![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/peace-building.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
A Human-Centered Approach<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cThe absence of a shared perception of what constitutes \u2018peacebuilding practice\u2019 remains a challenge.\u201d<\/em> 25 Jul 2020 –<\/em> Let\u2019s do an experiment, shall we?<\/p>\n Step 1<\/strong>: Put ten peacebuilders in a room. I won\u2019t ask where you find them or how you got them there. This is all up to you.<\/p>\n Step 2<\/strong>: Ask them each to define the term \u2018peacebuilding.\u2019<\/p>\n Step 3<\/strong>: See what happens\u2026<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n You know what you\u2019ll get? Ten different answers. And you might wonder, \u201care they all talking about the same thing?\u201d<\/p>\n So in the end, the answer to the question \u2014 \u201cwhat is peacebuilding?\u201d \u2014 is exactly this\u2026 it depends on who you ask.<\/p>\n To get a better understanding of this, let me give you a bit of background first. I\u2019ll also share some examples of peacebuilding definitions, some reflections on where these fall short, and finally, I\u2019ll share some thoughts on what I think peacebuilding should be and what it can be for you.<\/p>\n Here we go!<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n Peacebuilding as a concept was first coined by peace studies scholar Johan Galtung back in the 70s. Having earlier developed the concept of structural violence<\/a>, Galtung\u2019s called for the creation of peacebuilding structures to promote sustainable peace by addressing the causes of violent conflict, and to support holistic mechanisms for conflict resolution. In an academic article from 1976<\/a>, he wrote, \u201cstructures must be found that remove causes of wars and offer alternatives to war in situations where wars might occur.\u201d<\/p>\n Peacebuilding began being introduced into the UN system in response to a 1992 report entitled An Agenda for Peace<\/a> by then Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. And over the years, how peacebuilding is understood and put into practice around the world has continued to develop.<\/p>\n In the meantime, the concept has evolved both in academic circles and across the international aid industry. The concept itself is understood and applied quite differently across these three groups: academia, the UN, and international aid actors.<\/p>\n In this article, I hope to bring a little understanding to the reader about how each of these groups understand the concept, discuss briefly some limitations therein, then offer a more humanistic concept that I hope you will appreciate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n Academic definitions tend to be diverse. There are a good handful of leading Peace Studies scholars and even more Universities with established Peace and Conflict Studies programs, each with their own definitions and frameworks. Let\u2019s look at three examples to get a sense of things.<\/p>\n As the man who created the term, let\u2019s see what Galtung has to say:<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding is the process of creating self-supporting structures that remove causes of wars and offer alternatives to war in situations where wars might occur.\u201d \u2014 <\/em>Johan Galtung<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Another important thought leader on this is John Paul Lederach, currently a Professor of International Peacebuilding at the University of Notre Dame. He has written several excellent books on peacebuilding and was the founding director for the Center for Justice and Peacebuilding at Eastern Mennonite University.<\/p>\n \u201c[Peacebuilding] is understood as a comprehensive concept that encompasses, generates, and sustains the full array of processes, approaches, and stages needed to transform conflict toward more sustainable, peaceful relationships. The term thus involves a wide range of activities that both precede and follow formal peace accords. Metaphorically, peace is seen not merely as a stage in time or a condition. It is a dynamic social construct.\u201d \u2014 <\/em>John Paul Lederach<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The University of Notre Dame\u2019s Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies is one of the world\u2019s leading centers studying the causes of violent conflict and strategies for sustainable peace. Kroc Institute faculty and fellows conduct interdisciplinary research on a wide range of peace and justice topics. Let\u2019s see what they have to say:<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding is the development of constructive personal, group, and political relationships across ethnic, religious, class, national, and racial boundaries. It aims to resolve injustice in nonviolent ways and to transform the structural conditions that generate deadly conflict. Peacebuilding can include conflict prevention; conflict management; conflict resolution and transformation, and post-conflict reconciliation.\u201d \u2014 <\/em>Joan B. Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice, University of Notre Dame<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The Joan B. Kroc Institute even has this cool wheel of not just peacebuilding, but \u2018strategic peacebuilding.\u2019 Nice one Joan B. Kroc Institute!<\/p>\n Strategic peacebuilding paths by the Joan B. Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice, University of Notre Dame.<\/p><\/div>\n Definitions put forth by peace theorists and universities each tend to be quite unique. There are some patterns to be observed, however, which we\u2019ll cover later after reviewing the other two groups.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n How the term peacebuilding is understood and applied across UN agencies is interesting. The UN does have a general concept of peacebuilding meant to guide agencies who engage in peacebuilding efforts; however, numerous agencies have also developed their own definitions.<\/p>\n Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali\u2019s Agenda for Peace<\/a> (1992) laid the foundation of the UN\u2019s understanding of peacebuilding. In it, peacebuilding is not described as a term in itself, but quantified as \u2018post-conflict peacebuilding,\u2019 explicitly noting that it be employed after a war or conflict has taken place. The definition offered of \u2018post-conflict peacebuilding\u2019 is as follows:<\/p>\n \u201cAction to identify and support structures which will tend to strengthen and solidify peace in order to avoid a relapse into conflict.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The conceptual basis for peacebuilding for the UN system was later codified in a resolution adopted by the Secretary General\u2019s Policy Committee in 2007:<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding involves a range of measures targeted to reduce the risk of lapsing or relapsing into conflict by strengthening national capacities at all levels for conflict management, and to lay the foundations for sustainable peace and development.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n UN agencies (like UNDP, UNESCO, UNICEF, etc.) differ in how they approach peacebuilding. Some have a more fluid understanding of the concept, while others have developed their own unique definitions and associated frameworks. To get a sense of how UN agencies have operationalized peacebuilding, let\u2019s see one example. Here is one from UNICEF, as laid out in their Conflict Sensitivity and Peacebuilding Programming Guide<\/a> of 2016:<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding is defined as working ON conflict, with an intention to produce \u2018primary\u2019 or \u2018secondary\u2019 peacebuilding outcomes, to: reduce the risk of a lapse or relapse into violent conflict by directly addressing root causes and consequences of conflict; strengthen national, community and individual capacities to address conflict constructively; and lay and support foundations for sustainable peace and development.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n This bit about primary and secondary outcomes links up with their planning, monitoring, and evaluation systems. The distinction about working \u2018ON\u2019 conflict is associated with their description of conflict sensitivity as working \u2018IN\u2019 conflict. It makes sense for the purpose of operationalizing peacebuilding in UNICEF, but definitions like this were not intended for those working outside of UNICEF. You see something similar with other UN agencies involved in peacebuilding.<\/p>\n Cognizant of the diverse interpretations and application of the term peacebuilding across UN agencies, the UN\u2019s Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO) put forth yet another definition to guide efforts of diverse agencies:<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding is rather the continuum of strategy, processes and activities aimed at sustaining peace over the long-term with a clear focus on reducing chances for the relapse into conflict\u2026. [It] is useful to see peacebuilding as a broader policy framework that strengthens the synergy among the related efforts of conflict prevention, peacemaking, peacekeeping, recovery and development, as part of a collective and sustained effort to build lasting peace.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n In conceptualizing peacebuilding as \u2018a broader policy framework,\u2019 PBSO\u2019s definition is practical for their purposes of developing a cohesive UN strategy at the policy level, but like other UN definitions, this does little for anyone operating outside the UN system.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n Definitions of peacebuilding by NGOs and others involved in the international aid industry are also all over the place. With no standard definition or unifying body to guide them, each organization has developed its own concept and approach. Some organizations are dedicated to peacebuilding and may have a particular perspective on it, while others are more aligned with the political objectives of whichever country is sponsoring the aid to be distributed.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s take a look at some of these. First, I\u2019ll give you a few examples from groups whose sole purpose is about peacebuilding. Note that each organization has more expansive definitions, but I kept it concise for practical purposes here.<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding is about bringing together the different actors that are engaged in the rebuilding of a country.\u201d<\/em> \u2014 Interpeace<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding is about dealing with the reasons why people fight in the first place and supporting societies to manage their differences and conflicts without resorting to violence.\u201d<\/em> \u2014 International Alert<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding is about addressing the underlying causes of conflict. It helps people to resolve their differences without resorting to violence.\u201d<\/em> \u2014 Conciliation Resources<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n In 2018 a collective of peacebuilding NGOs like these led a campaign to get peacebuilding in the dictionary. I don\u2019t think it worked because I couldn\u2019t find it in any dictionaries online, but good effort. Campaign members agreed to use the definition by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), an organization that works at the policy level of international aid.<\/p>\n \u201c[Peacebuilding is] A broad range of measures implemented in the context of emerging, current or post\u2010conflict situations and which are explicitly guided and motivated by a primary commitment to the prevention of violent conflict and the promotion of a lasting and sustainable peace.\u201d<\/em> \u2014 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n If you look at this definition and the previous three, all include only contexts affected by violent conflict. The first also focuses exclusively on the period following a conflict, notice the focus is on \u2018actors that are engaged in rebuilding a country.\u2019<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n To get a sense of how political actors in the aid industry define peacebuilding, let\u2019s take a look at the Department of International Development (DFID), the United Kingdom\u2019s government department responsible for administering overseas aid. Peacebuilding is a part of their overall funding strategy, and their concept of peacebuilding is outlined in a 2010 practice paper: Building Peaceful States and Societies<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding aims to establish positive peace. It has three inter-related elements: 1) supporting inclusive peace processes and agreements, 2) building mechanisms to resolve conflict peacefully, and 3) addressing causes and effects of conflict.\u201d \u2014 <\/em>Department of International Development (DFID)<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n In the definition, you can see exactly what types of programs they fund, in line with priorities set out by the U.K. government.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s one by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP), an entity established by U.S. Congress in the 80s that is \u201cdedicated to the proposition that a world without violent conflict is possible, practical, and essential for U.S. and global security.\u201d They are involved in a broad range of peace work in contexts where working for peace advances U.S. geopolitical objectives. Their expansive concept of peacebuilding seems to be a catch-all for any program they may support.<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding may include providing humanitarian relief, protecting human rights, ensuring security, establishing nonviolent modes of resolving conflicts, fostering reconciliation, providing trauma healing services, repatriating refugees and resettling internally displaced persons, supporting broad-based education, and aiding in economic reconstruction. As such, it also includes conflict prevention in the sense of preventing the recurrence of violence, as well as conflict management and post-conflict recovery. In a larger sense, peacebuilding involves a transformation toward more manageable, peaceful relationships and governance structures \u2014 the long-term process of addressing root causes and effects, reconciling differences, normalizing relations, and building institutions that can manage conflict without resort to violence<\/em>. \u2014 United States Institute for Peace (USIP)<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Lastly, Alliance for Peacebuilding is a network of over 100 organizations working to end violent conflict and sustain peace. Their definition, and their work in general, aims to bring cohesiveness across a broad range of NGO and international aid peacebuilding entities.<\/p>\n \u201cPeacebuilding is an elastic term, encompassing a wide range of efforts by diverse actors in government and civil society at the community, national and international levels to address the immediate impacts and root causes of conflict before, during and after violent conflict occurs.\u201d<\/em> \u2014 Alliance for Peacebuilding<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n If you are a peacebuilder or aspire to be one, but are not involved in academia, the UN or the international aid industry, unfortunately, available definitions don\u2019t really apply to you. But that doesn\u2019t have to be the case. Peacebuilding is expansive. If existing definitions are limited, we need new ones.<\/p>\n And for peacebuilding to be more relevant to regular people, I propose a more human-centered understanding of the concept. But first, it\u2019s important to recognize the value of existing definitions and identify their limitations. So let\u2019s take a look at what definitions of peacebuilding tend to cover, and what they tend to exclude, that in my opinion should be considered peacebuilding.<\/p>\n What definitions tend to cover:<\/p>\n What they do not (or seldom) cover:<\/p>\n A more in-depth critique of peacebuilding practice will come in a later post, but for now, I\u2019m pleased to share a definition of peacebuilding that I developed myself. I put in a lot of reflection on this during the past few years so that it can be as practical and relevant as possible for regular people. I\u2019d say it\u2019s a human-centered approach.<\/p>\n For me, peacebuilding is essentially <\/em>an approach<\/em><\/strong> adopted by individuals or groups who meaningfully engage with issues they care about in an effort to build a more peaceful and just world. It includes a wide range of actions, activities, and life choices aimed to transform conflict, delegitimize violence, deconstruct systems that produce inequality, heal suffering, or otherwise remove the causes of war and violence. Building peace should reduce the separation between people and lay the foundation for a more just society.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Happy peacebuilding everyone!<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n Find ways you can build peace in the world around you. Download my free handout 198 Actions for Peace<\/a>.<\/p>\n _____________________________________________<\/p>\n\n
\n\u2014 White Paper on Peacebuilding (2015) by Geneva Peacebuilding Platform<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
\n\nWhere the concept of peacebuilding came from<\/h2>\n
\n\nAcademic definitions<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/wheel_of_peace.png\")
<\/a>\n\nUnited Nations<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\nNGO and international aid definitions<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n\nTowards a human-centered approach to peacebuilding<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/Taylor-O\u2019Connor-e1595479450617.jpeg\")
<\/a>Taylor O\u2019Connor, MA Peace Education, UN Mandated University for Peace, 2009. Taylor is a rebellious peacebuilder, peace educator, and founder of the blog Everyday Peacebuilding<\/a>. Freelance Peacebuilding Technical Specialist by day, he\u2019s working to make insights from peacebuilding practice relevant and practical to wider audiences. If you\u2019d like to learn some creative and strategic ways you can build peace in your life and in the world around you, get his free handout 198 Actions for Peace<\/a> – also good for educational settings. <\/em><\/p>\n