Advertisement

Introduction

  • Gijsbert M. van Iterson ScholtenEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)

Abstract

This chapter serves as an introduction to the themes discussed in this book, arguing why academics should be more interested in peace as a substantive phenomenon (positive peace) and in the different visions that practitioners engaged in peacebuilding have of peace. Specifically, it calls for an understanding of peace as a word with a plural: different kinds of peacebuilding build different peaces. It also introduces the four-dimensional peace cube as a conceptual tool to compare different visions of peace and provides a summary of the arguments made in the different chapters.

References

  1. Adolf, A. (2009). Peace. A world history. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  2. Advisory Group of Experts (2015). The challenge of sustaining peace. Report of the Advisory Group of Experts for the 2015 Review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  3. Aggestam, K., F. Cristiano, et al. (2015). “Towards agonistic peacebuilding? Exploring the antagonism–agonism nexus in the Middle East peace process.” Third World Quarterly 36(9): 1736–1753.Google Scholar
  4. Allansson, M., E. Melander, et al. (2017). “Organized violence, 1989–2016.” Journal of Peace Research 54(4): 574–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Altan-Olcay, O. and A. Icduygu (2012). “Mapping civil society in the Middle East: The cases of Egypt, Lebanon and Turkey.” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 39(2): 157–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anderson, M. B. and L. Olson (2003). Confronting war: Critical lessons for peace practitioners. Cambridge: Collaborative for Development Action.Google Scholar
  7. Anheier, H. K. (2007). “Reflections on the concept and measurement of global civil society.” Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 18(1): 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Autesserre, S. (2010). The trouble with the Congo: Local violence and the failure of international peacebuilding. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Autesserre, S. (2014). Peaceland: Conflict resolution and the everyday politics of international intervention. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Banks, N., D. Hulme, et al. (2015). “NGOs, states, and donors revisited: Still too close for comfort?” World Development 66: 707–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barnett, M., H. Kim, et al. (2007). “Peacebuilding: What is in a name?” Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 13(1): 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Belloni, R. (2001). “Civil society and peacebuilding in Bosnia and Herzegovina.” Journal of Peace Research 38(2): 163–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Belloni, R. (2009). “Civil society, the state and peacebuilding.” In Building sustainable futures. Enacting Peace and Development. L. Reychler, J. Funk Deckard, and K. H. R. Villanueva (Eds.). Bilbao: University of Deusto: 185–194.Google Scholar
  14. Belloni, R. (2010). “Northern Ireland: Civil society and the slow building of peace.” In Civil society & peacebuilding: A critical assessment. T. Paffenholz (Ed.). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers: 105–128.Google Scholar
  15. Belloni, R. (2012). “Hybrid peace governance: Its emergence and significance.” Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 18(1): 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Belloni, R. and B. Hemmer (2010). “Bosnia-Herzegovina: Civil society in a semiprotectorate.” In Civil society and peacebuilding: A critical assessment. T. Paffenholz (Ed.). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc.: 129–152.Google Scholar
  17. Berents, H. and S. McEvoy-Levy (2015). “Theorising youth and everyday peace (building).” Peacebuilding 3(2): 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Björkdahl, A. and K. Höglund (2013). “Precarious peacebuilding: Friction in global–local encounters.” Peacebuilding 1(3): 289–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Björkdahl, A., K. Höglund, et al. (2016). Peacebuilding and friction: Global and local encounters in post conflict-societies. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Björkdahl, A. and S. Kappler (2017). Peacebuilding and spatial transformation: Peace, space and place. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Boege, V. (2012). “Hybrid forms of peace and order on a South Sea Island: Experiences from Bougainville (Papua New Guinea).” In Hybrid forms of peace: From everyday agency to post-liberalism. O. Richmond and A. Mitchell (Eds.). Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan: 88–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Borchgrevink, K. and K. B. Harpviken (2010). “Afghanistan: Civil society between modernity and tradition.” In Civil society & peace building: A critical assessment. T. Paffenholz (Ed.). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers: 235–258.Google Scholar
  23. Brown, S. R. (1980). Political subjectivity: Applications of Q methodology in political science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Brown, S. R. (1993). “A primer on Q methodology.” Operant Subjectivity 16(3/4): 91–138.Google Scholar
  25. Call, C. T. (2008). “Knowing peace when you see it: Setting standards for peacebuilding success.” Civil Wars 10(2): 173–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Çelik, A. B. (2010). “Turkey: The Kurdish question and the coercive state.” In Civil society & peacebuilding: A critical assessment. T. Paffenholz (Ed.). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers: 153–180.Google Scholar
  27. Chandhoke, N. (2002). “The limits of global civil society.” In Global civil society 2002. M. Glasius, M. Kaldor, and H. Anheier (Eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press: 35–54.Google Scholar
  28. Chandler, D. (1999). “The limits of peacebuilding: International regulation and civil society development in Bosnia.” International Peacekeeping 6(1): 109–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Chandler, D. (2010). “The uncritical critique of ‘liberal peace’.” Review of International Studies 36(S1): 137–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Chandler, D. (2017). Peacebuilding: The twenty years’ crisis, 1997–2017. Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Cooper, N., M. Turner, et al. (2011). “The end of history and the last liberal peacebuilder: A reply to Roland Paris.” Review of International Studies 1(1): 1–13.Google Scholar
  32. Cortright, D. (2008). Peace: A history of movements and ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Cortright, D., M. Greenberg, et al. (2016). Civil society, peace, and power. Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  34. Cramer, C. (2006). Civil war is not a stupid thing. Accounting for violence in developing countries. Hurst & Company.Google Scholar
  35. Çuhadar, E. and S. Hanafi (2010). “Israel and Palestine: Civil societies in despair.” In Civil society & peacebuilding: A critical assessment. T. Paffenholz (Ed.). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers: 207–234.Google Scholar
  36. Çuhadar, E. and A. Kotelis (2010). “Cyprus: A divided civil society in stalemate.” In Civil society & peacebuilding: A critical assessment. T. Paffenholz (Ed.). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers: 181–206.Google Scholar
  37. De Coning, C. (2018b). Sustaining peace: Can a new approach change the UN? Global Governance Spotlight 3. Bonn: Stiftung Entwicklung und Frieden.Google Scholar
  38. De Coning, C. and K. Friis (2011). “Coherence and coordination: The limits of the comprehensive approach.” Journal of International Peacekeeping 15(1–2): 243–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Denskus, T. (2007). “Peacebuilding does not build peace.” Development in Practice 17(4–5): 656–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Diehl, P. F. (2016). “Exploring peace: Looking beyond war and negative peace.” International Studies Quarterly 60(1): 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Diehl, P. F. and D. Druckman (2010). Evaluating peace operations. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  42. Dietrich, W. and W. Sützl (1997). A call for many peaces. Peace Center Burg Schlaining.Google Scholar
  43. Doyle, M. W. and N. Sambanis (2000). “International peacebuilding: A theoretical and quantitative analysis.” American Political Science Review 94(4): 779–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Firchow, P. (2018). Reclaiming everyday peace: Local voices in measurement and evaluation after war. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Fisher, S. and L. Zimina (2008). Just wasting our time? An open letter to peacebuilders. Retrieved from http://www.konfliktbearbeitung.net/downloads/file1042.pdf.
  46. Fortna, V. P. (2008). Does peacekeeping work?: Shaping belligerents’ choices after civil war. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Galtung, J. (1964). “An editorial.” Journal of Peace Research 1(1): 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Galtung, J. (1969). “Violence, peace, and peace research.” Journal of Peace Research 6(3): 167–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Galtung, J. (1975). “Three approaches to peace: Peacekeeping, peacemaking and peace-building.” In Peace, war and defence. Essays in peace research. J. Galtung (Ed.). Copenhagen: Christian Ejlers. 2: 282–304.Google Scholar
  50. Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by peaceful means: Peace and conflict, development and civilization. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  51. Gen, S. and A. C. Wright (2018). “Strategies of policy advocacy organizations and their theoretical affinities: Evidence from Q-methodology.” Policy Studies Journal 46(2): 298–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Glasius, M., D. Lewis, et al. (2004). Exploring civil society: Political and cultural contexts. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Heathershaw, J. (2008). “Unpacking the liberal peace: The dividing and merging of peacebuilding discourses.” Millennium-Journal of International Studies 36(3): 597–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Heathershaw, J. (2013). “Towards better theories of peacebuilding: Beyond the liberal peace debate.” Peacebuilding 1(2): 275–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Heiss, A. and J. Kelley (2017). “Between a rock and a hard place: International NGOs and the dual pressures of donors and host governments.” The Journal of Politics 79(2): 732–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Höglund, K. and M. S. Kovacs (2010). “Beyond the absence of war: The diversity of peace in post-settlement societies.” Review of International Studies 36(2): 367–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Howard, R. J., A. M. Tallontire, et al. (2016). “Which “fairness”, for whom, and why? An empirical analysis of plural notions of fairness in Fairtrade Carbon Projects, using Q methodology.” Environmental Science & Policy 56: 100–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Jabri, V. (2013). “Peacebuilding, the local and the international: A colonial or a postcolonial rationality?” Peacebuilding 1(1): 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Jad, I. (2007). “NGOs: Between buzzwords and social movements.” Development in Practice 17(4–5): 622–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Jenkins, R. (2013). Peacebuilding: From concept to commission. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Junne, G. and W. Verkoren (2005). Postconflict development: Meeting new challenges. Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  62. Klem, B. (2018). “The problem of peace and the meaning of ‘post-war’.” Conflict, Security & Development 18(3): 233–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Kopecky, P. and C. Mudde (2005). Uncivil society?: Contentious politics in post-communist Europe. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Kühn, F. P. (2012). “The peace prefix: Ambiguities of the word ‘peace’.” International Peacekeeping 19(4): 396–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Kurtenbach, S. (2010). “Guatemala: A dependent and fragmented civil society.” In Civil society & peacebuilding: A critical assessment. T. Paffenholz (Ed.). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers: 79–104.Google Scholar
  66. Lederach, J. P. (1997). Building peace: Sustainable reconciliation in divided societies. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.Google Scholar
  67. Lteif, D. (2015). Mapping civil society organizations in Lebanon. Beirut: Beyond Research and Development.Google Scholar
  68. Lykke Jr., A. F. (1997). “Defining military strategy.” Military Review 77(1): 183.Google Scholar
  69. Mac Ginty, R. (2006). No war, no peace: The rejuvenation of stalled peace processes and peace accords. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Mac Ginty, R. (2008). “Indigenous peace-making versus the liberal peace.” Cooperation and Conflict 43(2): 139–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Mac Ginty, R. (2010). “Hybrid peace: The interaction between top-down and bottom-up peace.” Security Dialogue 41(4): 391–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Mac Ginty, R. (2011). International peacebuilding and local resistance: Hybrid forms of peace. New York and Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mac Ginty, R. (2014). “Everyday peace: Bottom-up and local agency in conflict-affected societies.” Security Dialogue 45(6): 548–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Mac Ginty, R. and G. Sanghera, Eds. (2012b). Special issue: Hybridity in peacebuilding and development. Journal of Peacebuilding & Development 7(2): 3–8.Google Scholar
  75. Mahmoud, Y. and A. Makoond (2017). Sustaining peace: What does it mean in practice. Issue Brief. New York: International Peace Institute.Google Scholar
  76. Menkhaus, K., H. Sheikh, et al. (2010). “Somalia: Civil society in a collapsed state.” In Civil society & peacebuilding: A critical assessment. T. Paffenholz (Ed.). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers: 321–350.Google Scholar
  77. Millar, G. (2014). “Disaggregating hybridity: Why hybrid institutions do not produce predictable experiences of peace.” Journal of Peace Research 51(4): 501–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Millar, G., J. Van Der Lijn, et al. (2013). “Peacebuilding plans and local reconfigurations: Frictions between imported processes and indigenous practices.” International Peacekeeping 20(2): 137–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Mouly, C. (2013). “The Nicaraguan peace commissions: A sustainable bottom-up peace infrastructure.” International Peacekeeping 20(1): 48–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Naveh, S. (2013). In pursuit of military excellence: The evolution of operational theory. Routledge.Google Scholar
  81. Newman, E. (2009). “‘Liberal’ peacebuilding debates.” In New perspectives on liberal peacebuilding. E. Newman, R. Paris, and O. Richmond (Eds.). Tokyo: United Nations University Press: 26–53.Google Scholar
  82. Nicholls, D. (1991). “Richard Cobden and the International Peace Congress movement. 1848–1853.” The Journal of British Studies 30(4): 351–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. O’Connor, K. (2013). “Q Methodology as a tool for committee governance research.” West European Politics 36: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Orjuela, C. (2010). “Sri Lanka: Peace activists and nationalists.” In Civil society & peacebuilding: A critical assessment. T. Paffenholz (Ed.). Boulder, CO and London: Lynne Rienner: 297–320.Google Scholar
  85. Paffenholz, T., Ed. (2010). Civil society & peacebuilding: A critical assessment. Boulder, CO and London: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  86. Pagnussatt, D., M. Petrini, et al. (2018). “What do local stakeholders think about the impacts of small hydroelectric plants? Using Q methodology to understand different perspectives.” Energy Policy 112: 372–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Paris, R. (2004). At war’s end: Building peace after civil conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Paris, R. (2010). “Saving liberal peacebuilding.” Review of International Studies 36: 337–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Peterson, J. H. (2012). “A conceptual unpacking of hybridity: Accounting for notions of power, politics and progress in analyses of aid-driven interfaces.” Journal of Peacebuilding & Development 7(2): 9–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Pugh, M., N. Cooper, et al., Eds. (2008). Whose peace? Critical perspectives on the political economy of peacebuilding. New Security Challenges. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  91. Rasmussen, M. V. (2003). The west, civil society and the construction of peace. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Rasmussen, M. V. (2010). “The ideology of peace: Peacebuilding and the war in Iraq.” In Palgrave advances in peacebuilding. Critical developments and approaches. O. Richmond (Ed.). Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan: 175–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Regan, P. M. (2014). “Bringing peace back in: Presidential address to the Peace Science Society, 2013.” Conflict Management and Peace Science 31(4): 345–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Richmond, O. P. (2005). The transformation of peace. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Richmond, O. P. (2006). “The problem of peace: Understanding the ‘liberal peace’.” Conflict, Security & Development 6(3): 291–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Richmond, O. P. (2011). A post-liberal peace. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  97. Richmond, O. P. and A. Mitchell, Eds. (2012). Hybrid forms of peace. From everyday agency to post-liberalism. Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  98. Selby, J. (2013). “The myth of liberal peace-building.” Conflict, Security & Development 13(1): 57–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Shinko, R. E. (2008). “Agonistic peace: A postmodern reading.” Millennium-Journal of International Studies 36(3): 473–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Spurk, C. (2010). “Understanding civil society.” In Civil society and peacebuilding: A critical assessment. Boulder, CO: Lynne Reinner.Google Scholar
  101. Stephenson, W. (1953). The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  102. Tadjbakhsh, S., Ed. (2011). Rethinking the liberal peace: External models and local alternatives. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  103. Tardy, T. (2017). “Measuring the success and failure of peace operations.” International Peacekeeping 24(3): 489–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Taylor, I. (2009). “What fit for the liberal peace in Africa?” In The liberal peace and post-war reconstruction: Myth or reality? R. Mac Ginty and O. P. Richmond (Eds.). London and New York: Routledge: 63–76.Google Scholar
  105. Tongeren, P. v., M. Brenk, et al. (2005). People building peace II, Successful stories of civil society. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  106. Tschirgi, N. and C. De Coning (2018). “The challenge of sustaining peace.” In Just security in an undergoverned world. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 440.Google Scholar
  107. van der Lijn, J. (2015). “Comprehensive approaches, diverse coherences: The different levels of policy coherence in the Dutch 3D approach in Afghanistan.” Small Wars & Insurgencies 26(1): 72–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Van Exel, J. and G. de Graaf (2005). “Q methodology: A sneak preview.” Retrieved February 5, 2013, from http://www.qmethodology.net/PDF/Q-methodology.
  109. Van Leeuwen, M. (2016). Partners in peace: Discourses and practices of civil-society peacebuilding. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Wallensteen, P. (2015a). Quality peace: Peacebuilding, victory and world order. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  111. Zabala, A. and U. Pascual (2016). “Bootstrapping Q methodology to improve the understanding of human perspectives.” PLoS One 11(2): e0148087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Zaidi, S. A. (1999). “NGO failure and the need to bring back the state.” Journal of International Development 11(2): 259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations