This special issue—the final issue of Volume 4—focuses on peacebuilders: Who are they? How do they work? What are their unique needs and capacities? What challenges do they face?
Strategies for building sustainable peace after violent conflict tend to focus on two levels of leaders: national elites who negotiate peace agreements and community actors who oversee local mediation and reconciliation efforts
Youth organizations are particularly capable of positively contributing to peace because of their varied conceptualizations of peace, which foster multidimensional approaches to peacebuilding, and their ability to integrate indigenous knowledge into their conflict resolution efforts.
Business-peace initiatives can be successful: 64% of respondents reported improved social fabric in their community, and 80% identified at least one positive economic outcome of the project.
EU, UN, and OSCE civilian missions could do much more to fully capitalize on the potential for “synergy” in their work, through more systematic exchange of capabilities like staff, mission support, equipment, funding, or political and diplomatic support.
Women comprised less than a quarter of the Afghan religious peacebuilders network examined, and most of them were engaged in peacebuilding work focused on education, including teaching peace and conflict resolution from an Islamic perspective or raising awareness in their spheres of influence about what Islamic sacred texts say about peace.
In most cases, local elites hold a negative view of the role of the diaspora in peacebuilding and, at best, view diaspora engagement as limited to economic development.
As of January 2020, The U.S. and Iran have walked back from the precipice of war. The recent escalation underscores
Environmental peacebuilding is an emerging field that views conflict over environmental resources as an opportunity for conflicting parties to cooperate with one another and, ultimately, work towards establishing a lasting and sustainable peace.
There was evidence of only “mechanistic dehumanization” among Dinka respondents towards Nuer and no evidence of any form of dehumanization among Nuer respondents towards Dinka.