Suchergebnisse

In this article, I will first draw attention to the surprising, but ultimately problematic trajectory of peace studies from the period of the Cold War to the present day. This is a trajectory from 'peace' as a critique of dominant geopolitics to one of 'peace' that has become part of the very dominant geopolitics it initially set out to criticise. Secondly, I will map – undoubtedly in cursory and incomplete fashion – the scholarly communities and literatures dealing with questions of peace and conflict. Rather than a literature review or an attempt at synthesis, my purpose is to highlight the broad variety of existing units of analysis, motivations, theories and methodologies of peace and conflict studies. Thirdly, I will propose a number of suggestions for a research attitude that, in absence of a better word, I subsume under the heading of 'critical peace and conflict research', striving to understand peace and conflict as concomitantly subjective and objective, as critique and hegemony, as normative and value-free, as local and global.

The use of physical force is, unfortunately, one of the key elements in the repertoire of human behaviour. Given the persistence and prominence of the intentional use of force, or violence, for human interactions, group behaviour and state actions, it is surprising how limited the degree of understanding of this topic still is. Many of the policies dealing with potential or actual group-based violence therefore remain imperfect. For example, not one of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which have shaped the development aid discourse since 2000, refers to peace or security. This silence on security, conflict and peace is overdue to be remedied. The SIPRI Yearbook aims to fill existing knowledge gaps: it provides information on and endeavours to enhance understanding of conflict, peace and security, thereby enabling better policies to be made in the pursuit of a more peaceful, secure and equitable world. Social science has identified at least four further significant fields that exhibit knowledge gaps concerning the strategic use of force by groups in areas with weakened state institutions, including in undemocratic states. These four fields are the drivers of insecurity, conflict and fragility; trends in security, conflict and peace; the consequences of violent conflict and insecurity; and interventions and institutions for security and peace. Taken as a whole, these gaps imply the absence of a comprehensive system of security data tying together the different strands of peace research, which may be the most fundamental and systematic knowledge gap presented thus far. This lack of understanding greatly complicates peacebuilding and conflict prevention. It makes interventions in conflicts much more ideological, much less an issue of actual common interests and ultimately less successful -- leading to self-fulfilling prophecies or 'narratives' of failed interventions, seemingly demonstrating the limitations of such actions. If so many other issues in an individual's life or in society can be measured, it should be possible to develop metrics for peace and security, both at the individual and the aggregate, national levels. However, measuring perceptions of insecurity, counting the war dead, tallying incidents of weapon smuggling, developing proxies for peace and estimating security indicators is not sufficient. Despite these and many other developments referenced in the SIPRI Yearbook over the years, at least two important challenges remain. The first challenge is to define the remaining data needs to advance the study of security, conflict and peace. The second will be to develop a 'global system of security accounts', which brings together in a consistent framework the many variables measuring flows of security and peace. The SIPRI Yearbook has for almost five decades provided a narrative on global security developments, building on SIPRI's unique ability to gather, collate and interpret relevant trends. The time may be right to ask how this narrative can be formalized to further develop knowledge on and policies for security and peace. Adapted from the source document.

This textbook provides a comprehensive overview of different methods and sources of information-gathering for peace and conflict students and researchers, as well as the challenges presented by such work. Research on conflict-ridden societies carries special challenges for the collection and evaluation of information about the conflict and its actors. First, due to the nature of information emerging, incentives to misrepresent and propaganda is common. News coverage is sometimes poor and reporting is often incomplete, selective and biased. Second, the sensitivity of the topic and the questions posed in peace and conflict research means that access to and the security of informants can be a problem. Peace and conflict research as a discipline encompasses a number of different approaches for obtaining empirical information which serve as a basis for analyzing various research topics. This book provides a comprehensive overview of different methods and sources of information-gathering for students and researchers, as well as the challenges presented by such work. It offers: tools for evaluating sources and information suggestions on where different types of information can be found advice on using different types of sources, including news reports and written narratives practical guidelines for constructing large-scale datasets insights and guidelines for comparative fieldwork, in-depth interviews, focus groups, and surveys reflection and discussion on important ethical concerns in peace research This book will be of much interest for students and researchers of peace and conflict studies, conflict resolution, war and conflict studies, development studies, security studies and IR, as well as for NGO workers/researchers. Kristine Höglund is Associate Professor at the Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University. She has a PhD in

This article describes the summer 2014 violence along the Line of Contact in the Nagorny Karabakh conflict
and then examines the potential for conflict transformation in the future. A central problem is the nature of
the authoritarian regimes in Azerbaijan and Armenia, while solutions would come from a greater involvement
of civil society groups in the negotiating process.