Copyright © 2005 Robert Ricigliano, all rights reserved Current Challenges Some disturbing trends... Getting to peace is getting harder “Decisive CR” was very difficult in the 90’s (Wollensteen and Sollenberg, 2001) Will the success of a specific intervention be muted by systemic failure? When we try to help, we often hurt Cases of assistance fueling conflict (Anderson, et al 2001) Successful intervention in one area can fuel conflict in another Even when we get “peace,” it is hard to sustain Cambodia, Mozambique vs. Israel-Palestine, DRC, Angola What accounts for processes launch and sustainable process and those that do not? Copyright © 2005 Robert Ricigliano, all rights reserved

Copyright © 2005 Robert Ricigliano, all rights reserved Current Challenges These trends point to the need to take a systemic view in order to intervene responsibly and effectively… One that moves beyond individual disciplines (e.g. human rights, development, CR, environment, etc.) …and argues for taking a holistic approach to peace building that addresses: Process factors (break downs in how people and groups manage conflict) Social factors (break downs in basic relations between groups, negative inter-group attitudes) Structural factors (break downs in basic systems and institutions, e.g. rule of law, economy, governance) Copyright © 2005 Robert Ricigliano, all rights reserved

Copyright © 2005 Robert Ricigliano, all rights reserved A Holistic Approach Sustainable and just peace (Coexistence, PWL) require 3 change at three interrelated level: Process Level The ability of people (especially elites at the national and local levels) to manage their differences and work together peacefully and constructively (e.g. negotiations and dispute resolution procedures) Social Level Relations between groups in society (e.g. reconciliation, trust, social capital) Structural Level Basic institutions and systems in society that provide for people’s basic human needs (e.g. governance, media, social services, security, rule of law, environment, economy) Copyright © 2005 Robert Ricigliano, all rights reserved

Obstacles to a Holistic Approach Combining political, social and structural activity be frustrated by: Limited Theories of Action “No agency appeared to analyze a context to decide what, of all possible strategies, would be most effective” (RPP, 2002) Entrenched Practices Artificial division of labor (“we don’t do political work…”) Overemphasis on political negotiations The “Realist” Critique Organizational/Political self-interest Funding pressure/competition Copyright © 2005 Robert Ricigliano, all rights reserved

Copyright © 2005 Robert Ricigliano, all rights reserved A Holistic Approach Some Assumptions Any attempt at integration must start with two key facts: There is not now any grand theory of peace building (Coexistence work?) that explains how process, social and structural interventions should relate to each other Collaboration among process, social and structural actors cannot be compelled The best way to promote holistic approaches to peacebuilding (in theory and practice) is to build the communication infrastructure for inter-field collaboration Networks of Effective Action are a way to implement this approach Copyright © 2005 Robert Ricigliano, all rights reserved

Networks of Effective Action Value Inclusivity and Diversity Include process, social, structural actors Include official and unofficial actors; International, national and sub-national actors Enable Learning, Informed Intervention Promote the sharing of information Holistic conflict analysis Mapping actors/activity by sector, unaddressed needs and opportunities for collaboration Promote iterative approaches to intervention Operate “Chaordically” Set out shared purpose and principles among its members; Are decentralized and self-organizing Copyright © 2005 Robert Ricigliano, all rights reserved