It should be recognised, however, that not all the agents in the system need to be engaged in all coordination activities. Barnes reports, in the context of her experiences in Mozambique, that the meaning of coordination often varied depending on which of the stakeholders employed it at a given moment, and that the various stakeholders competed to place their agencies at the forefront of the process to enhance their own legitimacy and subsequent fundraising capacities (Barnes 1998). When evaluating the impact of coherence, one should consider with care the balance that has been struck among the four elements of coherence, the transaction cost in terms of the time and resources invested in coordination, as well as any unintended consequences that may have come about in the process (Aoi et al 2007). First, in some cases short-term political and security considerations may override longer-term development considerations and this may undermine the very socio-economic rehabilitation on which sustainable peacebuilding depends. In the real world, peacebuilding agents, more often than not, have to settle for ‘second best’ or ‘partially coherent’ solutions in order to establish a workable foundation for cooperation.22
Save book to Kindle
It is impossible to achieve coherence if the framework, with which individual agents have to be coherent, has not been developed and shared with all the agents in the system. Instead, this paper will focus-in on two areas where the lack of coherence has had the most damaging effect on achieving sustainability, and which; correspondingly, hold the most promise for improving peacebuilding coherence, once addressed. If the peace process fails and the conflict resumes, the time and resources invested have been wasted. Whilst there should be coordination between the humanitarian and the peace and security dimensions of a peacebuilding system, the level and intensity of this link do not have to be of the same quality as that of the link between the other dimensions of the system.
The Need for a Clearly Articulated Overall Peacebuilding Strategy
The inability of the external actors to give meaning to their stated policies and principles of alignment is one of the most significant shortcomings in the context of peacebuilding coherence. In this paper ‘coherence’ is understood as the effort to direct the wide range of activities undertaken in the political, development, human rights, humanitarian, rule of law and security dimensions of a peacebuilding system towards common strategic objectives..21 It is important to recognise, however, that the dynamic and non-linear nature of complex systems means that coherence can never be fully attained (Cilliers 2002). The first defines and analyses peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction in the context of the coherence and coordination deficit. Pursuing coherence helps to manage the interdependencies that bind the peacebuilding system together, and coordination is the means through which individual peacebuilding agents can ensure that they are coherent with the overall strategic framework.
Book Review
- A peacebuilding or post-conflict reconstruction system consists of a large number of independent agents that collectively carry out a broad range of activities across the dimensions of the system.
- The first defines and analyses peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction in the context of the coherence and coordination deficit.
- These new developments need time to be refined through practice before they can be meaningfully analysed.
They are overwhelmed by the pressure to engage with all the assessments, proposals and plans generated by the sudden influx of external actors, and they are frustrated that despite all this activity there is typically little to show, in terms of immediate delivery, for their time and effort. The principle that peacebuilding systems should be locally owned and led is well established in the policy realm. As a result, the Peacebuilding Commission’s integrated peacebuilding strategies are designed around the demands of the consolidation phase of peacebuilding systems.
The first was the need to generate a clearly articulated overall peacebuilding strategy that can provide the various peacebuilding agents with a common frame of reference which they can use as a reference point for coherence, i.e. the framework with which it should be coherent. It was pointed out that one of the reasons why coherence has proven elusive is because the agencies that undertake peacebuilding activities lack a shared understanding of the role of coherence and coordination in peacebuilding systems. It is also widely understood that peacebuilding activities that are not grounded in the socio-cultural belief systems that shape the worldview of the internal actors cause dysfunction. Peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction activities need to be need-based, and the priorities, sequencing and pace of delivery need to be informed by the dynamics of the conflict system, through local ownership and meaningful internal/external coordination. It is the focus on the conflict prevention aspect that gives peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction its unique identity, and the overall strategy during the peacebuilding phase needs to reflect this emphasis on consolidating the peace process. The most broad and pervasive process to date is probably the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) process, facilitated by the World Bank and aimed at aligning the overall development strategy of the external actors and the host Government.
The paper focused on two areas where the lack of coherence has had the most damaging effect on achieving sustainability, and which, correspondingly, hold the most promise for improving peacebuilding coherence, once addressed. Although well intended, the result is that large amounts are spent on activities that the internal actors simply cannot absorb. Whilst the first emphasis is thus on generating the processes that will serve to realise the human rights of the internal actors to determine their own destiny, the second emphasis is on ensuring that the combined and cumulative effect of the assistance offered has a positive effect on the internal actors, and that it is delivered at a rate that can be absorbed. Without it, however, any investments made in peacebuilding systems are unlikely to be sustainable. This rights-based approach implies that there should be processes casino1 in place, controlled by the internal actors, that generate the needs-based information needed to assess, design, plan, coordinate and implement assistance programmes. The first is the need to establish a new basis for the internal/external relationship, namely a rights-based approach that recognises that the internal actors have the human right to determine their own future.
External actors also point to the dysfunction caused by their own institutional cultures that emphasise output rather than impact. In fact, the concept of fragile states was initially developed in the donor context to refer to countries where the Government is unable or unwilling to establish a meaningful relationship with bilateral and multilateral donors. This is because the parties emerging out of conflict typically represent ambiguous constituencies, and there are often conflicting claims of ownership and support. In this context, donors have come to accept the moral principle, and operational reality, that assistance has to be needs based and locally owned. These new developments need time to be refined through practice before they can be meaningfully analysed.
Consultations undertaken under pressure, for instance during rapid needs assessments, often serve to legitimise pre-conceived perceptions rather than add value by generating independent and objective opinions and analysis, and thus fail to reflect the true needs and priorities of the internal actors. External actors find it difficult to identify credible internal actors with whom they can enter into a meaningful partnership, especially in the stabilisation and transitional phases before elections are held. The Rome Declaration and related policies are aimed at addressing the core structural inequality of the international assistance regime, namely that the external agency is empowered by virtue of being the benefactor. The humanitarian community has developed the humanitarian Consolidated Appeal Process (CAP), but this is more of a resource mobilisation tool than a strategic planning tool.
This book presents nuanced and contextually specific knowledge of Sierra Leone’s political and war histories, and the outcomes of the implementation of programmes of post-conflict reforms. The second identified a few priority areas where improved coherence and coordination are likely to have the most meaningful impact. Whilst external partners can facilitate such processes, https://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=121162 they need to be truly locally owned and have meaningful power. Meaningful sustainability requires that the internal actors should not just own the problem, but also the solutions. There are two areas within the internal/external tension that have the potential to transform the inherent tensions in the relationship.
While place-based strategies prioritize the reconstruction of physical assets, people-centered strategies strengthen community ownership and social inclusion, improve livability of the built environment, and accelerate the socioeconomic recovery of cities. The case of Lebanon was presented to explain how restoration of historic sites, buildings and markets promoted urban recovery and cohesion between various factions of society. To be successful in the challenging environment of a conflict-torn country, the project applied a flexible implementation approach that relied heavily on local institutions and citizen engagement thus benefiting from their capacity and expertise. Urban areas are frequently at the center of modern conflicts and therefore face a unique set of challenges in post-conflict settings. Internal actors will be best placed to absorb assistance towards the end of the transitional period when some basic capacities have been restored or newly established, and in the consolidation phase, when a newly elected government is in place that have the constitutional legitimacy to determine national priorities.