Suchergebnisse

Internationally sponsored interventions in fragile and conflict-affected states are often resisted by domestic actors who have deep local knowledge, profoundly different expectations of political processes, and keen desires to shape their country's future. Many forms of local resistance can damage or stall the progress of externally driven peacebuilding, but the critical peacebuilding literature has suffered from an inability to articulate coherent strategic alternatives to the dominant paradigm of liberal interventionism. This paradigm, we argue, is actually part of what fuels continued resistance: as external actors seek to implant liberal democratic norms into local bureaucratic and political cultures, countless sites of conflict emerge, with local and international actors jockeying between and amongst each other for position, resources, and control over the specificities of reform. These struggles – effectively a competition over local ownership – are at the centre of peacebuilding and will determine short- and long-term intervention outcomes. Focusing on the case of political reform in Afghanistan, this article develops a grounded theory of ownership as 'meta-conflict', in which participant voices from local and international peacebuilding leaders, working in-country, are given a primary role in determining the compatibility of the donor community's prevailing liberal agenda with local requirements for building peace.

The effectiveness of (neo)liberal intervention in conflict zones remains ambiguous, with supportive and critical camps of scholars and practitioners embracing disparate viewpoints that are each propped up by rigorous empirical analysis. The consequences of this empirical ambiguity have deeply permeated international intervention organisations, who use these unsettled findings for decision- and policy-making. This article argues that the promotion of disparate intervention methodologies is entirely predictable given the existence of contested relationships between prominent underlying themes to the debates around peacebuilding and development intervention: globalisation, development aid, inequality, and poverty, and their roles in inciting or preventing violence. These contested relationships justify the cautious selection and interpretation of research findings by decision- and policy-makers. The concluding discussions explore the impact of biased research production and uptake processes that bolster self-interested intervention practices and outline several recommendations for better aligning evidence-based decision- and policy-making with the needs of conflict-affected populations.

Internationally sponsored interventions in fragile and conflict-affected states are often resisted by domestic actors who have deep local knowledge, profoundly different expectations of political processes, and keen desires to shape their country's future. Many forms of local resistance can damage or stall the progress of externally driven peacebuilding, but the critical peacebuilding literature has suffered from an inability to articulate coherent strategic alternatives to the dominant paradigm of liberal interventionism. This paradigm, we argue, is actually part of what fuels continued resistance: as external actors seek to implant liberal democratic norms into local bureaucratic and political cultures, countless sites of conflict emerge, with local and international actors jockeying between and amongst each other for position, resources, and control over the specificities of reform. These struggles – effectively a competition over local ownership – are at the centre of peacebuilding and will determine short- and long-term intervention outcomes. Focusing on the case of political reform in Afghanistan, this article develops a grounded theory of ownership as 'meta-conflict', in which participant voices from local and international peacebuilding leaders, working in-country, are given a primary role in determining the compatibility of the donor community's prevailing liberal agenda with local requirements for building peace.

"This volume presents ground breaking research from the innovative, narrative-based scholarship from Canada's highly respected Arthur V. Mauro Institute for Peace and Justice. Applicable to scholars across the world, the studies elevate and explore diverse conflict experiences in ways that until now, have not been readily accessible"--

Sharing circles : the benefits and limitations in peacebuilding initiatives / Cathy Rocke -- Applying the conflict transformation lens to understand why indigenous Canadians drop out of school / Laura Reimer -- Peacebuilding projects as a conflict transformation tool : a meso-level perspective from Winnipeg / Kawser Ahmed -- The power of stories in qualitative research editorial warning : contains graphic and disturbing material / Bob Chrismas -- Hermeneutic phenomenological understandings of Canadian soldiers' experiences in peace support operations / Patlee Creary -- Racialized and gendered peacebuilding in the U.S.-Mexico border justice movement / Jodi Dueck-Read -- The role of transitional justice in conflict transformation and peacebuilding in Kenya / Peter Karari -- Living with others : learning for peace and global citizenship / Lloyd Kornelsen -- Players or pawns? : protest, participation, and principled nonviolence at the 1968 Summer Olympics / Chris Hrynkow -- Towards an integrated framework of conflict resolution and transformation in environmental policymaking : case study of the North American Great Lakes area / Olga Skarloto -- "You're sitting in my desk!" : researching the "past in the present" in Israel / Katerina Standish -- The challenge of local ownership of peacebuilding in Afghanistan : dependency, biased coordination, and scant timelines / Chuck Thiessen -- Conclusion : closing the circle / Katerina Standish