Advertisement

Conclusion

  • SungYong Lee
Chapter
Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)

Abstract

This concluding chapter integrates the key findings appearing in the previous chapters and discusses their theoretical and practical implications. Firstly, the chapter overviews and summarises the findings presented in the case studies chapters. The discussion particularly focuses on the four types of strategies adopted by local peacebuilders for developing local peacebuilding models—ownership inheritance, management of external reliance, friction-avoiding approaches, and utilisation of religious/traditional leadership—, following the structure of this volume. It then examines the unique features that the local models in Mindanao and Cambodia demonstrate and their significance and limitations. In the final sections, the chapter reorganises and analyses the findings with regard to two areas that are not comprehensively discussed in the case study chapters: the forms of local-international collaboration developed in Mindanao and Cambodia, and varied responses of local peacebuilders to international norms. Through the examination, this study highlighted the promotion of local ownership as process, and demonstrates the strategies and practices being developed in field practice at the moment, and presents how models of local ownership are evolving in some local communities in Asia.

Keywords

Strategies for ownership promotion Norm localisation Local-external interaction Ownership promotion as process 

References

  1. Acharya, Amitav. 2004. How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? Norm Localization and Institutional Change in Asian Regionalism. International Organization 58 (2): 239–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adamson, Fiona. 2005. Global Liberalism Versus Political Islam: Competing Ideological Frameworks in International Politics. International Studies Review 7: 547–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bettiza, Gregorio, and Filippo Dionigi. 2014. Beyond Constructivism’s Liberal Bias: Islamic Norm Entrepreneurs in a Post-secular World Society. EUI Working Paper 10. European University Institute, Badia Fiesolana.Google Scholar
  4. Boesenecker, Aaron, and Leslie Vinjamuri. 2011. Lost in Translation? Civil Society, Faith-Based Organizations and the Negotiation of International Norms. International Journal of Transitional Justice 5: 345–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bonacker, Thorsten, Judith von Heusinger, and Kerstin Zimmer (eds.). 2017. Localization in Development Aid: How Global Institutions Enter Local Lifeworlds. London and New York: Routeldge.Google Scholar
  6. Bözel, Tanja, and Thomas Risse. 2009. The Transformative Power of Europe: The European Union and the Diffusion of Ideas. KFG Working Paper 1.Google Scholar
  7. Buttel, Frederick. 2000. World Society, the Nation State, and Environmental Protection. American Sociological Review 65 (1): 117–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Capie, David. 2008. Localization as Resistance: The Contested Diffusion and Small Arms Norms in Southeast Asia. Security Dialogue 39 (6): 637–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cheesman, Nick, Monique Skidmore, and Trevor Wilson. 2012. Myanmar’s Transition: Openings, Obstacles and Opportunities. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chopra, Jarat, and Tanja Hohe. 2004. Participatory Peacebuilding. In Building Sustainable Peace, ed. Tom Keating and W. Andy Knight, 241–262. Edmonton and Tokyo: University of Alberta Press/United Nations University.Google Scholar
  11. Cobb, Neil. 2014. Rethinking the ‘World Polity’ Perspective on Global Sodomy Law Reform. In Handbook of LGBT Communities, Crime, and Justice, ed. D. Peters and V.R. Panfil, 283–310. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cortell, Andrew, and James Davis. 2000. Understanding the Domestic Impact of International Norms: A Research Agenda. International Studies Review 2 (1): 65–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dibley, Thushara. 2014. Partnership, Power and Peacebuilding: NGOs as Agents of Peace in Aceh and Timor-Leste. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Edomwonyi, O. 2003. Rwanda: The Importance of Local Ownership of the Post-conflict Reconstruction. Available at http://www.eldis.org/go/home&id=17223&type=Document. Accessed on 2 Feb 2016.
  15. Elbasani, Arolda. 2004. Albania in Transition: Manipulation or Appropriation of International Norms? Southeast European Politics 5: 24–44.Google Scholar
  16. Futamura, Madoka, and Mark Notaras. 2011. Local Perspectives on International Peacebuilding. Research Article Series. Tokyo: United Nations University. Available at http://unu.edu/publications/articles/local-perspectives-on-international-peacebuilding.html#info. Accessed on 3 May 2016.
  17. Gellman, M. 2010. World Views in Peace Building: A Post-conflict Reconstruction Challenge in Cambodia. Development in Practice 20 (1): 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goodman, Ryan, and Derek Jinks. 2008. Incomplete Internalization and Compliance with Human Rights Law. European Journal of International Law 19: 725–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., and Kiyoteru Tsutsui. 2005. Human Rights in a Globalizing World: The Paradox of Empty Promises. American Journal of Sociology 110: 1373–1411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harris-Short, Sonia. 2003. International Human Rights Law: Imperialist Inept and Ineffective? Cultural Relativism and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Human Rights Quarterly 25 (1): 130–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heathershaw, John, and Daniel Lambach. 2008. Introduction: Post-conflict Spaces and Approaches to Statebuilding. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 2 (3): 269–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hughes, Caroline. 2003. The Political Economy of Cambodia’s Transition, 1991–2001. London and New York: Routledge Curzon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hughes, Caroline, and Vanessa Pupavac. 2005. Framing Post-conflict Societies: International Pathologisation of Cambodia and the Post-Yugoslav States. Third World Quarterly 26 (6): 873–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jetschke, Anja, and Jürgen Rüland. 2009. Decoupling Rhetoric and Practice: The Cultural Limits of Asean Cooperation. The Pacific Review 22: 179–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Koenig, Mathias, and Julian Dierkes. 2012. Conflict in the World Polity: Neo-institutional Perspectives. Acta Sociologica 54 (1): 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lee, Jeong-Hye. 2017. The Life and Learning in Banteay Prieb in Cambodia: Focusing on People-Centered Development in Technical Vocational Education and Training. Master’s dissertation, Seoul National University, Seoul.Google Scholar
  27. Lee, SungYong. 2015. Motivations for Local Resistance in International Peacebuilding. Third World Quarterly 36 (8): 1437–1452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee, SungYong, and Alpaslan Özerdem (eds.). 2015. Local Ownership in International Peacebuilding: Key Theoretical and Practical Issues. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Lee, SungYong, and WookBeom Park. 2018. The Dual Track of Democracy Promotion in Post-war Peacebuilding in Cambodia: The Gap Between Institutional Development and Civil Society Mobilisation. Peacebuilding. Advanced Publication.  https://doi.org/10.1080/21647259.2018.1498671.
  30. Levitsky, Steven, and María Victoria Murillo. 2005. Theorizing About Weak Institutions: Lessons from the Argentine Case. In Argentine Democracy: The Politics of Institutional Weakness, ed. Steven Levitsky and María Victoria Murillo. University Park: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Lidén, Kristoffer. 2009. Building Peace Between Global and Local Politics: The Cosmopolitical Ethics of Liberal Peacebuilding. International Peacekeeping 16 (5): 616–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Liese, Andrea. 2009. Exceptional Necessity: How Liberal Democracies Contest the Prohibition of Torture and Ill-Treatment When Countering Terrorism. Journal of International Law and International Relations 5 (17): 17–47.Google Scholar
  33. Mac Ginty, Roger. 2011. International Peacebuilding and Local Resistance: Hybrid Forms of Peace. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mac Ginty, Roger, and Gurchathen Sanghera. 2012. Hybridity in Peacebuilding and Development: An Introduction. Journal of Peacebuilding & Development 7 (2): 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Meyer, John W., John Boli, George M. Thomas, and Francisco O. Ramirez. 1997. World Society and the Nation-State. American Journal of Sociology 103: 144–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Noutcheva, Gergana. 2009. Fake, Partial and Imposed Compliance: The Limits of the EU’s Normative Power in the Western Balkans. Journal of European Public Policy 16: 1065–1084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Olawale, Ismail. 2008. Enabling Local Ownership: Participation and Capacity-Building in SSR. In Local Ownership and Security Sector Reform, ed. Timothy Donais, 127–148. Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF). Münster: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
  38. Orr, Robert. 2004. An American Strategy for Post Conflict Resolution. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies.Google Scholar
  39. Peterson, Jenny 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: 9–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Porter, Elisabeth, and Dale Bagshaw. 2009. Mediation in the Asia-Pacific Region: Transforming Conflicts and Building Peace. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Reich, Hannah. 2006. “Local Ownership” in Conflict Transformation Projects: Partnership, Participation or Patronage? Berghof Occasional Paper No. 27, Berghof Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management, Berlin.Google Scholar
  42. Reus-Smit, Christian. 2001. Human Rights and the Social Construction of Sovereignty. Review of International Studies 27 (4): 519–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Richmond, Oliver. 2009. The Romanticisation of the Local: Welfare, Culture, and Peace-Building. The International Spectator 44 (1): 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Richmond, Oliver, and Audra Mitchell. 2012. Hybrid Forms of Peace: From Everyday Agency to Post-liberalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Risse, Thomas. 2002. Transnational Actors and World Politics. In Handbook of International Relations, ed. Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth Simmons. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  46. Risse, Thomas, Stephen Ropp, and Kathryn Sikkink (eds.). 1999. The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Sandholtz, Wayne. 2008. Dynamics of International Norm Change: Rules Against Wartime Plunder. European Journal of International Relations 14 (1): 101–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schimmelfennig, Frank, Stefan Engert, and Heiko Knobel. 2006. International Socialization in Europe: European Organizations, Political Conditionality and Democratic Change. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schmitz, Hans, and Kathryn Sikkink. 2013. International Human Rights. In Handbook of International Relations, ed. Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth Simmons. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  50. Shaw, Rosalind, and Lars Waldorf (eds.). 2010. Localizing Transitional Justice: Interventions and Priorities After Mass Violence. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Smillie, Ian. 2001. Patronage or Partnership: Local Capacity Building in Humanitarian Crises. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
  52. Sriram, Chandra Lekha. 2012. Post-conflict Justice and Hybridity in Peacebuilding: Resistance or Cooptation? In Hybrid Forms of Peace: From Everyday Agency to Post-liberalism, ed. Oliver P. Richmond and Audra Mitchell. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  53. Stobbe, Stephanie Phetsamay. 2015. Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding in Laos: Perspective for Today’s World. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  54. van Kersbergen, Kees, and Bertjan Verbeek. 2007. The Politics of International Norms: Subsidiarity and the Imperfect Competence Regime of the European Union. European Journal of International Relations 13 (2): 217–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wiener, Antje. 2009. Enacting Meaning-In-Use: Qualitative Research on Norms and International Relations. Review of International Studies 35 (1): 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zimmermann, Lisbeth. 2016. Same Same or Different? Norm Diffusion Between Resistance, Compliance, and Localization in Post-conflict State. International Studies Perspectives 17 (1): 98–115.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations