Suchergebnisse

"Thania Paffenholz outlines concepts and experiences for designing and assessing intervention strategies. The article discusses the problems which result from the question of which actor can intervene with which strategies and instruments, and at what time in any particular situation of conflict. Drawing upon her field experience, the author formulates ten issues that need to be addressed in intervention design: 1. the need for vision, goals and commitment; 2. methods of analysing conflicts and actors; 3. strategies and roles of intervening actors; 4. the ongoing search for adequate partners and entry points; 5. timing and exit options of interventions; 6. thinking in processes and building structures; 7. criteria for the recruitment of field staff; 8. co-ordination and co-operation; 9. the inclusion of the goals of sustainability and 10. building learning into the process of interventions. These aspects are examined from the perspective of NGOs' reality in conflict and finally the author raises the difficulties of creating knowledge management mechanisms within organisations and programmes." (author's abstract)

This article argues that the scholarly study of "transfer" from track-two workshops to track-one negotiations is highly applicable to the study of transfer from other modalities of participation to track-one in inclusive peace negotiations. During the last decade, other approaches to make negotiations more inclusive have also been increasingly employed, such as national dialogue conferences, variety of consultation mechanisms, or a diverse set of peace commissions. In this paper, we aim to expand the conceptualization of transfer beyond ICR workshops and discuss how the knowledge accumulated concerning transfer in the ICR literature during the last decades can be applied to understand and evaluate transfer from other inclusion modalities used in peace negotiations today. We therefore make a distinction between the first generation of transfer (1.0) developed by the ICR workshops scholars and practitioners and the transfer process from other modalities used in inclusive negotiations (2.0). To apply the lessons learned from transfer 1.0 to 2.0, we start with an overview of the concept as developed in track-two literature. We then suggest a conceptualization of transfer 2.0, based on insights from how it has unfolded in five of the seven inclusion modalities examined in our comparative case study. We discuss the similarities and differences between transfer 1.0 and 2.0 and how transfer 2.0 can be studied, including and beyond track-two initiatives. We conclude by suggesting a number of directions for future research on transfer 2.0 that are relevant to several inclusion modalities.