they had experienced discrimination at UPEACE.

When asked about unequal treatment due to any aspect of their identity

(gender, sexuality, ability, etc.) by other students, staff, the institution, or

professors, 27% of students reported being treated unequally from other

students, compared to 15% reporting unequal treatment by the institution,

13% by staff, and 14% by professors. Furthermore, 43% of participants agreed

that they had witnessed discrimination at UPEACE.

In the qualitative section, 30 participants wrote comments. Eight

participants from North America talked about feeling discriminated against

because of where they are from; four of these comments reflected students

feeling that their opinions were not valid because of where they are from, and

four of the comments pertained to the lack of financial aid given to students

from North America. With respect to the former claim, one respondent wrote

“situations have arisen where peers feel like the opinions of ‘white North

Americans’ are not valid because we are perceived to not have as much ‘life

experience’ because of the North American lifestyle.” With respect to the

latter claim about financial aid, one respondent wrote, “I feel that due to the

North American country I come from I was disregarded for financial aid even

though I have incredible need for it, more so than others who were afforded

it.” Another student commented, “It is frustrating when I see students on

scholarship going clothing shopping at Multiplaza all the time, traveling all

over the Americas on the breaks, etc while other students are struggling

financially because they were not even considered for financial aid because of

their country of origin.” These participants felt that financial aid is distributed

by region, rather than by financial need, and they see this as being unfair.

Three participants said they felt discriminated against because they

were non-native English language speakers. Five students wrote that they felt

that freedom of speech was valued theoretically but not practically, in the

sense that they feel that students can say things, but don’t feel that the

administration is listening. One student wrote “I believe that freedom of

speech is tolerated at UPEACE, but the next question is whether anyone in

power is listening.” Another participant, addressing this next question, wrote

“I know many students who have tried to be heard by the university and were

not listened to. We have a lot of suggestions and constructive criticism that is

undervalued.”

With respect to accessibility, one participant wrote:

“As an institution UPEACE certainly has unequal access to people

with disabilities. However, I would only call it discrimination when

there is no intention to accommodate for special needs and

UPEACE has shown their willingness (and to a lesser extent

commitment) to make changes in the accessibility of the

institution. Yet, I am not sure to what extent equal access is really

recognized as a human right by members of the UPEACE

community.”

Another comment referred to religious freedom: “Friday is very crucial

and important day for a Moslem but it’s hard to pray in the mosque or at

UPEACE for the reasons of accessibility or arrangement of learning schedule.

Most of the Moslem student sacrifice that day to attend the class.”

The operating definition of discrimination in this survey was “unequal

treatment due to any aspect of one’s identity (language, culture, gender,

sexuality, ability, etc).” According to the UNESCO Convention on

Discrimination in Education (1960), discrimination is “any distinction,

exclusion, limitation or preference which, being based on race, colour, sex,

language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,

economic condition or birth, has the purpose or effect of nullifying or

impairing equality of treatment.”

With respect to financial aid, Section 2 of the Non-Discrimination Policy

(University for Peace, 2009) states that “The University will take affirmative

action to admit students who are under-privileged. This includes financial

assistance to prospective and current students from developing nations” (40).

This policy does not explicitly exclude students from developed countries.

Greater transparency about this process, such as elucidating specific criteria

and their respective weight for financial aid consideration, would create

greater overall understanding.

The issue of language discrimination is of great concern, as English is

the language used in the institution, but many students are non-native English

speakers. Additional language support could help, but discrimination requires

that all community members – native English speakers and non-native English 60

speakers alike – have an understanding of language rights. Education about

cultural rights and specifically linguistic rights, such as through the Universal

Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2001), would be one way to raise awareness

of this issue.

With respect to accessibility, UPEACE took many initiatives this year to

make the campus more accessible to individuals in wheelchairs. However, not

only is it important for the university to have equal access to people of all

types of ability, but it is also critical that all community members recognize

equal access as a human right. Again, this could be addressed through

education and awareness-raising, using the Universal Declaration of Human

Rights (1948) and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

(2006).

With respect to religious freedom, it may be difficult for the university to

adjust its schedule to accommodate all religions, as different religions have

different holy days, and many religions are represented in the UPEACE

community. However, providing a safe space that is devoted to student

reflection, meditation and prayer, that is easily accessible on campus, would

allow students to practice their faiths more freely. The university could

consider building a multi-faith reflection room as part of its building plans.

It should be noted that in the Non-Discrimination Policy (University for

Peace, 2009), the channel through which community members are to use to

handle discrimination cases is the Office of Diversity and Equality. However,

at this time, this office exists only on paper. There was a movement this year

to try to establish this office, but as of now, the office has yet to be

established, and the channel that students have to address discrimination

issues is through the administration.

This section demonstrates that while the majority of students feel that

human rights are protected, promoted, and valued at UPEACE, there is still

substantial room for improvement, particularly with respect to discrimination,

linguistic rights, equal access, and facilitating religious freedom.

    

9.5 Equality between men and women

Table 6: Equality between men and women

What do you think about the following statements about gender equality at UPEACE? Please

choose one response for each statement.

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

Gender equality is culturally

relative.14 18 21 45 10 3 111

In my program we learn about

gender equality.3 17 19 56 15 0 110

In my program we develop

skills to promote gender

equality in our work.

5 27 26 40 11 1 110

At UPEACE, men and women

are treated equally across the

community.

0 10 19 70 9 2 110

At UPEACE, gender equality

is valued.0 6 14 74 14 2 110

At UPEACE, I have

experienced discrimination

based on my gender.

29 48 22 7 2 2 110

Additional Comments 8

answered question 111

skipped question 23

As shown in Table 6, 50% of respondents claim that gender equality is

culturally relative, and 65% agree that in their program they learn about

gender equality. In addition, 72% of respondents agreed that men and women

are treated equally across the community, 80% agreed that gender equality is

valued, and 47% agreed that they develop skills to promote gender equality in

their work.

In the qualitative data, 8 respondents wrote comments. One participant

remarked that “it [gender equality] is valued theoretically but not practically.”

Another wrote that “I think more than in most other universities, men and

women are treated equally at UPEACE.” Another respondent commented that

“I have seen or felt gender-based discrimination during class discussions with

male students that do not believe in gender equality.”

One participant remarked that

62

“I feel like gender is often mentioned at a superficial level but

rarely discussed and understood more deeply…at UPEACE it is

clear to everyone that it is important to pay attention to gender

inequality somehow, but it is unclear to most how that needs to be

done appropriately.”

One student from the gender program remarked that “I have been

disappointed by the gender awareness at UPEACE.” This student referred to

interviews that the gender class conducted across campus about gender

awareness, and called the results “disheartening.” However, as this was

during the first course, it would be interesting to conduct a similar survey

again, to see if there had been an increase in gender awareness throughout

the year.

This section indicates that most students agree that gender equality is

valued and promoted at UPEACE. However, it is not experienced equally by all

community members, as some of the data indicates. There appears to be a gap

between knowledge-building and skill-building, in the sense that a number of

students report developing knowledge about gender equality, but fewer report

developing skills to promote gender equality. This indicates that there is room

for improvement with respect to gender equality at UPEACE. A deeper

exploration of gender dynamics, as well as more skills-based initiatives for

integrating gender equality, are possible steps for improvement

    

9.5 Democratic participation

This section is comprised of two subsections: one about democratic

participation at UPEACE, and the second specifically dealing with

participation in the classroom.

Table 7: Democratic Participation at UPEACE

How do you feel about the following statements regarding democratic participation at

UPEACE? Please choose one response for each statement.

Answer OptionsStrongly

DisagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

At UPEACE, we develop

knowledge about democratic

principles and decision

making.

5 8 20 65 9 3 110

At UPEACE, I can participate

in democratic decision

making about decisions that

affect me.

9 22 26 46 4 3 110

At UPEACE, democratic

participation is valued in the

classroom.

3 10 16 72 8 0 109

At UPEACE, democratic

participation is valued outside

the classroom.

6 16 28 56 3 2 111

SFS (Students/Faculty/Staff)

is a democratic decision

making body.

13 19 27 27 3 21 110

Additional Comments 27

answered question 111

skipped question 23

As shown in Table 7, 73% of participants agree that democratic

participation is valued at UPEACE, and agree 67.3% that they learn about

democratic decision making. With respect to decisions that affect them, 45%

of students agree that they can participate in democratic decision making.

When asked about the Students/Faculty/Staff (SFS) organisation, there was no

clear outcome as to whether students think that SFS is a democratic decision

making body, as 29% disagreed, 25% neither agreed nor disagreed, 45%

agreed, and 19% answered “don’t know/undecided.”

In the qualitative additional comment box, 27 students wrote comments.

Thirteen participants made claims about students not being able to participate

in decision making because of the hierarchical structure of the university. One

student wrote, “UPEACE is a vertical institution. You can push to have new

decisions, you are free to take any initiative, but when it comes to changes, it

is hard…everything finally depends on the will of the vice-rector and the

rector. There is no real accountability.” Twenty participants made comments

related to SFS. One participant wrote,

64

“During my year at UPEACE I witnessed decisions made by high

leaders (such as the rector and vice-rector) at the institution that

surpassed the SFS’ decisions. In one occasion SFS said “no” to a

procedure and still the higher level decision makers preferred to

say “yes” and the end result did not reflect SFS’s decision at all.”

Three participants explicitly noted the gap between theory and values,

on one hand, and application in daily life, on the other, in democratic decision

making. One participant wrote, “Democratic principles are valued highly

across the board, but are not practiced as much.”

The comments above reflect that the students see a structural issue with

democratic decision making at UPEACE. In a comparative study of models of

transformative peace education, Turay & English (2008) studied UPEACE:

“As the name suggests, the University for Peace in Costa Rica, is

basically oriented to peace. Yet its very structure and organization

as a bona fide university militates against participatory planning

and widespread attention to indigenous issues. Although it does

have a diversity of offerings in peace studies…its traditionally

based program is limited by its hierarchical organization” (292).

The structure of UPEACE (University for Peace, 2007: 5) is common in

universities and in UN bodies, and any organization or institution requires

some structure in order to ensure the flow of responsibilities. However, this

structure may inhibit democratic decision making and participation by all

community members.

SFS is a new body, and its role needs to be clarified in greater detail. A

committee was working on a charter for SFS, and this charter is one step in

clarifying its mission. It should be noted as well that this year student

representatives were present on most university committees this year, in an

effort to increase student involvement.

This section again reflects a gap between knowledge and values and

practical application in daily life. According to students’ experience, education

for democratic participation is strong, and most community members value

democratic participation. How this manifests in reality in university

governance and decisions, though, seems to be contrary to the knowledge and

values, according to students’ experiences, particularly with SFS.

Table 8: Democratic participation in the classroom

How do you feel about the following statements regarding participation in the classroom?

Please choose one response per line.

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

I am able to fully or actively

participate in my program.1 6 14 52 34 1 108

My professors encourage

participation in my program.0 3 11 61 34 0 109

Different forms or styles of

participation are valued in my

program.

4 9 24 49 16 6 108

I understand how my

participation is being

evaluated by my professors.

7 17 22 43 10 9 108

The way my participations is

evaluated is fair.6 15 32 37 8 10 108

Additional Comments 24

answered question 109

skipped question 25

As shown in Table 8, 80% of participants agreed that they are able to

participate fully or actively in their programs. With respect to the evaluation

of participation, 22% of students disagreed and 20% neither agreed nor

disagreed that they understand how their participation is evaluated, and 30%

neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement “the way my participation is

evaluated is fair.”

In the qualitative data, 24 participants wrote comments. Four

participants wrote comments that they don’t understand how participation is

evaluated. Three students wrote that they think participation is graded in an

unfair way, and two students wrote that they think participation evaluation is

fair or “fair enough.”

One student commented upon the participation of Asian students, which

was also discussed in the Education section (9.2). This participant wrote “In

Asian culture…it is unusual for Asian student to stand up and argue the idea

66

of professor… Some of my Japanese friends get very low score on their

participation because he/she never speak in class.”

Participation is often a large percentage of evaluation for UPEACE

courses, often between 15-25%. Participation is an important element of a

culture of peace (Brenes, 2004; Adams, 2009), and should be an element of

the educational process to promote a continuous exchange among students

and between student and teacher (Freire, 1970). It is also important for

students to understand how their participation is being graded, and for this to

be a process that is culturally sensitive and accounts for different forms of

participation, such as active listening.

With respect to classroom participation, there needs to be a clearer

policy as to how participation is evaluated. This policy needs to take into

account different forms of participation that are culturally sensitive.

9.7 Understanding, Tolerance and Solidarity

This section was divided into three subsections and questions were

asked about each theme. These questions were followed by 4 yes/no questions

about peer pressure, institutional pressure, and harassment.

Table 9: Understanding

How do you feel about the following statements about understanding at UPEACE? Please

choose one response for each statement.

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

I understand other members

of the UPEACE community.0 3 30 66 5 3 107

Other members of the

UPEACE community

understand me.

3 5 32 54 2 11 107

Understanding is valued in

the UPEACE community.1 5 23 66 12 0 107

In my program we learn about

understanding.4 17 28 49 5 4 107

UPEACE community members

behave in ways that promote

understanding.

4 8 35 50 5 5 107

There is understanding

between students, staff and

faculty.

8 18 28 44 2 8 108

Additional Comments 20

answered question 108

skipped question 26

As shown in Table 9, 66% of respondents feel they understand other

members of the UPEACE community, and 52% feel that other members of the

UPEACE community understand them. Furthermore, 73% feel that

understanding is valued in the UPEACE community, 51%

report that they learn about understanding in their program, and 51% agree

that community members behave in ways that promote understanding. With

respect to understanding between students, staff, and faculty, 47% of

participants agree that there is understanding.

In the qualitative section, 20 students wrote comments. Seven

participants wrote that community members make an effort to understand

others, but ultimately understanding is hard to achieve. One participant

wrote, “I think all strive for understanding and it is valued, and yet I’d be

hesitant to say I ‘understand’ other members of the UPEACE community….For

all I learned, I am sure there is a lot I didn’t learn as well.” Three participants

noted the role of communication in understanding. One such participant noted

this link, and connected it to language, saying

“Communication plays a key role in this understanding but there

are times due to vocabulary constraints, one has the inability to

express oneself and this may be misinterpreted as submission or

withholding of information when it is just inability to further

articulate feelings, ideas and emotions.”

Three participants noted a lack of institutional support that promotes

understanding. One participant remarked, “I don’t necessarily think there is

much space, in the classroom or institutionalized, to understand different

viewpoints.”

68

This section illustrates the difficulty in achieving understanding, even in

an environment where people are trying. One participant noted that “there is

a general attempt to understand and respect each other even if we do not

agree, but this is not really discussed or taught in class.” This correlates to the

quantitative question about learning about understanding, to which 20% of respondents

disagreed. Understanding could be further promoted by developing knowledge and skills

for it, and through greater institutional support.

Table 10: Tolerance

How do you feel about the following statements about tolerance? Please choose one response

for each statement.

Answer Options Strongly disagree

Disagree

Neither agree nor

disagree

Agree Strongly agree

Don't know/undecided

Response Count

There is a high level of tolerance among the members of the UPEACE community.

2 11 19 57 10 5 104

Tolerance is valued by the members of the UPEACE community.

0 7 15 66 11 4 103

The UPEACE community members behave in ways that promote tolerance.

1 10 22 60 7 3 103

We learn about tolerance in my program.

6 21 32 36 6 2 103

Different viewpoints are tolerated in the UPEACE community.

2 8 18 63 9 3 103

Additional Comments 15answered question 104

skipped question 30

As shown in Table 10, 64% of participants agreed that there is a high

level of tolerance among the members of the UPEACE community, and 74%

agreed that tolerance is valued by the community. In addition, 65% agreed

that UPEACE community members behave in ways that promote tolerance,

and 70% agreed that different viewpoints are tolerated by the UPEACE

community, while 41% agreed that they learn about tolerance in their

programs.

In the qualitative data, 15 participants wrote comments. Four

participants wrote that the term “tolerance” itself is problematic and has a

negative connotation. One student wrote, “This question should be about

respect and not tolerance at UPEACE. Tolerating people’s behavior is not the

same as respecting them. To me the term tolerance has a negative

implication.” Participants proposed “respect,” “acceptance,” and

“compassion” as alternative concepts to tolerance. Three participants

questioned whether community members tolerate of more conservative view

points, saying that they felt more conservative viewpoints are not tolerated.

One participant wrote, “I think the more conservative amongst us at UPEACE

would tend to feel like their views are not treated with the same legitimacy as

more liberal perspectives. UPEACE is quite hegemonic in this respect.”

According to the UNESCO (1995) definition, “tolerance” includes “respect” and

“acceptance”, which other students proposed as alternatives to using tolerance. The

Merrian-Webster (2010) dictionary offers a different definition, which says that tolerance is

“sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own;

the act of allowing something.” Many people probably relate more to the second definition,

as this is how the term is used more in common speech, and this definition does not

include the ideas of respect, acceptance or appreciation. In order to include these terms in

future questionnaires and in the culture of peace framework, we should do so explicitly,

and not by expecting that people will understand them to be a part of “tolerance.”

Table 11: Solidarity

How do you feel about the following statements about solidarity at UPEACE? Please choose one response for each statement.

Answer Options Strongly disagree

Disagree

Neither agree nor

disagree

Agree Strongly agree

Don't know/undecided

Response Count

There is a high level of solidarity among the students of the UPEACE community.

5 15 24 49 9 3 105

There is a high level of solidarity among all the members (students, staff, faculty and administration) of the UPEACE community.

5 18 33 36 6 7 105

We learn about solidarity in my program.

8 32 27 29 5 4 105

Solidarity is valued by members of the UPEACE community.

4 8 26 52 8 7 105

UPEACE community members behave in ways that promote solidarity.

6 17 25 45 8 5 106

Other (please specify) 13answered question 106

skipped question 28As shown in Table 11, 55% of students agree that there is a high level of

solidarity among the students of the UPEACE community, and 40% agree that

there is a high level of solidarity among all community members. In addition,

70

57% agreed that solidarity is valued by members of the UPEACE community,

and 50% agreed that UPEACE members behave in ways that promote

solidarity. With respect to learning about solidarity, 38% of participants

disagreed that they learn about solidarity in their program.

In the qualitative section, 13 respondents wrote comments. Two

students said there was a high level of solidarity with personal problems or

concerns. One student wrote, “Somebody gets in trouble (family member

dies), we pull together – a couple of good examples throughout the year.” One

participant was unclear as to what solidarity meant, indicating a need to

clarify the concept.

While the questions in this survey dealt with solidarity within the

community, I did not ask explicitly about solidarity with other communities.

This should be included in future surveys. However, it should be noted that

the UPEACE community initiated a number of campaigns throughout the year

to raise money for communities abroad that were affected by disasters, such

as Haiti and the Philippines, and these initiatives indicate solidarity.

The last 4 questions of this section were Yes/No questions that referred to pressure

to take part in academic, extra-curricular and social events, and about harassment.

Table 12: Peer pressure for school-related events

I have experience peer pressure to take part in school-related (academic or extracurricular) events.

Answer OptionsResponse Percent

Response Count

Yes 55.6% 60No 34.3% 37Don't know/Undecided 10.2% 11Comments 22

answered question 108skipped question 26

As shown in Table 12, 56% agreed that they had experienced peer

pressure. In the qualitative section, 22 participants wrote comments. With

respect to specific events for which they felt pressured to be involved, seven

students cited the UPEACE Model United Nations Conference (UPMUNC),

two students cited open house, two students cited cultural nights (i.e.,

Thanksgiving, regional night celebrations), and one student cited the Vagina

Monologues. Four students mentioned feeling discomfort, a lack of

understanding, or disrespect for not participating. One student wrote

“sometimes the community doesn’t understand that an individual can’t

participate or doesn’t have the means to do so and then they frown upon you.”

Four students said they felt this pressure was positive. One student wrote that

they had experienced peer pressure “not really in a bad way – but people are

VERY encouraging to get involved.”

Table 13: Institutional pressure for school-related events

I have experienced institutional pressure (from professors or administration) to take part in school-related (academic or extra-curricular) events.

Answer OptionsResponse Percent

Response Count

Yes 44.9% 48

No 46.7% 50

Not sure/Undecided 8.4% 9

Comments 20

answered question 107

skipped question 27

As shown in Table 13, 45% respondents agreed that they had experienced it to

take part in school-related events. In the qualitative data to Question 5, 20 participants

wrote comments. With respect to specific events, seven students cited UPMUNC, four

cited the Open House event, one cited election observation, and one cited special

sessions that have been arranged by their department head.

Table 14: Peer pressure for social events

I have experienced peer pressure to take part in social events (either at UPEACE

or within the UPEACE community).

Answer OptionsResponse

Percent

Response

Count

Yes 42.6% 46

No 49.1% 53

Don't know/undecided 8.3% 9

Comments 8

answered question 108

skipped question 26

72

As shown in Table 14, 49% of participants disagreed that they had

experienced peer pressure to take part in social events. In the qualitative

section, 8 participants wrote comments. Two students wrote that they felt this

was not a bad type of pressure, while two other students wrote that this

pressure was negative.

Table 15: Harassment

I have felt harassed in any way by members of the UPEACE community.

Answer OptionsResponse

Percent

Response

Count

Yes 13.0% 14

No 80.6% 87

Undecided 6.5% 7

answered question 108

skipped question 26

As shown in Table 15, 81% of participants disagreed with the statement

“I have felt harassed in any way by members of the UPEACE community.”

There was no comment box for the question about harassment, which was an

error in survey design.

Peer and institutional pressure manifests as an extreme, and potentially

imposing form of solidarity, which is why I asked these questions. From the

quantitative data, it seemed that most students had experienced peer or

institutional pressure; however, in the qualitative information, it was a mixed

result as to whether this pressure was a positive element (inclusive and

encouraging) or negative (imposing).

Overall, there is a degree of understanding, tolerance, and solidarity

amongst the UPEACE community. It appears that these topics are not

necessarily included in students’ programmes, as the responses about

learning about these areas were low in agreement. One step to foster greater

understanding, tolerance (or acceptance and respect) and solidarity would be

to explicitly learn about these themes throughout all programmes. This would

give students a better background from which to develop daily life practices

that correlate to these values. However, in order to facilitate this behavior,

skill-building workshops on understanding, tolerance and solidarity could also

improve this area towards a culture of peace.

9.8 Participatory Communication and the Free Flow of

Information

Table 16: Communication at UPEACE

How do you feel about the following statements about communication at UPEACE? Please

choose one response for each statement.

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

Information is easily

accessible at UPEACE.14 30 25 31 4 1 105

At UPEACE, there is

transparency (openness and

accountability) of information.

21 27 30 19 3 5 105

There are adequate methods

of communication at UPEACE.11 31 20 38 3 2 105

There is a free flow of

information between students

at UPEACE.

8 8 24 58 4 3 105

There is a free flow of

information between the

administration and students

at UPEACE.

18 30 23 29 3 2 105

There are standards of

communication within the

UPEACE community.

9 20 33 31 2 9 104

Additional Comments 16

answered question 105

skipped question 29

74

As shown in Table 16, 42% of participants disagreed that information

was easily accessible, 46% disagreed that there is transparency of

information, and 46% disagreed that there is a free flow of information

between the administration and students at UPEACE. Furthermore, 80% of

respondents agreed that there is a free flow of information between students

at UPEACE. With respect to adequate methods of communication, 40% of

participants disagreed and 39% agreed. With respect to standards of

communication, 32% agreed that there are standards, and 28% disagreed.

In the qualitative section, 16 participants wrote comments. Three

students wrote that there is a lack of transparency in the institution. Three

participants noted that perhaps communication was “too free” in the sense

that there were not standards of use for the community email lists, which

generates many emails per day. Two of these participants noted that a filter or

a daily digest of emails might solve this issue. Two participants noted the

heavy reliance on the Internet as the primary form of communication, and that

this can be problematic, particularly for students with less frequent access

(for example, students who do not own a computer or do not have Internet

access in their homes; it should be noted that all students have computer and

Internet access on campus, as there are a sufficient number of computers in

the public computer lab). Two participants also commented that the timing of

information was often inadequate. One participant wrote, “Getting crucial

information to the students days or weeks late puts incredible pressure on us

to perform to expectations that would have been reasonable with proper

notification, but become unreasonable at the last minute (Board of Directors

meeting, Open House).”

This section shows that the area of communication at UPEACE requires

improvement in order to progress towards a culture of peace, particularly

with respect to the accessibility of information in general, and communication

between the administration and students. Participatory communication and

free flow of information is important for most other aspects of a culture of

peace, particularly understanding and democratic participation. Improving

communications would also strengthen other areas of a culture of peace, and

thus strengthen the culture of peace overall.

Table 17: Interpersonal communication at UPEACE

How do you feel about the following statements about interpersonal communication at

UPEACE? Please choose one response for each statement.

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

Members of the UPEACE

community communicate

peacefully.

3 10 30 58 4 0 105

Members of the UPEACE

community value peaceful

communication.

1 7 15 72 8 2 105

In my program we develop

skills in nonviolent or

peaceful communication.

9 25 15 49 7 0 105

In my program, professors

communicate peacefully or

nonviolently.

3 2 21 64 10 4 104

In my program, students

communicate peacefully or

nonviolently.

3 9 27 59 8 0 106

Additional Comments 16

answered question 106

skipped question 28

As shown in Table 17, 59% of participants agreed that UPEACE

community members communicate peacefully and 76% agreed that

community members value peaceful communication. With respect to skill

development, 53% reported that they develop nonviolent communication skills

in their programs. 71% agreed that professors communicate peacefully or

nonviolently, and 63% agreed that students communicate peacefully or non-

violently in their programmes.

In the qualitative section, 16 students wrote comments about

interpersonal communication. Six participants wrote that most community

members communicate peacefully, but some communicate unpeacefully. One

participant wrote “There are some students and professors with non-peaceful

communication.” Three participants said that there should be a nonviolent

76

communication course as a part of orientation or foundation course. One

participant wrote, “WE NEED NVC TRAINING. Thanks.”

This section illustrates that community members value nonviolent

communication and in their experience, community members communicate in

peaceful ways. Additional training in nonviolent communication for all

community members would strengthen this aspect of a culture of peace.

9.8 International Peace and Security

Table 18: International Peace and Security

How do you feel about the following statements about international peace and security?

Please choose one response for each statement.

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

At UPEACE we develop

knowledge about

international peace and

security.

0 3 11 77 14 0 105

UPEACE community members

value international peace and

security.

0 3 12 74 15 1 105

At UPEACE we develop skills

to promote international

peace and security.

2 7 19 68 7 2 105

After I graduate from

UPEACE, I plan to work

towards improving

international peace and

security.

1 5 14 46 27 13 106

UPEACE, as an institution,

contributes to international

peace and security.

1 7 17 51 20 9 105

Additional Comments 7

answered question 106

skipped question 28

As shown in Table 18, 87% of participants agreed that they develop

knowledge to promote international peace and security, 85% agreed that

UPEACE community members value international peace and security, and

72% agree that they develop skills to promote international peace and

security. With respect to future plans, 69% of participants agree that they

plan to work towards improving international peace and security, and 68%

agreed that UPEACE as an institution contributes to international peace and

security.

In the qualitative data, 7 respondents wrote comments, which was the

lowest number of written comments for any section. One student wrote that

UPEACE “contributes merely by existing as a space for people from many

regions in the world to coexist, interact, and support one another.” According

to participants’ responses, the area of international peace and security is one

of the strongest areas – or at least most agreed upon – in the culture of peace

at UPEACE framework.

9.10 Local Peace and Security

This section had two subsections, the first on local safety, and the

second on conflict resolution, as this was not explicitly dealt with in any other

section, but is an important part of promoting a culture of peace. The first

section also included a Yes/No question about violations of personal security

on campus.

Table 19: Safety

How do you feel about the following statements about safety? Please choose one response

for each statement.

Answer Options Never RarelySometim

esUsually Always

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

I feel safe on the UPEACE

campus.0 1 5 30 67 0 103

I feel safe getting from my

home to the UPEACE campus.1 1 8 49 45 0 104

I feel safe off-campus. 0 5 20 52 25 0 102

Additional Comments 14

answered question 104

78

skipped question 30

As shown in Table 19, 94% of participants said they usually or always

feel safe on campus, and 90% usually or always feel safe getting from their

home to the UPEACE campus, while 75% usually or always feel safe off-

campus.

In the qualitative data, 14 participants wrote comments. Four students

commented that they felt the road between Ciudad Colon and UPEACE is

unsafe. One participant wrote, “Traffic on the road to campus always makes

me feel very unsafe.” Another wrote that “the bridges are a little scary on the

way to UPEACE!” Two students specified campus safety issues; one

participant said they did not feel safe with regards to their belongings, and

one student wrote “I do not like the security guards carrying loaded guns.”

Two students remarked that they did not always feel safe on the streets of

Ciudad Colon.

It should be noted that “off-campus” could mean many things – for most

students, this means El Rodeo or Ciudad Colon, the communities where most

students live. However, this could be interpreted as anywhere in Costa Rica,

and the university as an institution would have very little control or ability to

affect students’ experiences off-campus.

One participant wrote “Safe for me is when I can practice my religion

without hesitation and it only can be done in a boarding house or Mosque.”

This section indicated that students feel safe on-campus, but that some efforts to

making the road safer would improve overall safety. It should be noted that during the

2009-2010 school year, a particularly rough patch of the road was paved by the local

government, thanks in part to lobbying by the university.

Table 20: Personal security violations

Have you ever experienced a violation of your personal security (i.e., violence,

theft, etc.) on the UPEACE campus?

Answer OptionsResponse

Percent

Response

Count

Yes 7.7% 8

No 90.4% 94

Not sure/undecided 1.9% 2

Comments 12

answered question 104

skipped question 30

As shown in Table 20, 90% of participants said they had not experienced

a violation of their personal security on the UPEACE campus, while 8% of

participants experienced a violation and 2% respondents were not sure or

undecided.

In the qualitative information, ten respondents wrote comments. The

violations they cited included: sunglasses went missing; being flashed on two

separate occasions between UPEACE and home; being asked on a date by one

of the security guards; money stolen from bag; having been touched by other

community members; theft.

While violations of personal security rarely occur on campus, they still

do occur. With the recent change in security companies, there has been a

clear effort to improve security on campus.

Table 21: Conflict Resolution

How do you feel about the following statements about conflict resolution at UPEACE? Please

choose one response for each statement.

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

In my program we develop

knowledge about conflict

resolution.

2 14 18 58 11 0 103

At UPEACE, we develop

nonviolent conflict resolution

skills.

8 15 18 52 8 3 104

80

Nonviolent conflict resolution

is valued at UPEACE.2 3 9 74 10 4 102

There are sufficient channels

at UPEACE for conflict

resolution to handle conflicts

within the UPEACE

community (i.e., between

students, between students

and faculty, etc).

7 20 26 39 2 9 103

UPEACE as an institution

promotes local peace and

security.

6 13 26 42 7 9 103

Additional Comments 10

answered question 104

skipped question 30

As shown in Table 21, 67% of participants agreed that they learned

about conflict resolution, 58% agreed that they developed nonviolent conflict

resolution skills, 82% agreed that nonviolent conflict resolution is valued, and

48% agreed that UPEACE as an institution promotes local peace and security.

Forty percent (40%) of participants agreed that there are sufficient channels

at UPEACE to handle comments within the community.

In the qualitative section, 10 participants wrote comments about conflict

resolution and local peace and security. Three participants commented that

UPEACE should be more involved with the communities of El Rodeo and

Ciudad Colon in order to promote local peace and security. One participant

wrote that “I would say that Upeace as an institution not only does not

promote local peace and security, but the opposite, since with the indifference

it projects to the local community it provokes negative feelings.” However,

one student commended UPEACE’s involvement with the communities, saying,

“I fully appreciate the strides that UPeace makes to develop good

relationships with members of El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon. Not all institutions

would work so hard at this, and it is commendable.”

These comments reflect different opinions and perceptions about

UPEACE’s involvement with local communities in respect to local peace and

security. Less than half of the students in the quantitative data agreed that

UPEACE as an institution promotes local peace and security. As suggested by

some participants, one way UPEACE could improve local peace and security is

through developing a closer relationship to local communities.

9.11 Inner Peace

Table 22: Inner Peace

How do you feel about the following statements about inner peace (personal peace)? Please

choose one response for each statement.

Answer OptionsStrongly

disagreeDisagree

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

Don't

know/un

decided

Respons

e Count

In my program we develop

knowledge about inner peace.16 37 20 25 2 3 103

Inner peace is valued by

members of the UPEACE

community.

4 19 30 41 5 4 103

In my program we develop

skills for cultivating inner

peace.

14 48 20 16 2 2 102

Inner peace is part of

cultivating a culture of peace.4 9 12 42 33 3 103

I have adequate time for

personal peace practices in

my life at UPEACE (i.e.,

prayer, meditation, movement

etc.).

7 19 21 39 12 5 103

Additional Comments 15

answered question 104

skipped question 30

As shown in Table 22, 51% of participants disagreed that they developed

knowledge about or skills for inner peace in their program, 60% disagreed

that they develop skills for cultivating inner peace in their programmes, and

44% agreed that inner peace is valued by UPEACE community members. With

respect to inner peace as part of cultivating a culture of peace, 73% of

participants agreed that it is. Fifty percent (50%) of participants agreed that

they have adequate time for personal peace practices.

82

In the qualitative section, 15 participants wrote additional comments.

One student noted that practicing personal peace requires “not only adequate

time, but also places.” Three students wrote that they thought other students

had negative perceptions of inner peace. One participant wrote “Inner peace

has been looked down upon by many other students I have talked to.” Notably,

no students reported that they themselves had negative perceptions of inner

peace. One participant noted that inner peace is a large part of

extracurricular activities.

The data about inner peace as a part of a culture of peace corresponds

to research conducted at UPEACE by Wichmann (2009). Wichmann asked

participants “How important is individual peacefulness to peacemaking?” to

which 68% of respondents – who were UPEACE students, staff, and faculty -

said “very important” (on a Likert scale of not important to very important).

While the questions are slightly different in their wording, they illustrate that

two years in a row, over two-thirds of the UPEACE community feel that inner

peace (or individual peacefulness) is important to peacemaking and a culture

of peace.

Overall, this information illustrates that students feel that inner peace is

an important component of a culture of peace, but do not develop knowledge

or skills for it in their programmes at UPEACE. One way that UPEACE could

strengthen this aspect of a culture of peace is by providing more information

and skill-building workshops for inner peace.

9.12 Culture of Peace

This section consisted of three yes/no questions and three qualitative questions about a

culture of peace.

Table 23: Awareness of a culture of peace prior to UPEACE

Had you heard of the concept of a "culture of peace" prior to coming to UPEACE?

Answer OptionsResponse

Percent

Response

Count

Yes 46.2% 48

No 37.5% 39

Not sure/undecided 16.3% 17

If yes, please explain (where, when, how, etc.) 26

answered question 104

skipped question 30

As shown in Table 23, 47% of participants agreed that they had heard of

the concept of a “culture of peace” prior to coming to UPEACE, while 38%

disagreed.

In the qualitative section, 26 participants wrote additional comments.

Students wrote that they had learned about a culture of peace in various

places, including: former studies (9 participants), jobs (5 participants),

extracurricular activities (2 participants), religion (3 participants), and books

they had read (5 participants).

This question was to gauge participants’ familiarity with a culture of

peace prior to coming to UPEACE. Less than half of the community was

familiar with the concept prior to their studies. This indicates that many

students bring knowledge about a culture of peace with them to the

community; however, many students do not, which is a strong reason to

integrate the concept into programs in a more intentional way.

Table 24: Knowledge, skills and values for cultivating peace

acquired at UPEACE

Has your overall knowledge, skills, and values in regards to cultivating peace

increased since beginning your studies at UPEACE?

Answer OptionsResponse

Percent

Response

Count

Yes 61.5% 64

No 17.3% 18

Not sure/undecided 21.2% 22

If so, how so? 28

answered question 104

skipped question 30

As shown in Table 24, 62% of participants indicated that their overall

knowledge, skills, and values in regards to cultivating peace increased since

beginning their studies at UPEACE.

84

In the qualitative section, 28 participants wrote additional comments.

Most comments reflected specific knowledge and skill increases. Three

respondents indicated that their knowledge had increased through

interactions with UPEACE community members. One participant wrote,

“Efforts to interact with students and faculty from other regions of the world

and to get to know Ciudad Colon community and families have increased my

ability to cultivate and value peace.”

This question indicates that most students’ knowledge, skills and values

with respect to cultivating peace have increased. However, it is slightly

alarming that so many participants disagreed with the question or were not

sure/undecided, as UPEACE is an educational institution which aims to

increase the knowledge of its students.

Table 25: Culture of Peace at UPEACE

Is there a culture of peace at UPEACE?

Answer OptionsResponse Percent

Response Count

Yes 47.1% 48No 12.7% 13Not sure/undecided 40.2% 41Please explain 43

answered question 102skipped question 32

As shown in Table 25, 47% of respondents agreed that there is a culture

of peace at UPEACE, 13% disagreed, and 40% were not sure or undecided.

In the qualitative section, 43 respondents wrote additional comments,

which is the most of any comment box in the survey. With respect to strengths

of a culture of peace, participants wrote: nonviolence is highly valued (1

participant); diversity is a main characteristic (1 participant); peacebuilding is

promoted and strongly supported (1 participant); issues that bring tension or

conflict are resolved in a democratic manner (1 participant) or by personal

communication (1 participant) . One participant wrote,

“I feel that all the students especially, but also staff and faculty,

are so kind and open and tolerant. They are happy to share their

views and cultures and everyone is happy to witness them. This

makes everyone relaxed and feel respected and valued. This leads

to peace.”

With respect to weaknesses, four participants claimed that UPEACE, as

an institution and community, is not modeling the principles and values it is

teaching. One student remarked, “I am not sure that people are committed to

walk the talk and become a model.” Three participants wrote that most

students tend to stay in their own cultural groups, and saw this as inhibiting

the culture of peace. One participant wrote, “Many people seem to spend most

of their free time with people from similar cultural backgrounds, which tells

me that there is still work to be done in strengthening this culture of peace.”

Three participants wrote that the university lacked an intentional, holistic,

integrated approach to a culture of peace. One participant remarked, “There

are components that could be used for a culture of peace but the whole

institution is not actively or intentionally doing it.”

The quantitative data and qualitative data confirm that there are

strengths to the culture of peace, such as the promotion of peacebuilding

overall, and members making an effort to promote peace. However, it also

confirmed that there are weaknesses, such as a potential gap between what is

being taught and whether this is modeled in daily life, and that the institution

lacks an intentional approach to building a community culture of peace.

In this section I also asked three open-ended questions:

1. What peacebuilding skills, knowledge and/or values did

you have prior to coming to UPEACE?

In response to this question, 71 participants gave written responses.

Participants listed a variety of skills, knowledge and values, including:

nonviolent communication (6 respondents), knowledge of social justice (2

respondents), facilitation skills (3 respondents), mediation (3 respondents),

negotiation (2 respondents), listening skills (4 respondents), inner peace (6

respondents), negotiation (2 respondents), conflict transformation (2

respondents), and self-reflecting (2 respondents). This section shows the

wealth of experience that UPEACE community members come to UPEACE

with.

86

2. Is there anything about your experience of a culture of

peace at UPEACE that this survey does not capture? If so, please

explain.

In response to this question, 23 participants gave written responses. No

participants wrote that the survey did not capture for their experience of a

culture of peace. Fourteen respondents wrote “no” or “nothing”. Four

participants commented that they thought it was a comprehensive survey

that captured their experience adequately.

3. Finally, do you have any suggestions for how we can

strengthen the culture of peace at UPEACE?

In response to this question, 22 participants wrote responses. Students

also gave extensive recommendations throughout the survey, and in this

section I will include a summary of the responses to this question as well as

additional recommendations that were incorporated into other sections.

Table 26: Summary of Participants’ Recommendations

Education •Facilitate “best practice pedagogy” among permanent and visiting faculty•Develop standards for the way students are evaluated

•Establish a system for class participation evaluation•Provide students with some feedback during the course•Incorporate minority viewpoints in readings and in views presented•Put course evaluations online to allow for greater transparency •Infuse all programs with peace education methods and pedagogies

Environmental sustainability

•Create a more explicit environmental sustainability policy•Use recycled paper for course readers•Raise awareness of the university’s recycling program•Improve the university’s recycling program•Provide more natural and healthy options in the cafeteria

Democratic Participation

Clarify SFS’s role through a mission statement Provide democratic participation skill-building

workshops and exercises

Understanding, Tolerance, Solidarity

Make the programs a year and a half long to allow time for deeper understanding

Establish (institutionalize) a dialogue forum for students to come together and discuss cultural differences and issues

Provide formal/institutionalized intercultural training, education, and exchange; cultural sensitivity training for all community members

Provide harassment training to all community members

Communications Provide nonviolent communication training for all community members

Make a daily email digest so as to cut down on community emails received

Improve transparency, particularly with respect to tuition (how it is spent) and financial aid (what the requirements are)

Have a mechanism to ensure that students who are on financial aid are working hard

Local peace and security

More defined mechanisms for conflict resolution on campus

Inner peace Offer a daily meditative exercise

Culture of peace (in general)

The administration should ask the students and alumni how together we can all strengthen the culture of peace at UPEACE

More brown bags on the culture of peace Have a Town Hall meeting on this topic

Share the results of this survey with the community

Teaching people to practice what they preach

One participant asked, “What would a place with a culture of peace look

like?” The respondent gave the following suggestions: greater respect for

others’ space and time; formalized training on non-violent communication;

formalized/institutionalized cultural exchange, training, and education; an

institutional recognition that inner peace is important for a culture of peace,

and setting time aside to cultivate inner peace.

10. Feedback session and discussion

In this section, I will discuss the main points that arose during the

presentation and feedback session on May 14 from 12:15-1:00, which was

attended by approximately 20 students, staff, faculty, and members of the

administration.

88

10.1 Discrimination

In the discussion forum, some participants felt that 32.8% was a high

percentage of the population to have experienced discrimination. One

participant commented that discrimination has to do with individual

sensitivities; for example, someone who witnesses discrimination might think

it is more important than the person experiencing it. However, this can also

relate to oppression in and of itself, and how the oppressed become

accustomed to being discriminated against and treated unequally (Freire,

1970). Thus one who is the victim of discrimination may not perceive it as

such.

Another participant commented that discrimination in and of itself is not

necessarily negative, as discrimination involves recognizing differences, which

UPEACE to some extent encourages by intentionally creating a multicultural

environment; the difficulty is how to determine when discrimination is a

negative thing rather than a grouping by difference and diversity, which

should be celebrated. This is a different definition of discrimination than the

one used by UNESCO, however, and different than the conceptualization used

in this survey.

The issue of discrimination at UPEACE requires deep consideration as to

how to address it. UPEACE has a Nondiscrimination and Non-Harassment

Policy which outlines procedures for complaints of discrimination, but as

noted above, the Office for Diversity and Equality, which is to handle such

complaints, does not exist. Establishing this office would be one way in which

the university could make steps in dealing with discrimination issues.

10.2 Culture of Peace Comparison

Another participant asked if similar data was available for other

institutions so as to compare UPEACE to other universities. According to

Adams (2009), and as discussed above, culture of peace assessment should

primarily be used to compare an institution or community to itself, not with

another institution or entity, over time to evaluate progress towards a culture

of peace. However, another participant noted that we can learn from other

institutions or communities by looking at their protocols in specific areas.

Although comprehensive culture of peace assessment is a new field, many of

the related fields have been assessed independently and researched heavily.

For example, Shuman & Rudelius-Palmer (1999) developed human rights

indicators in their self-assessment test Taking the Human Rights Temperature

of Your School. Furthermore, in cultivating local and global cultures of peace,

institutions and communities should share best practices so as to help one

another advance towards a culture of peace. Thus, while the culture of peace

assessment should be used to compare and institution or community to itself

overtime, comparisons - with the purpose of learning, rather than competition

- can be done with other communities and institutions.

One participant referred to this as “benchmarking,” and suggested that

it should be someone’s full-time job at the university to engage in a project of

comparison.

10.3 Communication

In the communications discussion, one participant reflected that there

needs to be another medium of communication other than email, and

suggested the use of the large bulletin board outside the cafeteria as another

medium of communication.

This issue was addressed in the questionnaire as well, and it would be

advisable for the university to find other forms of communication that are not

reliant on the Internet.

10.4 Inner peace

The topic of inner peace generated a lot of discussion. Several

participants noted that there are strong extracurricular student-run programs

for inner peace, such as yoga and meditation. A question arose as to how

inner peace can or should be integrated more fully into all programs. Another

participant noted that the physical location of the university was conducive to

peaceful, personal reflection and developing personal peace. Another

participant suggested that what students have added outside the program

should be considered to be added to the curriculum.

This feedback and discussion session brought up the new issue of

culture of peace comparison, and highlighted aspects of the survey such as

discrimination, communication, and inner peace. That these topics generated

the most discussion indicates that they are areas that community members

have particular interest or concern.90

11. Conclusions

In the process of promoting a culture of peace, UPEACE is certainly

engaging in this process by providing graduate-level programmes in peace-

related fields. To progress more fully, UPEACE, as an institution and

community, should take a more holistic, intentional, comprehensive approach

to promoting a community culture of peace. In this way, the UPEACE

community could be a model for the values and practices of peacebuilding.

Students’ experiences of a culture of peace at UPEACE were very mixed,

as is visible from the survey results, and in particular to the question “Is there

a culture of peace at UPEACE?” In the qualitative data, some students wrote

of experiencing a culture of peace; others wrote of experiences that were not

peaceful.

It is clear that to a degree, there is a culture of peace at UPEACE. The

following chart highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each area, in

accordance with all data collected.

Table 27: Summary of UPEACE Culture of Peace Strengths and Weaknesses

Culture of Peace Programme Area

Strengths Weaknesses

Education All programmes of study related to peace

Most students develop knowledge about most culture of peace areas in most programmes

Uncertainty of how students are evaluated

Reliance on lecture as teaching method (by some professors)

Lack of skill development for peacebuilding

Environmental Sustainability

Many students develop knowledge about sustainability

Students do not develop skills for sustainability

Institutional policies and practices do not always to align with principles of sustainability

Culture of Peace Programme Area

Strengths Weaknesses

Human Rights Most students develop knowledge about human rights

Community members value human rights

Many students report experiencing discrimination, inequalities

Gender Equality Most students develop knowledge about gender equality

Men and women are mostly treated equally across the community

Some students do not develop skills to promoting gender equality in their work

Uncertainty about overall campus gender awareness

Democratic Participation Students develop knowledge about democratic principles and decision making

Unclear as to role of SFS

Many students do not feel able to participate in decisions that affect them

Understanding, Tolerance, & Solidarity

All three are valued in the community

Many students do not develop knowledge for these three in their programmes

Many students do not develop skills for these in their programmes

Participatory Communication and the Free Flow of Information

and Knowledge

There is a free flow of information between students

Most community members try to communicate peacefully

Free flow of information between administration and students is low

Most do not develop skills for nonviolent communication in their programmes

92

International Peace and Security

Most students develop knowledge, skills, and values for international peace and security

Most students feel that UPEACE contributes to international peace and security

Culture of Peace Programme Area

Strengths Weaknesses

Local Peace and Security Most students always feel safe on campus

Most students develop knowledge about conflict resolution

Some concerns about the road between UPEACE and Ciudad Colon

Concern about relations with El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon communities

Insufficient conflict resolution channels within UPEACE community

Inner Peace Strong extracurricular programmes for inner peace

Setting of UPEACE promotes inner peace

Most students do not develop knowledge about or skills for inner peace

A major strength for the culture of peace is that community members

develop knowledge in most areas. All ten master’s programmes are related to

peace, and most students develop knowledge for peacebuilding in their

programmes. Most students develop knowledge about the other programme

areas of a culture of peace in their programmes, including human rights,

sustainability, gender equality, democratic principles, international peace and

security, and conflict resolution. Most students report that community

members value most culture of peace programme areas, including human

rights, understanding, solidarity, tolerance, gender equality, and peaceful

communication. With respect to gender equality, most students agreed that

men and women are treated equally across the community. With respect to

peaceful communication, most students agreed that community members try

to communicate peacefully and that there is a free flow of information

between students. Most students agree that UPEACE contributes to

international peace and security. Regarding local peace and security, most

students always feel safe on campus. With respect to inner peace, there are

strong extracurricular programmes for inner peace, and the tranquil natural

setting of the campus is conducive to developing a state of inner peace. These

strengths highlight the degree to which UPEACE has already developed a

culture of peace.

A challenge in all areas is the gap between knowledge development, and

skill development and application in daily life. In most areas, community

members develop knowledge and values for a culture of peace; however, the

way this manifests in daily life and in practice is often contradictory to the

knowledge and values. While this is probably often an issue in academia,

which tends to focus more on theory, it is absolutely critical that the practical,

skills-based component of the various peace-related master’s programmes be

at least as equally developed as the theoretical component. I believe that the

gap between peace theory and peace experience on campus partially relates

to skill development, and also to personal reflection as to how we are

personally integrating the knowledge and values that we are learning as

individuals and as a community. Furthermore, while each of the master’s

programmes has a different focus, there are skills relating to a culture of

peace that are relevant and necessary for peaceworkers in all fields that all

community members develop, such as active listening and conflict resolution

skills.

With respect to the hindrances to a culture of peace at UPEACE, a

number of comments reflected the need to institutionalise various practices

for a culture of peace. This means to implement policies that support a culture

of peace, and for the institution to carry out these policies in practice. With a

94

more formal institutionalisation of these practices, more community members

should engage in behaviour that is consistent with the policies.

It is also important for community members - students, staff, faculty, and

administration - to receive support to initiate programs for a culture of peace.

According to the theory of Freire (1970), the ultimate goal of education is for

action towards transformation. It is critical that through the learning process -

which is happening at all times by all community members, inside and outside

the classroom - that members also have the opportunity to take action. With

respect to democratic decision making at UPEACE as discussed above,

participants in this survey stated that they did not feel as though their voices

were heard by the administration. As a result, and as reported in the

qualitative data, some community members felt disempowered, frustrated,

and doubtful of the democratic process. In order to promote a culture of peace

at UPEACE, community members need to be empowered to be able to make

decisions and take action to promote a culture of peace, and one way that this

could happen is through increased participation in democratic decision-

making.

As noted above, students come to UPEACE with a wealth of experience

and knowledge. UPEACE as an institution and community should not miss the

opportunity to take full advantage of each student’s talents, interest, and

desire to give back to the community.

A number of issues that arose were directly related to lack of

communication between the administration with students and transparency.

For example, a number of students want to know what happens to the

recycling, how tuition money is spent, how financial aid is determined, and

what the SFS role is. These could all be clarified through improved

communication and transparency.

With respect to how to assess the culture of peace, this research project

was one step in this assessment. Through this research, it became clear that

in order to further understand the culture of peace, additional research should

be taken, which will be explored in Chapter 12.

The UPEACE community is progressing on the path of a culture of

peace. This research highlights the areas where this culture is already strong,

and the areas that can improve to move farther along this path. The UPEACE

Community Culture of Peace Action Plan in Chapter 12 outlines some steps

that the community can take in order to continue improving. I hope that this

research will be used to take action towards strengthening the UPEACE

community culture of peace in a holistic, integrated way.

12. UPEACE Community Culture of Peace Action Plan

From the exploration of the culture of peace at UPEACE, this research

offers the following recommendations in the form of a UPEACE Community

Culture of Peace Action Plan to be considered by the UPEACE administration,

staff, faculty and community. Ideally, this is the first such action plan, but this

exercise and action plan development should be performed on an annual basis

to ensure continuity and assess progress. This plan of action includes some of

the recommendations made by participants, as well as recommendations that

I, the researcher, feel would be valuable contributions to the community’s

culture of peace, in light of the research findings. The action plan is divided

into three categories: policy, research, and education and trainings.

The primary recommendation is for continued culture of peace

assessment, and for the university to develop an integrated, holistic approach

to developing a community culture of peace. The following recommendations

are initial steps on the path of culture of peace assessment.

While the community was involved in developing this action plan

through the ideas they contributed to the survey, working group and feedback

session, in future years, ideally there would be a community working group

(or series of groups) to develop the action plan.

12.1 Policy

While some policies were reviewed for the current research, a detailed,

thorough policy analysis was beyond its scope. In order to make more

thorough policy recommendations, further research on the universities

policies in regards to a culture of peace is needed. However, some

recommendations can be offered from the research findings.

Participation evaluation standards: Clear standards for

participation would strengthen the culture of peace by clarifying

the educational evaluation process. Such factors could be based on

96

attendance, and include respect for different forms of

participation, such as active listening.

Environmental policy: Mainstreaming environmental

sustainability in policy and practice would strengthen the

university’s overall culture of peace by creating greater harmony

with the environment. These policies could be articulated in the

Student Handbook, and a session given at orientation explaining

the policy so that all community members would be aware.

Greater awareness is needed of the campus recycling policy. As

different items are recyclable in different countries, recycling

education would lead to greater clarity, and could be given at

orientation, and through ongoing campaigns (such as through

posters, well-marked bins) to improve recycling efforts. These

policies should include efforts for decreased consumption,

recycling, energy conservation, and green building.

Role of SFS: Clarifying the role of SFS would lead to greater

understanding in regards to this form of community democracy.

This year, a committee was working on a mission statement, and

this effort should be completed. This effort will help to contribute

to clarifying the democratic decision making process, and

hopefully increase democratic participation on campus.

Intra-community communications committee: In order to

improve the free flow of information, a committee could be formed

to determine how to best improve communications between the

administration and students, to ensure that students receive

important information in a timely manner. This committee could

also work on issues of transparency, such as with financial aid and

other issues that require clarification.

Establishment of the Office of Diversity and Equality:

Establishing the Office of Diversity and Equality would lead to

improved protection and responsibility of human rights, and

increased understanding and tolerance. According to the Student

Handbook (University for Peace, 2009), the Office of Diversity and

Equality is responsible for handling issues of discrimination and

other issues surrounding equality, diversity, and multiculturalism.

As of now, this office only exists on paper. I recommend the

establishment of this office, in particular due to the findings in this

research on discrimination. Upon its establishment, this office

could work on issues such as disability mainstreaming and

linguistic rights.

Ombudsperson: Establishing an office of an Ombudsperson

would contribute to a culture of peace by improving campus

conflict resolution. Many universities have an ombudsperson who

handles the myriad of conflicts that may occur in the university

setting. Alcover (2009) notes that “since institutions of higher

education are as prone to conflicts as all other human

organizations, it is imperative that university practice what it

purports to teach in the area of conflict resolution” (275). This is

particularly relevant for an institution specializing in international

peace. Alcover presents a contingent model of mediation

interventions within the scope of the University Ombudsperson

based on three dimensions:

“the level of balance or symmetry of power characterizing

the relationships between the parties involved; the

foreseeable temporal perspective of the relationship (short-

term vs. medium- and long-term); and the level of

formalization of the mediation process (establishing a

continuum between formal and informal mediations)” (2009:

276).

Such a model could be used by UPEACE to implement an office of

an Ombudsperson, which would serve as a conflict resolution

mechanism for the community.

Community Liaison Office: A community liaison office could

contribute to the culture of peace by increasing local peace and

security through stronger ties with local communities. This is a

response that combines some students’ observations that the

university could have greater involvement with local communities,

and some students’ request for more field work. Appendix B

outlines a proposal for a Community Liaison Office, that would

98

coordinate projects in the local communities with UPEACE

students and community members.

12.2 Further research

The current research elucidated several areas where further research is

needed.

Culture of peace policy analysis: A deeper analysis of the

university’s formal policies with respect to culture of peace areas

would complement this research.

Culture of peace survey: Completing this survey in subsequent

years would create a better understanding of the culture of peace,

and allow the community to track its progress. In addition, all

community members should be included, and the survey adapted

according to relevance and needs of different populations (for

example, for faculty, staff, etc.).

Culture of peace benchmarking: As discussed in Chapter 9, it

would be beneficial to examine initiatives and protocols at other

universities that are working towards a culture of peace.

Systematic programme content analysis: Similar to the policy

analysis, a systematic programme content analysis would examine

the integration of all areas of a culture of peace, using the

framework in this study.

Culture of peace analysis of other communities: A similar analysis to the

one conducted through this project could be carried out at other institutions

or in other communities.

12.3 Education and trainings

Additional trainings were suggested by student feedback, including

cross-cultural, nonviolent communication, environmental, and democratic

skill-building workshops.

Cultural training and discussion groups: A number of

participants in the survey emphasized the need for promoting

understanding. I propose having some cross-cultural training as a

part of orientation and foundation course. Then, I propose the

formation of small groups – perhaps 5 students per group – from

different regions, that would meet on a weekly basis to have cross-

cultural dialogue. Another peace education student, Dawn

Warmbrand, is currently carrying out her research on

interculturalism at UPEACE, and will be making recommendations

for increased understanding. Please see her independent research

project for further details.

Nonviolent communication training and groups: A number of

students who participated in the survey requested nonviolent

communication training, and previous classes also expressed

interest in such training in research by Wichmann (2009) and Rizzi

Carlson (2009). In a similar pattern to the intercultural training, I

suggest some nonviolent communication training during

orientation and foundation course, followed by study groups that

would meet periodically, perhaps once a week, to continue

practicing nonviolent communication. Marshall Rosenberg’s

Nonviolent Communication (2003) is one method, but other

methods should also be presented. A companion workbook exists

for Rosenberg’s book that could be used to guide the study groups.

Culture of peace workshop series: In order to advance the

culture of peace at UPEACE, and turn academic theory into daily

practice, I propose a 12-week Culture of Peace workshop series.

Each week, one workshop would be offered on the week’s featured

programme area. The workshop series would be carried out once a

semester, with different emphases in the second semester. The

workshops would be skills-oriented and reflective. These

workshops are specifically to address the gaps that remain in skill

development and application in daily life. The sequence of the

workshops is from inner to outer peace, from the individual to the

international. Each workshop would be 1.5 hours long.

These workshops would be intended for all community members. Each

workshop would be offered once in the morning and once in the afternoon to

accommodate everyone’s schedules.

The following is a sample format and list of topics. Ideally, different sessions

would be run by one community member who would ensure continuity and 100

coherence throughout the program. When appropriate, guest speakers from

within or outside the community would be invited to share their expertise or

relevant experience. As with other culture of peace practices, best practices

from other communities could be integrated. Many educational workshops on

these topics have been developed by other institutions. The sample list

includes workshop ideas from the Bonner Foundation (2010), an organization

that works with college communities in promoting education for social

change. As with the benchmarking, a similar research could be carried out to

compile different curricula on these topics.

Week 1: Culture of Peace – Overview

Key questions: What is a culture of peace? How do I already apply these

principles to my life? How can we promote a culture of peace at

UPEACE?

Objectives: After this workshop, participants will be able to:

Define a culture of peace

Envision a culture of peace at UPEACE

This session would provide an overview of the culture of peace framework,

and ask participants to start thinking about how to apply the concepts in their

daily lives, using the Manifesto 2000 guidelines. Ideally, this session would

take place during orientation or foundation week.

Exercises: Participants brainstorm about culture of peace. The culture of

peace framework is presented. Participants break into small groups and

create a vision of a culture of peace at UPEACE – What would a culture of

peace at UPEACE look like? What practices and behaviours do we as

community members need to exhibit and integrate in order to manifest a

culture of peace on campus?

Resources: Culture of Peace Framework, Manifesto 2000

Week 2: Inner peace

Key questions: What is inner peace to me? What are different practices

for inner peace?

Objectives: After this workshop, students will

Understand different techniques for cultivating inner peace

Understand the importance of inner peace in a culture of peace

This session will examine different practices that participants can use to

cultivate inner peace. Different non-religious techniques for cultivating inner

peace will be explored. Students will be asked to share any techniques that

they use that help them to develop inner peace. Sample activities include

brainstorming on inner peace, a mindful eating exercise and compassion

meditation.

Week 3: Environmental Sustainability

Key questions: How does my lifestyle impact the environment? What can

I do to live sustainably at UPEACE?

Objectives: After this workshop, participants will be able to

Assess their personal environmental impact

Understand ways that they can personally reduce their impact

Learn ways to create a more sustainable community,

collectively

This session will ask participants to reflect on their lifestyles in terms of

environmental sustainability. Participants will use a tool (such as an ecological

footprint questionnaire) to evaluate their personal environmental impact in

order to reflect on ways they can improve their relationship with the

environment. Participants will also examine the UPEACE community to think

of collective initiatives that could be taken to increase the sustainability of the

community.

Week 4: Participatory Communication and the Free Flow of

Information – a nonviolent communication primer*

*Note: if the nonviolent communication training has already occurred as a

part of training or orientation, then this session can be a review, or take a

different focus, such as focusing on active listening, etc.

Key questions: What does it mean to communicate nonviolently? How

can I be peaceful in my speech?

Objectives: After this workshop, participants will be able to

Use nonviolent communication techniques to connect

observations, feelings, needs and requests102

Use active listening

Explore other ways of communicating peacefully

This session will introduce key concepts in nonviolent communication, such

as:

Differentiating between observations and evaluation

Differentiating feeling from thinking

Connecting universal needs/values to feelings

Making clear requests for what you want

Active listening

Week 5: Education: Creating a peaceful classroom environment

Key questions: What does education for peace/peace education mean?

What does it mean to have a peaceful learning environment? How can we

create peaceful learning environments here at UPEACE, without avoiding

conflict?

Objectives: After this session, participants will

Define what attributes are part of a peaceful classroom

Be able to integrate these attributes as students or teachers.

In this session, participants will explore the ideas of creating a balanced

learning environment, where students feel safe and are free to express

themselves, while diving deeply into issues that could potentially cause

conflict. Ideas discussed will include classroom guidelines, dialogue dynamics,

and handling classroom conflicts.

Week 6: Advancing Understanding, Tolerance and Solidarity

Key questions: What tools do I need to understand others? What

assumptions do I bring from my worldview/culture? How can I heighten my

awareness to be respectful of others?

Objectives: After this session, participants will

Have skills for cross-cultural understanding

Be able to reflect on their own identities and ethnocentricities

This session will focus on cultural understanding in order to help students to

take full advantage of the multicultural environment at UPEACE. Students will

also explore ideas of ethnocentrism.

Resources: “Communicating Across Cultures” http://www.culture-at-

work.com/ex1xcincidents.html

http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/BonCurIdentityCircles.pdf

http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/EthnocentrismTraining.pdf

Week 7: Gender equality

Key questions: What is my understanding of gender? How do gender

roles play out in my life? How can I integrate gender principles into my

work?

Objectives: After this session, participants will be able to

Define gender

Understand how gender roles are present in their lives

Begin the process of integrating gender sensitivity into their

work

This session will focus on gender equality and personal identification with

gender. Through personal reflection, participants will gain a deeper

understanding in the role that gender plays in their lives, and begin to think of

ways that they can mainstream gender equality in their work.

Resource:

http://www.bonner.org/resources/modules/modules_pdf/BonCurGender2Deepe

ning.pdf

Week 8: Local peace and security – Conflict Resolution

Key questions: How can I solve daily conflicts in a nonviolent way?

Objectives: After this workshop, participants will

Understand basic mediation techniques

Be equipped to handle interpersonal conflicts

Ideally this session would be co-taught by community members who have

mediation experience, as generally there are several members of the

community who have mediation backgrounds.

Resource: http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/BonCurConflictResolution.pdf

Week 9: Human Rights: Exploring Discrimination

Key questions: What is discrimination? How do I discriminate?

Objective: After this workshop, participants will 104

Understand different kinds of discrimination

Understand how to take action if they have experienced

discrimination at UPEACE

This session will explore issues of discrimination in daily life. Participants will

explore ways in which they may have personally experienced discrimination or

have discriminated against others. Participants will become familiar with ways

to deal with discrimination at UPEACE.

Resource: http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/BonCurRacism.pdf

Week 10: Democratic Participation

Key questions: How does democratic decision-making happen in daily

life? What are different ways to participate democratically? How can we

promote democratic participation at UPEACE?

Objective: After this workshop, participants will

Understand different ways to participate democratically

Have an action plan for how they can participate democratically at

UPEACE

This session will focus on how to apply principles of democratic participation

to daily life, at home and at UPEACE.

Resource: http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/BonCurCitizenshipRts.pdf -

this would need to be adapted for the UPEACE context, but provides ideas for

exploring the idea of democratic citizenship.

Week 11: International Peace and security

Key questions: How can we contribute to the global culture of peace?

What would international security look like in a culture of peace?

Objectives: After this workshop, participants will

Be able to apply culture of peace concepts in their home regions

Understand different ideas of international security and how to

achieve it

In this session participants will look globally, with a discussion on how they

can contribute to cultures of peace in their home regions, and how this can be

integrated towards a global culture of peace. Ideas of alternative international

security will be examined.

Week 12: Integrating practices: Reflecting on the semester, Action

plan for next semester

Key questions: What are related topics that we’d like to explore next

semester? What does the culture of peace look like so far in the semester?

How should we move forward?

Objectives: After this session, participants will

evaluate the UPEACE culture of peace up to this point in their

experience

leave with concrete actions to take to strengthen the culture of

peace

This session will integrate the knowledge and work of the past 11 sessions.

Participants will reflect on their experience at UPEACE so far, assess the

culture of peace, and develop a vision for the next semester. Participants will

brainstorm ways in which the community can strengthen the culture of peace.

This session should also include an evaluation of this 12-week workshop

series.

Resource: http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/BonCurSharedVision.pdf

106

14. References

Adams, D., et. al. (1986). The Seville Statement on Violence. Retrieved on June

12, 201

from:http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.phpURL_ID=3247&URL_DO=D

O_TOPIC

&URL_SECTION=201.html

Adams, D. (1995). UNESCO and a Culture of Peace: Promoting a Global

Movement. Original

edition out of print. Available at:

http://www.culture-of-peace.info/monograph/page1.html

Adams, D. (2009). World Peace through the Town Hall: A Strategy for the

global movement for a

culture of peace. Self-published. Available at: http://www.culture-of-

peace.info/books/worldpeace.html

Alcover, C. (2009). Ombudsing in Higher Education: A Contingent Model for

Mediation in

University Dispute Resolution Processes. Spanish Journal of Psychology

12(1), 275-287.

Retrieved on June 23, 2010 from:

http://147.96.1.15/BUCM/revistas/psi/11387416/articulos/SJOP0909120275A.

PDF

Avruch, K. (1998). Culture and conflict resolution. Washington DC: United

States Institute of

Peace, pp. 5-21.

Brenes-Castro, A. (2004). An Integral Model of Peace Education. In Educating

for a Culture

of Social and Ecological Peace, Wenden, A. L., (ed.) Albany: State

University of New

York Press. pp. 77-98.

Carter, C. (2005). Standards for Peace Education. Handout.

Cawagas, V. (2007). Pedagogical principles in educating for a culture of

peace. In Toh, S.H., & V.

Cawagas (Eds.) Cultivating Wisdom, Harvesting Peace. Brisbane,

Queensland: Multi-Faith

Centre, Griffith University.

Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design. London: Sage. pp. 3-21.

Culture of Peace Foundation. (2005). World Report on the Culture of Peace:

Civil Society report at

midpoint of the Culture of Peace Decade. Barcelona. Available at:

http://www.decade-culture-of-peace.org/2005report.html

de Rivera, J. H. (2004) A template for assessing cultures of peace. Peace and

Conflict, 10(2). pp.

125-146. 

de Rivera, J. H. (2005). Opinion: Assessing the Culture of Peace. UN Chronicle

Online Edition,

issue 2. Retrieved on December 4, 2009 from:

http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2005/issue2/0205p53.html

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder & Herder.

Groff, L. & Smoker, P. (1996) Creating global/local cultures of peace. In

UNESCO (Ed.) From a

culture of violence to a culture of peace. Paris: UNESCO. pp. 103-127.

108

International Congress on Peace in the Minds of Men. (1989) The

Yamoussoukro Declaration on

Peace in the Minds of Men.  Yamoussoukro, Côte D'Ivoire.

Merriam-Webster. (2010).Online Dictionary. http://www.merriam-

webster.com/

Nhat Hanh, T. (2003). Creating true peace. London: Rider. Pp. 182-208.

Ortiz, C. (2010). University for Peace Department of Academic Administration.

Personal

Communication via email. June 29.

Presidential Commission for the University for Peace (1981). University for

Peace:

Basic Documents. San José, Costa Rica. 

Reardon, B. & Diallo, D. (1980). Creation of a Pedagogic Institute for Peace.

International Seminar

on Education and Communications for Peace: Provisional Report.

In University for Peace:

Basic Documents. pp. 195-197.

Renner, M. (2005). Security redefined. In M. Renner, H. French, & E.

Assadourian (Project

Directors). State of the World. Pp. 3-19. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

Rizzi Carlson, O. (2009). The Peacebuilding Center @ UPEACE. Master’s

thesis. University for

Peace.

Rosenberg, M. (2003). Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life.

Encinitas: Puddledancer

Press.

Shiman, D. & Rudelius-Palmer, K. (1999). Taking the Human Rights

Temperature of Your School.

In Economic and Social Justice: A Human Rights Perspective.

Minneapolis: Human Rights Resource Center, University of Minnesota.

Retrieved on June 24, 2010 from:

http://www.hrusa.org/hrmaterials/temperature/temperature.shtm

Synott, J. (2004). Global and international studies. Transdisciplinary

perspectives. Southbank,

VIC: Social Science Press (since acquired by Thomson Learning

Australia), Chapter 12:

Ethics, Rights and Subordinated People. pp. 300-334.

The Bonner Foundation. (2010). Accessed on June 30, 2010 at:

http://www.bonner.org.

The Earth Charter. (1997). Retrieved on December 9, 2009 from: 

http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/uk/uk_sum_cp.htm.

Toh, S.H. & Cawagas, V.F. (1987). Peace education: A framework for the

Philippines. Quezon

City: Phoenix Publishing House, pp. 57-76.

Toh, S.H. & Cawagas, V.F. (2002). A Holistic Understanding of a Culture of

Peace. Presented at

the APCEIU Expert Consultation on EIU, Fiji.

Toh, S.H. (2006). Education for sustainable development and the weaving of a

culture of peace:

Complementaries and synergies. Paper presented at the UNESCO

Expert Meeting on

Education for Sustainable Development (ESD): Reorienting Education to

Address

Sustainability, 1-3 May 2006, Kanchanaburi, Thailand.

110

Toh, S. H. (2007). Pathways to the building of a culture of peace. Presented at

the Peace Education

Workshop in Uganda, 10-13 July 2007, organized by the Ugandan

National Commission for

UNESCO and the Korean National Commission for UNESCO. pp. 1-14.

UN General Assembly. (26 June 1945). Charter of the United Nations.

Retrieved on June 12, 2010

from: http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/preamble.shtml

UN General Assembly (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Retrieved on June 23, 2010

from: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

UN General Assembly (17 December 1980). A/RES/35/55: Resolution on the

Establishment of the

University for Peace. 

UN General Assembly (15 January 1998). A/RES/53/13: A Culture of

Peace. Retrieved on

December 16, 2009 from http://daccess-dds-

ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N98/760/15/PDF/N9876015.pdf?

OpenElement.

UN General Assembly (15 January 1998). A/RES/53/15: Proclamation of the

year 2000 as the

International Year for a Culture of Peace. Retrieved on June 12, 2010

from:

http://www.undemocracy.com/A-RES-52-15.pdf

UN General Assembly (2 September 1998). A/RES/53/370: Consolidated

report containing a draft

declaration and programme of action on a culture of peace. Retrieved on

June 12, 2010

from:

http://www.culture-of-peace.info/annexes/resA-53-370/coverpage.html

UN General Assembly (19 November 1998). A/RES/53/25: International

Decade for a Culture of

Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the World, 2001-

2010. Retrieved on December

16, 2009 from http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/uk/uk_sum_refdoc.htm

UN General Assembly (6 October 1999).  A/RES/53/243: Declaration and

Programme of Action on

a Culture of Peace. Retrieved on December 9, 2009 from 

http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/uk/uk_sum_cp.htm.

UN General Assembly (25 February 2005). A/RES/59/143: International

Decade for a Culture of

Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the World, 2001-

2010. Retrieved on December

10, 2009

from http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/kits/Resolutions%20UN/A_RES_59143e.pdf.

UN General Assembly (19 August 2005). A/60/279: Midterm global review of

the International

Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the

World, 2001-2010.

Retrieved on June 12. 2010 from:

http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/Report/A%2060%20279%20ENG.pdf

UN General Assembly (13 December 2006). Convention on the Rights of

Persons with Disabilities.

Retrieved on June 23, 2010 from:

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/disabilities-

convention.htm

112

UNESCO. (1945). Constitution of the United Nations Education, Scientific,

and Cultural

Organization. Retrieved on June 23, 2010 from:

http://www.icomos.org/unesco/unesco_constitution.html

UNESCO. (1995). Declaration of Principles on Tolerance. Retrieved on June

16, 2010 from:

http://www.unesco.org/webworld/peace_library/UNESCO/HRIGHTS/124-

129.HTM

UNESCO. (1999). Manifesto 2000. Retrieved on June 12, 2010 from:

http://www3.unesco.org/manifesto2000/uk/uk_manifeste.htm

UNESCO. (2002). Mainstreaming the culture of peace. Retrieved on June 7,

2010

from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001263/126398e.pdf

UNESCO. (2001). Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. Paris:

UNESCO.

UNESCO. (2010). Culture of peace: what is it? Retrieved on June 16, 2010

from:

http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/uk/uk_sum_cp.htm

University for Peace. (2005). Contribution of the University for Peace to the

Mid-Term Report of

the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the Implementation of

United Nations General Assembly resolutions on the International

Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the

World, 2001-2010. Retrieved on June 6, 2010 from:

http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/Report/UPEACE.pdf

University for Peace. (2008). Annual Report: 2007-2008. Retrieved on June 12,

2010 from:

http://www.upeace.org/PDF/UPEACE%20anuual%20report%2007-08.pdf

University for Peace. (2009). Student Handbook. Department of Academic

Administration.

Vaughn Chaverri, C. (2007). Peace through Health Initiatives toward a Culture

of Peace: A New

Perspective to Incorporate at the University for Peace? Master’s thesis.

University for

Peace. 

Webster, R. (2007). Correlates of Peace Culture: Towards Culture of Peace

Indicators.

Master’s thesis. University for Peace. 

Webster, R. (2008). Culture of Peace Assessment Tools/Report Card. Retrieved

on December

9, 2009 from

http://www.cultureofpeace.ca/culture_of_peace_assessment_tool.htm

Wenden, A. Introduction. In A. Wenden (Ed.) Educating for a Culture of Social

and Ecological

Peace. Albany: SUNY Press.

Wessels, M. (1994). The Role of Peace Education in a Culture of Peace: A

Social-Psychological

Analysis. Peace Education Miniprints No. 65. Malmo, Sweden: School of

Education.

114

Appendix A: Summary of UPEACE contributions to UN Decade Reports

2001-2005*

Programme Area

2001 (A/56/349)2002

(A/57/186/Add.1)

2003 (A/58/182)

2004 (A/59/223)

Culture of Peace Through Education

· Consultations

· Advisory meetings

· Memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with UNESCO & UNU

· Priority to develop peace studies courses to build capacity in developing world

· Short courses in Central Asia, Latin America, Africa

· UPEACE foundation course

· Peace education masters and international consultation on the programme

· Training programmes and international peace studies

· Students graduated from NRSD, HRS, and ILSD

· Capacity-building in peace education and conflict prevention

· Courses in Budapest and Bangkok

· Multicultural courses on key peace-related issues (and dissemination to partner universities)

· Foundation course in international peace studies

· Repetition of newly established masters programmes(GPB, IPS, PE, ESP)

· Missions in 10 countries for education for peace in Africa

· 3 curriculum development workshops conducted in Africa

· Short courses for mid-career professionals

· Formal partnership with UNESCO & UNDP on Foundations for Africa's future leadership

116

2001 2002 2003 2004

Sustainable Economic and Social Development

· The Earth Council partnership

· Short courses in natural resources and conflict prevention and socio-economic development and peace

· American University (AU) dual master’s programme being planned

· Short courses in natural resources and conflict prevention

· 2nd year of AU dual master’s programme in Natural Resources and Sustainable Development (NRSD)

· partnership with LEAD International

· Short courses

· Continuation of AU NRSD programme

· LEAD International partnership

· New master’s programme in Environment, Security and Peace

· Continuation of NRSD programme

· Launching Environmental Peace and Security (ESP) programme

· Research on "Conflict and collaboration in natural resources management in Latin America and the Caribbean"

· Curriculum development on the relationship between youth,

employment/economic opportunities, and the prevention of violence

· Continued support to Earth Charter Initiative

2001 2002 2003 2004

Respect for all human rights

· Expert seminar on Human Rights and Peace in Geneva

· New Masters programmes in Human Rights Studies (HRS) and International Law and Settlement of Disputes (ILSD)

· 2nd year of HRS and ILSD programmes

· ILSD & International Law and Human Rights (formerly HRS)

· Preparation of human rights education material to disseminate in developing countries

118

Equality between men and women

· Masters in gender being prepared

· Short course on gender and conflict being launched

· International training on gender and peace-building for UN staff

· International meeting for development of gender master’s programme

· 2nd international training on gender and peace-building

· Gender master’s programme to be launched in 2003

· Consultation between UPEACE & UNESCO to address gender issues in Latin America

· New course in gender and peacebuilding

· Speicialised courses on gender and peacebuilding

· African women peacemakers programme for training and support

· One-week advanced intensive course on gender focus in peace processes

2001 2002 2003 2004

Democratic participation

· MOU with International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA)

· Continued collaboration with International IDEA on bilateral and multilateral projects

· Continued collaboration with International IDEA

· All 7 masters programmes deal with democratic participation

· Short courses on democratic participation

· Consultations in Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay

120

Understanding, tolerance and solidarity

· Project to launch peace education and research in central Asia

· International Seminar on Disability

· Development on courses for civil-military relations

· Follow-up work with Seminar on Disability

· Further projects with Inclusion International

· Civil-military course being developed in Asia and Latin America

· Summer course on human rights and religion

· Specialized course in "practises in conflict management and peacebuilding" for wide dissemination

· Brazil - assisting government with Peace in the cities and peace in the countryside" programme

2001 2002 2003 2004

Participatory communicationand the free flow of information

· Established media and peace institute (3-yr. development plan)

· International conference on the Lessons of the Tajik Peace Process for Afghanistan

· Institute for Media, Peace and Security to be located in Geneva

· Research on media and peace being initiated in Latin America and Africa

· Module being developed for UPEACE masters programmes

· Centre for Education and Information Technology at UPEACE - to develop infrastructure to make UPEACE materials available globally and maintain UPEACE web site

· Institute for Media, Peace and Security launched 4 new courses

· Revamping Africa programme's web site

122

International Peace and security

· Agreement with Royal Thai army to develop education and training programs

· Initiative w/Colombian government to est. conflict resolution institute

· Partnership with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

· Agreement for the establishment of a subsidiary office of the International Court of Arbitration at the main campus

· Promising contacts with UNiLAC

· Seminars on drug abuse and firearms

· Official launch of World Center for Research and Training in CR (WCRTCR) in Bogota

· 2 international seminars on international security

· In contact with ICA about establishing court on main campus

· Working with various agencies in the Americas on courses on control of illicit small arms trade

· WCRTCR

· 2 books on security published in Spanish

· High-level trainings aimed at senior officials, teachers and scholars in Central America

· Peace education and human rights curriculum for military services in Sierra Leone

· Creation of Latin America Centre for dispute settlement

· Course on illicit trafficking of small arms

*While UPEACE contributed to the 2005 mid-term report (A/60/279), the report was an overall summary of 2001-2004 efforts, emphasizing the development of new master's academic programmes, 5-year revitalisation plan

adopted by the UPEACE council, and the dissemination of worldwide teaching materials. 

124

Appendix B: Proposal for UPEACE Community Liaison

Proposal for University for Peace Community Liaison Office

(Submitted as part of Peace Education: Strategies for Life, Final Paper,

Stephanie Knox)

Introduction

In the course Peace Education: Strategies for Life, we had the

opportunity to conduct field research in El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon, the two

communities most directly connected with the University for Peace. Even

though we live and spend a lot of time in these communities, for many of us it

was the first time we visited a school or other community institutions. In

speaking with community members, we realized the strong desire for greater

involvement from the University, and at times an even negative perception of

the University for its lack of involvement in the communities thus far. At the

same time, UPEACE students would like to develop greater connection with

the communities, and would also gain practical experience in their related

fields. The local communities are potential "live learning labs" for the students

to turn theory into practice, which are currently being underutilized.

Furthermore, it provides the opportunity for service learning, allowing

students to make meaningful contributions to their host communities.

Although in our field work we worked specifically with the education sector,

opportunities exist for students in all programs who would like to gain

experience and give back to the community.

A constraint on maintaining consistent community relations is that there

is no permanent structure at UPEACE dedicated to these efforts. While

different efforts have been made from year to year, by different individuals

and different programs, there is a lack of continuity in these efforts that is

detrimental to sustainability, partially due to the fact that students are only at

the university for one year. In order to build lasting ties, and to build

programs that meet community needs, there needs to be a permanent

structure established at the University to promote community partnerships

and outreach. Thus I am proposing the establishment of a Community

Outreach Program at the University for Peace, headed by the Community

Liaison Officer.

The Community Outreach Program would help students to begin

projects within the community soon after their arrival, matching them based

on their interests and skills, and to develop projects and relationships

throughout the year. The Community Liaison Officer would be responsible for

maintaining ties within the community, for seeking out new partnerships, and

for assisting students with project development and implementation. The

Outreach Coordinator would also be responsible for maintaining institutional

memory of the outreach projects from year to year.

Background: Past to Future

While the University for Peace has been in existence for 30 years, it is really

only within the past several years that it has hosted a significant student

population. The increase in student population has had a significant impact on

the local communities of El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon. The University is located

in El Rodeo, a small farming community of 37 families. Some students live in

el Rodeo, while most live in Ciudad Colon, a larger city of 21,000 inhabitants

located 7 kilometers from the university.  As the university population has

increased, there has been an increase in the number of local businesses, local

taxis, and many local residents can earn money by providing student housing.

However, at this time, this relationship is largely economic, and has the

potential much stronger and deeper, and transformative for all parties

involved. The University has plans for further expansion, increasing the

number of programs offered and the number of students. With this plan for

expansion, it has the possibility of having greater impact, and it is important

to develop good relations with the communities now, so that all can be

mutually involved in this growth process. Furthermore, if this growth is going

to affect the local communities, which it inevitably will, it would be advisable

for these stakeholders to be consulted in the planning process.

From the global to the local

The University for Peace's mission is "to provide humanity with an

international institution of higher education for peace and with the aim of

promoting among all human beings the spirit of understanding, tolerance and 126

peaceful coexistence, to stimulate cooperation among peoples and to help

lessen obstacles and threats to world peace and progress, in keeping with the

noble aspirations proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations " UN

General Assembly, 1980). While the mission is global, the university should

begin its aims at the local level, by sharing knowledge, skills and resources

with the local communities, and promoting "understanding, tolerance, and

peaceful coexistence, (and) cooperation" within the immediate communities.

Structures and Partnerships

This project will be a joint effort between the University and the communities

of El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon, thus involving multiple structures. To begin, I

propose the following partnerships:

1. UPEACE and El Rodeo elementary school

2. UPEACE and Casa de la Cultura in Ciudad Colón

3. UPEACE and the Ciudad Colon elementary school

In the future, the University could expand its efforts, but for the first

year, I would suggest these partnerships, beginning with the first two, and if

time and resources allow, including the third.

As UPEACE is a formal educational institution, I propose the creation of

a new structure (of the Community Liaison Office) within the present larger

university structure. The Community Outreach Program would operate within

UPEACE and in conjunction with the structures of the formal Costa Rican

educational system and the nonformal Casa de la Cultura community

education center. 

Considerations in planning will have to take into account the structures

of UPEACE and the Costa Rican formal educational system, of which the el

Rodeo school is a part. For example, within UPEACE, programs could be

offered as an extracurricular activity, for credit, or as internships. Programs

would thus have to meet the requirements for credits or internships, whereas

the extracurricular activities would have greater flexibility. UPEACE will also

have to consider any formalities that should be taken in order to formally

establish the partnership with the school. It will be the job of the Outreach

Coordinator to understand these structures, and help inform students

accordingly. 

The Casa de la Cultura, as a nonformal educational structure, most

likely has greater flexibility than the formal school system. Again, the

Outreach Coordinator should meet with the appropriate individuals (such as

the president of ADHERAC, Minor Perez) in order to better understand the

structure.

Form

This endeavor should be between the UPEACE community and the El Rodeo

and Ciudad Colon community members. The UPEACE students should work in

collaboration with community members to develop project that meet

community needs as well as the needs and skills of the UPEACE students. The

relationship should be equal and horizontal, and based on mutual learning and

dialogue. The entire process should be participatory and democratic. To foster

cultural respect and strengthen communication, UPEACE students should

make a best effort to learn and communicate in Spanish (unless they are

teaching a language class, which could be a part of cultural exchange efforts

with the Casa de la Cultura).

The main role of the Community Outreach Coordinator would be the

liaison between students and the communities, rather than to design projects

his/herself. Maintaining healthy community relations will be an integral part

of this position. All projects should involve peace education pedagogies, such

as dialogue, creativity, reflection, and critical inquiry.

Sample Content: Art for Peace Project

The content of projects will again vary depending on community and UPEACE

student needs, the possibilities for which are unlimited. As both of our field

trips involved interviews with community members, some community needs

have already been established.

The El Rodeo school is highly interested in developing peace education

programs for the school. Two projects that could begin immediately are:

1. Peace Education teacher training for El Rodeo teachers

2. Art for Peace class for students

128

For this report I would like to focus on the Art for Peace Project, which

could be done in conjunction with the El Rodeo school, Casa de la Cultura, and

possibly the Ciudad Colón elementary school.

At this time, there is no art class offered at the El Rodeo school, and art

has a significant role in peacebuilding. In our interview we asked the children

to draw pictures in response to the question, "What is peace?" It was evident

that they really enjoyed drawing, and that this could be offered on a more

regular basis. Furthermore, and Art for Peace class could be carried out by

UPEACE students with limited Spanish language abilities (in comparison with

a teacher training, which would require Spanish fluency). The school is also

lacking any decorations, and thus art projects could be used to beautify the

school, and give the children a source of pride in their work on display.

The Art for Peace program would be a one hour weekly class conducted

by UPEACE students according to the schedule of the school. To get supplies,

UPEACE students could solicit donations through a bake sale and/or concert,

both of which have proven to be successful mechanisms for fundraising in the

past at UPEACE. This project could potentially be carried out at the Ciudad

Colon school as well, perhaps with an art show at the Casa de la Cultura, thus

incorporating 3 institutions and strengthening partnerships.

Here is a sample lesson for the Art for Peace class:

Lesson 1: Peace Dove

Objective: To talk about symbols and meanings of peace

Materials: If possible, teachers should cut out dove bodies beforehand

(otherwise, would require scissors for all the children). 

    Thick paper for doves' bodies, thin paper for wings, scissors for cutting,

colored pencils or markers, string

Warm-up: Ask children "What symbols remind you of peace?” Invite students

who answer to come to the whiteboard and draw their image.

    Perhaps by this point someone will have already mentioned a dove. Ask

students, "Why is the dove a symbol of peace?" (Answer: from the Noah's Ark

story in the Bible).

Activity: Making Peace Doves

    Please see

http://www.sites4teachers.com/links/redirect.php?url=http://www.enchantedl

earning.com/crafts/newyear/dove/ for diagrams and instructions for how to

make the doves.

    First have the children color the doves' bodies and wings. Then have

children assemble the doves. Finally, as a class hang the doves together

(inside the classroom, or on a tree. One option would be to bring a big branch

to class, put it in a box, and have the students hang them on the branch. That

way it can serve as a classroom decoration and will not contribute to outside

litter).

Wrap-up: Ask children for reflections on the activity. Suggested questions:

How do you feel when you make art?

What did you learn during this class?

What other kinds of art would you like to try?

A lack of community involvement from UPEACE is not only a lost opportunity;

it has the potential to negatively impact the university's reputation and

perception within the local communities. It is an ideal time for UPEACE to

develop a community outreach and service program, which will benefit

UPEACE students and local community members alike, and contribute to

cultivating a culture of peace at the local level.

130