On Thursday 21st February the Alliance for Peacebuilding hosted an online rountable discussion on the Civil Society and Inclusive Peace report. Over 20 people joined to hear our Senior U.S Representatives and Head of Advocacy Bridget Moix give an overview of key findings. Local peacebuilders from the Philippines and Colombia also held a discussion on inclusivity and peacebuilding to share their experiences as part of local organisations for creating more inclusion within peace processes.
Download the recorded roundtable discussion at the link below:
The report includes in-depth case studies from around the world, that help us to understand the strategies employed by grassroots peacebuilders to counter the challenges to effective inclusion in peacebuilding. From Nigeria to DR Congo, explore the case studies below to see what has worked (or not) in particular situations, and the successes, challenges and stalemates encountered on the pursuit to inclusive peace.
‘Civil Society and Inclusive Peace’ is the latest in our series of ‘Local Voices for Peace‘ reports, the aim of which is to raise the profile of civil society perspectives on peace and conflict. Explore the report in full on this page, as well as the executive summary, in-depth case studies, and interactive web page.
The report is based on a collaborative online consultation convened by Peace Direct in collaboration with the Inclusive Peace & Transition Initiative and the Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict. It explores the dynamics of inclusivity and peacebuilding, and presents analysis and recommendations from experts and practitioners from across the globe.
[split_panel colour=”black” title=”Key Recommendations” image=”/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/conclusion-or-section-3.jpg”]
Peace Direct developed the following recommendations aimed at international donors and other actors responsible for crucial decisions related to the makeup, funding and implementation of peacebuilding efforts.
- To secure meaningful inclusion, decision makers should undertake broad stakeholder analyses that respect the interests of all affected groups or communities. Those in charge of convening or funding peace processes should take responsibility for ensuring that the people invited are actually connected to the groups they claim to represent.
- Civil society should be allowed agency to influence all stages of peace processes. In addition to formal representation, decision makers should open channels of communication with those who are not at the table to give them the chance to input into the negotiations.
- Given the shrinking space for civil society in countries worldwide, international donors and multilateral organisations should, where possible, apply pressure on states that continue to limit free expression by civil society.
- Donors should incorporate unrestricted funds that can support grassroots and more informal civil society actors. Instead of relying solely on a limited roster of professionalised NGOs, peacebuilding donors could make efforts to include informal actors without forcing them to conform to a particular concept of civil society grantees.
- Decision makers and international donors should support accountability mechanisms and promote community mobilisation around peace implementation. Given that peace and conflict are not linear, support for civil society initiatives must not stop at the moment when peace accords are signed.
- The civil society peacebuilding community needs to address internal barriers by building space for reflection and learning. For example, civil society can build partnerships with academic institutions to help capture evidence of impact, prioritise internal strategy sessions during programme implementation; work with expert facilitators; and experiment with technology and writing tools to support reflection. Well-facilitated reflection spaces that pay attention to power, diversity and solidarity amongst civil society peers are equally crucial to collective impact.
Read more reports from our ‘Local Voices for Peace’ Series