peacebuilding and cmty development zolondek

8/2/2019 Peacebuilding and Cmty Development Zolondek

1/84

EASTERN UNIVERSITY

BUILDING PEACE: POST-CONFLICT PEACEBUILDING THROUGH COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

A thesis/project submitted in partial fulfillment of therequirements for the degree of

Master of Arts in Urban Studies: Community Development

By

Kristellys Zolondek

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

2010


2/84

BUILDING PEACE: POST-CONFLICT PEACEBUILDING THROUGH COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

By

Kristellys Zolondek

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for thedegree of

Urban Studies: Community Development

Eastern University

2010

Approved by ___________________________________________________Director of Faculty and Student Research

Date __________________________________________________________

Research Advisor Assigned ________________________________________


3/84

ABSTRACT

In the midst of conflict-ridden situations worldwide, development projects have the potential to promote

reconciliation and build peace. Participatory development projects that involve the input and governancefrom and implementation by the community maximize that potential. Although there has been a good

amount of literature on the subject of development and peacebuilding, the case for community

development strategies has to be mainstreamed. This paper demonstrates that community development isessential to the success of peacebuilding through development projects as it captures the necessary aspectof a participatory, community-centered strategy. The conclusion of this study implies that development

workers and those in the field of peacebuilding must acquire community development approaches, as it is

only through developing communities strengths and capacities that sustainable peace can be achieved.Furthermore, this paper argues that community development can be understood as synonymous to

peacebuilding.


4/84

TABLE OF CONTENTS

C h a p t e r 1 ..................................................................................................................................1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................2Statement of Problem..............................................................................................................................2

Need For Study ........................................................................................................................................3Purpose .....................................................................................................................................................4Goal and Research Questions .................... ....................... ...................... ....................... .......................4Limitations ....................... ...................... ....................... ....................... ...................... ....................... ....4

Literature Review....................................................................................................................................5Community Development ...................... ....................... ....................... ...................... ....................... ....5Post-conflict Peacebuilding...................................................................................................................9Development .................... ...................... ....................... ....................... ...................... ....................... ..14Linking Peacebuilding and Development in Post-Conflict Areas ...................... ...................... ..........16Local Capacities for Peace Framework. ....................... ....................... ...................... ....................... ..19Community Level Peacebuilding through Development Projects......................................................22Theological Framework ...................... ...................... ....................... ....................... ...................... ......23

Methodology...........................................................................................................................................24 Approach, Procedure, and Analysis....................................................................................................24Significance of Study .............................................................................................................................25

C h a p t e r 2 ................................................................................................................................27 Capacity-Building Development ..........................................................................................................28Community Economic Development ...................................................................................................30Social Capital Formation......................................................................................................................31Asset-Based Community Development ...............................................................................................33Action Research.....................................................................................................................................33Environmentally Sustainable Development........................................................................................37Women-centered Community Development.......................................................................................40

C h a p t e r 3 ................................................................................................................................42 Case Study 1: The Aman Shanti Community Development Project in Shankernager, India .......43Background ...................... ...................... ....................... ....................... ...................... ....................... ..43Structure of Development Project.......................................................................................................44

Specific Programs....45

Case Study 2: The National Solidarity Program in Jurm, Afghanistan ..........................................46

Background ...................... ...................... ....................... ....................... ...................... ....................... ..46Structure of Development Project.......................................................................................................47Specific Programs....49

Case Study 3: The Disaster Preparedness and Local Capacities for Peace Program in South

Sudan ......................................................................................................................................................50

Background ...................... ...................... ....................... ....................... ...................... ....................... ..50Structure of Development Project.......................................................................................................51Specific Programs ....................... ....................... ...................... ....................... ....................... .............52

C h a p t e r 4 ................................................................................................................................54 Evaluation: Case Study 1......................................................................................................................55

Analysis & Implications for Peacebuilding: Case Study 1..................... ....................... .....................56Conclusions: Case Study 1..................................................................................................................56

Evaluation: Case Study 2......................................................................................................................58


5/84

Analysis & Implications for Peace: Case Study 2 ....................... ....................... ...................... ..........58Conclusions: Case Study 2..................................................................................................................60

Evaluation: Case Study 3......................................................................................................................62Implications for Peace: Case Study 3 .................... ...................... ....................... ...................... ..........63Conclusions: Case Study 3..................................................................................................................66

Final Comments and Recommendations.............................................................................................68


6/84

LIST OF TABLES

Number

Table 1.1: Issues Addressed by Community Development Strategies .................... ...................... ................6Table 1.2: Principles of Asset-Based Community Development .................... ....................... ...................... .7

Table 1.3: Development Styles....................................................................................................................15Table 3.1: Structures of the Aman Shanti Community Development Program ..........................................45

Table 3.2: Structures of the National Solidarity Program .................... ....................... ...................... ..........47

Table 3.3: Structures of Disasters Preparedness and Local Capacities for Peace Program.........................52Table 3.4: DIPLCAP Program Phases and Specific Objectives..................................................................53Table 4.1: Evaluation Chart for the Aman Shanti Community Development Project in Shankernager,

India ...................... ...................... ....................... ...................... ....................... ...................... ..............55

Table 4.2: Evaluation Chart for the National Solidarity Program in Jurm, Afghanistan ............................58Table 4.3: Evaluation Chart for the Disaster Preparedness and Local Capacities Program in South Sudan:

Part I....................................................................................................................................................62

Table 4.4: Evaluation Chart for the Disaster Preparedness and Local Capacities Program in South Sudan:Part II...63


7/84

LIST OF FIGURES

Number

Figure 1.1. Community Development: Approaches and Issues Addressed ..................................................8

Figure 1.2. Lederachs Web of Reconciliation............................................................................................11Figure 1.3. Essential Characteristics for Sustainable Peacebuilding ....................... ...................... ..............13

Figure 1.4. The Peacebuilding Nexus..........................................................................................................17

Figure 1.5. The Peacebuilding Wheel..........................................................................................................18Figure 1.6. The Impact of Aid on Conflict: Categories of Dividers and Connectors..................................20Figure 1.7. Community Development Strategies Encompasses Peacebuilding and Post-Conflict

Development. ....................... ...................... ....................... ...................... ....................... .....................22

Figure 2.1. Stages of Capacity-Building in NGOs and Civil Society .........................................................29Figure 2.2: A Reformulation of the Component of Local Economic Development....................................31

Figure 2.3: Detailed Action Research Model .................... ....................... ...................... ....................... ......35

Figure 2.4: Sources and Consequences of Environmental Scarcity .................... ....................... .................39Figure 3.1. The 5-Phase Cycle of the National Solidarity Program .................... ....................... .................48

Figure 3.2. Phases of the DIPLCAP Program in South Sudan....................................................................52

Figure 4.1. Objectives of PSOs: Preconflict, During Conflict, and Postconflict at Different Levels. ........69


8/84

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to acknowledge those who have played a guiding, supporting, and inspirationalrole in the accomplishing of this thesis in the comments to follow:

First, those who have guided the writing of this thesis are acknowledged for helping me come

together academically throughout this process: Dr. Nathan J. Corbitt, Ms. Darlene Atta, and Dr. Richard

Tardanico. You have steered my writing in the right direction and have allowed me to think inside thebox of academia; a task often difficult for an abstract, visionary, and scattered thinker like myself. Thank

you each for the help you gave me along this process.Secondly, those by my side who have supported me since the beginning have been instrumental

in making me believe in myself and uplifting me through the hard times that comes with intensive

research and writing.Michael Zolondek, you have always walked the extra mile for me to help me during times of

intense work and study. I am always incredibly thankful and inspired by your willingness to help me and

those around you. Your work ethic has inspired me and taught me what it means to be thankful for an

education in a world where many dont get the same opportunities. Thank you.Elizabeth Bowden, you have been there with me since the beginning. Just knowing that we were

going through this process together and our mutual support took me a long way. You have always been

there and I am honored to have you as a colleague and a friend. Your support means so much to me.Thank you.

Everyone whom I know who has ever said, I believe in you: Thank you. The encouragement

those words have brought has been priceless.Finally, but certainly not least, I want to thank those who inspired me to focus on the issues my

thesis talks about. All of the peace activists whom I am honored and blessed to call friends: Every one of

your actions inspires me. You all have allowed me to not only believe but also see the goodness of

humanity and how that collective and sacrificial goodwill, with people from different walks of life, trulycan make another world possible here and now.

My last acknowledgments go out to the women, men, youth, boys and girlsmy brothers andsistershalfway across the world whose resilience have changed the goals of my days; the people ofUganda, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Those whom we have allowed to perish

while we stood idly by making our promise of Never Again just a slogan: I ask for forgiveness forturning a blind eye and a deaf ear when I could have done something. Holocaust survivors, those affected

by the Holocaust, and other genocide survivors: the greatest wisdom and strength to keep going comesfrom you. I want to specifically thank a Holocaust survivor living in Miami whom I have had the honor to

meet and learn from, Mr. Joe Sachs. I will reiterate as I told you in person: we stand with you. Your

beautiful heart and your courageous soul leave me speechless. I will forever thank God for getting theopportunity to know you.

My life is forever indebted to those in my local and global community who experience the threatof violence and loss of dignity on an individual or mass level. My life is forever committed to the desiresof Gods heart made flesh through Jesus Christ to see Gods kingdom here on Earth as it is in Heaven.

Amen.

Sincerely,Kristellys Estanga


9/84

GLOSSARY

Peacebuilding. Johan Galtung, named the father of peace studies, has contributed hisunderstanding of peacebuilding as an endeavor aiming to create sustainable peace by addressing the

root causes of violent conflicts and eliciting indigenous capacities for peaceful management and

resolution of conflict (AISBL, 2008, para. 2). InAgenda for Peace, the United Nations defines

peacebuilding as a process of that consists of a range of activities associated with capacity building,reconciliation, and societal transformation. Peacebuilding is a long-term process that occurs after violent

conflict has slowed down or come to a halt (Boutros-Ghali, 1995).Peacebuilding should be differentiated from peacemaking and peacekeeping. Peacemaking is the

diplomatic effort to end the violence between the conflicting parties, move them towards nonviolent

dialogue, and eventually reach a peace agreement (Maiese, 2003, para. 6). Peacekeeping is a third-partyintervention (often, but not always by military forces) to assist parties in transitioning from violentconflict to peace by separating the fighting parties and keeping them apart (para. 6).

Sustainablepeace. Peace is generally perceived as the absence of war. This is a negativedefinition of peace. A positive definition of peace is defined as the development of factors of

cooperation and integration between communities and nations in order to promote lasting peace (David

in Jeong, 2002, p. 27). Reychler (2001) defines sustainable peace as term that refers to a situationcharacterized by the absence of physical violence; the elimination of unacceptable political, economic,

and cultural forms of discrimination; a high level of internal and external legitimacy or support; self-

sustainability; and a propensity to enhance the constructive transformation of conflicts (p. 12).Furthermore, the requirements for sustainable peace to flourish are effective communication, consultation,and negotiation at different levels; peace-enhancing structures; an integrative moral-political climate; and

objective and subjective security (Reychler, 2001).

Conflict. Recyhler and Paffenholz (2001) define conflict as the pursuit of incompatible goals by

different groups (p. 5). Conflicts, if managed constructively, do not lead to violence. Some conflicts aremutually satisfactoryothers end up frustrating one or all parties (p. 7).

Violence. The term violence, according to Reychler and Paffenholz (2001), refers to a situationin which the quantitative and qualitative life expectancy of individuals or communities is intentionally

reduced (p. 4). They also point out noteworthy indicators such as expectancy of the members of agroup, infant mortality, daily calorie intake, [and] access to schooling (p. 4). When conflicts turn violent

the cost are not just human. They also include spiritual, humanitarian, material, political, ecological,

social, cultural, and psychological (Reychnler & Paffenholz, 2001). Violence can be perpetratedphysically, structurally, culturally and/or psychologically.

Post-conflict. This research will accept the definition posited by Junne and Verkoren (2005)which says that post-conflict is conflict situation in which open warfare has come to an end. Such

situations remain tense for years or decades and can easily relapse into large-scale violence (p. 1).

Development. Junne and Verokren (2005) see development as more than simply economicgrowth (p. 3). Development is about improving the standard of living for all people in poor countries(p. 3). Development improves various sectors of living conditions in a region which can include health,

environment, education, and political participation (p. 3).

Communitydevelopment. The fourth definition in U.S. Federal law states that communitydevelopment consists of activities that revitalize or stabilize low- or moderate-income geographies,designated disaster areas, or distressed or underserved metropolitan middle-income geographies (Code


10/84

of Federal Regulations, 1995). In order for the definition to be within the scope of this research, this thesis

will accept the definition by the Canadian CED Network:Creating vibrant, resilient and sustainable local economies action by people locally to createeconomic opportunities and better social conditions, particularly for those who are more

disadvantaged. An approach that recognizes that economic, environmental and social challenges

are interdependent, complex and ever-changing. To be effective, solutions must be rooted in local

knowledge and led by community members. (Canadian CED Network, n.d., para. 1)

Community development has many strategies: Capacity building, Economic development, Socialcapital formation, Asset-based, Environmentally sustainable, Action research, Faith-based, Cooperative

living (co-ops), Intentional communities, Political participation, Community mobilization, Participatory

planning, Community-driven development (CDD), Neighborhood government, Community practicesocial work, and Community mental health work. This paper focuses on community development interms that encompass the following approaches: capacity building, economic development, social capital

formation, asset-based, community mobilization, participatory planning and community-driven

development.


11/84

1

C h a p t e r 1

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PEACEBUILDING:

AN INTRODUCTION


12/84

2

Introduction

Community development strategies have emerged within peacebuilding frameworks in order to

further enhance peacebuilding initiatives in post-conflict areas. Like community development,

peacebuilding is a broad field which covers various processes, goals, and models. Although a post-

conflict developmental approach to peacebuilding can occur at various levels of society, this approach is

most sustainable when it is implemented at a grassroots level. This is where community development and

peacebuilding intersect. Community development helps to create a group consensus through cooperative

decision-making at the community level. Incorporating community organizing methods, community

developers work to enhance capacities within a community to achieve developmental goals. Community

developers can aid peacebuilding processes by helping to create participatory development projects. In

this way, development projects become more sustainable, more conflict-sensitive, and enhance local

capacities for peace.

Statement of Problem

Traditional peacebuilding initiatives need to be linked to development projects in order to achieve

sustainable results. There is no sustainable peace without the social infrastructure to support it.

Furthermore, there is no sustainable peace without community-led social infrastructure projects. These

kinds of projects promote cooperation between parties, minimize the potential harm a development

project might unwillingly have in areas of high tension, and enhance local capacities for peace. The

merging of community development strategies and peacebuilding would lead to such projects. So far,

community development strategies have been incorporated within both peacebuilding and development

projects in post-conflict areas. This thesis will hopefully change the way in which the relationship

between community development and peacebuilding has been viewed by illustrating that community

development strategies build peace in and of themselves. In other words, community development

strategies encompass post-conflict developmental approaches to peacebuilding.


13/84

3

Need For Study

Since WWII there has been a clear shift in global warfare trends from inter-state to intra-state

conflict (Charlesworth, 2006, p. 8). According to OReilly, over seventy wars have taken place between

1989-1996 in sixty locations (1998). In 1997, there were at least thirty-four wars and seventy low-

intensity conflicts, and since 2004 there have been thirty active armed conflicts worldwide (1998).

Furthermore, most of these conflicts are taking place in developing countries (Leonhardt cited in

Ryechler & Paffenholz, 2001, p. 238). As Junne and Verkoren observe, developing countries have gone

through a period of intensive civil strife that post-conflict development has become the norm rather than

the exception (Junne & Verkoren, 2005, p. 318). However, post-conflict development has often been

added as merely an additional task and not integrated sufficiently into their overall development

strategy (Junne & Verkoren). Development projects have the potential to promote reconciliation and

peacebuilding in the midst of these types of conflicts. This must be recognized and these approaches must

be incorporated into development work in post-conflict areas.

Interestingly, there has been a recent paradigm shift breaking into post-conflict development and

peacebuilding projects: the incorporation of participatory processes is taking place in an attempt to

produce more effective and sustainable results. Sustainability has become a buzzword because huge

amounts of aid money are being wasted as conflicts arise again and again, thereby turning the sites of

development projects into areas of hostility. Development projects must therefore be aware of their

impact on post-conflict areas, help mitigate conflict, and be intentional about developing local capacities

for peace. As Carey and Richmond havenoted, Peacebuilding must be an intrinsic part of development

[projects] (2003, p. 41) in order for community participatory cooperation to occur.

Although a significant amount of literature has been produced on the subject of development and

peacebuilding, these works lack a comprehensive analysis of the role of community development in these

fields. This paper will provide this much needed analysis and will demonstrate that community

development strategies are not only essential to the success of peacebuilding through development


14/84

4

projects, but that it is the kind of strategy that results when peacebuilding, post-conflict development, and

participatory processes come together.

Purpose

Goal and Research Questions

The goal of this research is to offer a strong case for the inclusion of the community in

development projects in post-conflict areas in order to build peace, thus killing two birds with one stone.

The guiding research questions to achieve this goal will be:

1. How are current post-conflict development projects engaging the community?

2. What are the building blocks for sustainable peace in post-conflict areas?

3. How do community development strategies enhance peacebuilding capacities within post-conflict

development projects?

As these three questions are addressed, the need for the implementation of community

development in post-conflict peacebuilding initiatives will become apparent. Community development is

able to achieve the goals of both development and peacebuilding projects, proving it to be a more cost-

effective, sustainable, and wise approach. This research will contribute to the larger discourse in a unique

way in that it will show how community development has inherent capacities for building sustainable

peace, thus making post-conflict developmental approaches to peacebuilding and community

development strategies synonymous, provided that the former is interested in engaging the community

through participation and indigenous leadership.

Limitations

Peace initiatives during an ongoing conflict will not be discussed in this thesis. My research will

focus specifically on post-conflict peacebuilding and development. It will assume the importance of peace

processes during conflict. It will also assume that the presence of development projects in current conflict

regions can adopt more conflict sensitive strategies through the awareness of these projects capacity for

peace through community led approaches. As will be demonstrated below, one must understand that


15/84

5

peacebuilding is a process used for post-conflict situations, whereas peacekeeping and peacemaking are

more relevant for current conflict situations.

My research will likewise not address other approaches to peacebuilding, which are just as

important as developmental approaches to building sustainable peace. There is a range of approaches that

involve holistic and transformative peacebuilding which must be taken into account in any given

situation. Approaches vary from trying to reform judicial systems to using the arts as a tool for

transformation to post-trauma healing to spiritual or faith-based approaches. These are all important

aspects of peacebuilding that should be a part of any process. However, for the sake of making a strong

case for community development, I will focus specifically on the developmental approach to

peacebuilding.

Lastly, this research will not address the different levels at which peacebuilding processes and

projects occur. Again, there is an assumption that peacebuilding must occur at different levels of society

for it to be sustainable and holistic. For example, when reforming judicial systems in order to bring about

peace through justice, the processes focus on working with what Lederach called top leadership and

middle range leaders (political leaders, leaders in respected sectors, ethnic/religious leaders) (Knox &

Quirk, 2000, p. 25). Similarly, within developmental approaches to peacebuilding, many projects work at

a macro-level with top and middle range leaders. A more sustainable approach, though, would involve

grassroots leaders along with the support of upper-level leadership to accomplish the intended goals.

Hence, community level peacebuilding through development projects will be my focus.

Literature Review

Community Development

According to Ferguson and Dickens (1999, p. 5) community development is asset building that

improves the quality of life among residents in a troubled area. In the community development field,

assets take five basic forms: physicalcapitalin the form of buildings, tools, and so forth; intellectual and

human capitalin the form of skills, knowledge, and confidence;social capitalnorms, shared

understandings, trust, and other factors that make relationships feasible and productive; financial capital


16/84

6

(in standard forms); andpolitical capital, which provides the capacity to exert political influence

(Ferguson & Dickens).

There are two predominant approaches to community development that shape various community

development strategies: needs-based development and asset-based community development. According to

UN-Habitat, community development strategies aim to help residents/community members address three

issues: (1) self-help (or self-sufficiency); (2) technical assistance; and (3) conflict resolution. As I will

demonstrated presently, the two aforementioned approaches deal with these issues in different ways.

Table 1.1

Issues Addressed by Community Development Strategies

Note: FromAn Asset-Based Approach to Community Development and Capacity-Building(pp. 5-6), byUN-Habitat, 2008, Nairobi, United Human Nations Settlements Programme

Needs-based Development. This type of development focuses on the needs of communities.

Needs-based development is based on identifying and responding to the needs in poor communities. This

approach focuses on what communities are lacking, not what they have, and is also termed the Deficit

Model. Within this approach, the needs of communities are assessed by agencies and technical assistance

is provided through top-down policies.

Criticisms have been raised regarding the needs-based development approach to community

development, including issues of deficiency and equity, perpetuating a culture of poverty, dependency,

and patience (UN-Habitat, 2008). In spite of this, needs-based development remains an effective tool for

mapping and quantifying the needs of distressed communities (UN-Habitat, 2008).

ISSUE ADDRESSED PURPOSESelf-help (or Self-sufficiency) Enables residents to mobilize and manage assets

Capitalizes on individual talents and skills Leverages collective assets and resources

Technical Assistance Transfers financial, organizational, and political assistance from externalsources to needy communities

Boosts self-confidence in marginalized communities

Conflict Resolution Explores avenues for conflict resolution within communities Encourages consensus on shared interests and visions


17/84

7

However, with the emergence of asset-based community development, needs-based development

is being used for the beginning stages of development and then an asset-based approach for the remainder

of development projects (i.e. assessing the needs of the community in the beginning and enhancing local

capacities for development and transformation).

Asset-based Community Development. A model of community development that has become

essential for community developers to work with has been Kretzmann and McKnights Asset-Based

Community Development (ABCD) model. ABCD, also referred to as the Dynamic Model, considers

local assets as the primary building blocks of sustainable community development (Northwestern

University, 2009, para. 1). ABCD builds on the skills of local residents, the power of local associations,

and supportive functions of local institutions (para. 1) in order to organize existing community strengths

and thereby build stronger, more sustainable communities.

ABCD assumes the need for external resources and aid while focusing on the assets of

[troubled] communities (Kretzmann & McKnight, 1993, p. 8). However, it stresses that outside resources

will be more effectively used if the local community is itself fully mobilized and invested, and if it can

define the agendas for which additional resources must be obtained( p. 8).

Below, the principles of ABCD are listed:

Table 1.2Principles of Asset-Based Community Development

PRINCIPLE DESCRIPTIONAsset-based Starts with what is present in the community: the capacities of its residents and

workers, and the associational and institutional base of the area

Internally-focused Concentrates first of all upon the agenda-building and problem-solving capacities oflocal residents, local associations and institution. Stresses the primacy of local

definition, investment, creativity, hope and control

Relationship-driven Constantly builds and rebuilds relationships between and among local residents

(bridging and bonding social capital, respectively), local associations and local

institutions

Note: FromBuilding Communities From the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a

Communitys Assets (p. 9), by Kretzmann & McKnight, 1993, ACTA Publications

The success of community development strategies, according to Kretzmann and Knight, lies in

the ability to rebuild relationships and address local assets (p. 10).


18/84

8

Needs-based vs. Asset-based. These two approaches to community development have created a

variety of strategies to help, empower, and transform communities around the world in a wide array of

situations, including in a post-conflict situation. Figure 1.1 below is taken from UN-Habitat (2008). It

shows how these two approaches each address the different categories tackled by community

development.

Figure 1.1. Community Development: Approaches and Issues Addressed From An Asset-Based

Approach to Community Development and Capacity-Building (p. 4), by UN-Habitat, 2008, Nairobi,United Human Nations Settlements Programme

Community Organizing & Building. Community development will often be intertwined with

community organizing or community building. The purpose of both fields is basically the same: to build

capacity that improves the quality of life among residents of low- to moderate-income neighborhoods

(Ferguson & Dickens, 1999, p. 11). According to Linthicum, Community organizing is that process by

which the peopleorganize themselves to take charge of their situation and thus develop a sense of

community together. It is a particularly effective tool for the poor as they determine for themselves the

actions they will take to deal with the essential forces that are destroying their communities and


19/84

9

consequently causing them to be powerless (1991, p. 31). Of the several definitions offered for

community organizing, Linthicums captures this fields purpose most clearly.

Community building, like community development and organizing, is defined in various ways,

but one can easily point out similar themes within these definitions. Community building has a common

emphasis on organizing residents, social capacity building, and grassroots participation (Ferguson &

Dickens, 1999, pp. 9-10). Likewise, community development should be neighborhood oriented, resident

driven, and empowerment focused (Ferguson & Dickens, p. 13).

Upon reviewing community development literature, it is safe to say that community development

uses both community organizing and community building within its framework to enhance local

capacities for change.

Social & Human Capital.The contribution of social capital theory to community development

has been significant. Social and human capital are two assets on which community development seeks to

build for social transformation. Human capital is tools and training that enhance individual productivity

(Putnam, 2000, p. 18). Social capital theorys core idea is that social networks have value[they can]

affect the productivity of individuals and groups (Putnam, p. 19). There are two forms of social capital,

each of which has different outcomes. Bonding social capital is good for undergirding reciprocity and

mobilizing solidarity[it is] inward looking and tend[s] to reinforce exclusive identities and

homogeneous groups (Putnam, p. 22), whereas bridging social capital generates broader identities and

reciprocity[bridging social capital is] better for linkage to external assets and for information diffusion

(Putnam, pp. 22-23). Both forms of capital are vital to community development, as community

development only works in the context of maximizing bonding and bridging social capital. Community

development sees problematic situations within communities as a result of weak social ties within the

community and weak social ties between the community and outer forces.

Post-conflict Peacebuilding

Definitions of Peacebuilding. Post-conflict peacebuilding is a newly emerging concept that

Boutros-Ghali defines as an action to identify and support structures which will tend to strengthen and


20/84

10

solidify peace in order to avoid a relapse into conflict (cited in Lambourne & Herro, 2008, p. 277).

Peacebuilding encompasses various lines of work including political, developmental, humanitarian and

human rights programmes (Lambourne & Herro, p. 278). According to Luc Reychler, sustainable peace

is characterized by the absence of physical violence; the elimination of political, economic and cultural

forms of discrimination; self-sustainability; a high level of internal and external legitimacy or approval;

and the propensity to transform conflicts constructively (as cited in Lambourne & Herro, p. 279).

Lederachs definition of peacebuilding, an array of processes, approaches, and stages needed to

transform conflict toward more sustainable, peaceful relationships (cited in Lambourne & Herro, p. 279),

comes from a Mennonite approach to peacebuilding. The basic theme of this peacebuilding approach is

to engage with local institutions that contribute to the growth and maintenance of peace, offer support

and help to local endeavors on their own terms, rather than seeking to impose a vision of what a final

peace should look like (Mitchell cited in Sampson & Lederach, 2000, p. 223). The Mennonite

peacebuilding tradition has contributed to the research mostly by emphasizing the need for long-term

relationship building as a primary component of achieving sustainable peace.

Lederach, a major contributor to peacebuilding research, has developed his own peacebuilding

model. In his model he makes three observations about classical peacebuilding initiatives:

1) there is an over-emphasis on short-term tasks which are often separated from the longer

ranging goals of social change necessary to sustain any macro political achievements made;

2) there is a hierarchical approach to peacebuilding instead of an organic approachmuch of the

activity is focused on top level leaders and the macro level political activities;

3) There are political changes which are integral to the process of transition in divided

societiesWhile these political changes are necessarymoving beyond transition to

transformation requires a more comprehensive approach involving social, economic, socio-

psychological and spiritual changes (Knox & Quirk, 2000, pp. 24-26).

Figure 1.2 shows Lederachs peacebuilding model, which has been shaped by his aforementioned

criticisms. Lederach summarizes his model in the following way:


21/84

11

We must move beyond a short-term crisis orientation and toward the development of a capacity

to think about social change in terms of decades and generations. We must move beyond ahierarchical focus on politics and toward the construction of a more organic, broad-basedapproach that created the space for genuine responsibility, ownership and participation in peace

building (Lederach, 1996, p. 53).

Figure 1.2. Lederachs Web of Reconciliation. FromPeace building in Northern Ireland, Israel andSouth Africa (p. 27), by Knox & Quirk, 2007, New York: St. Martins Press, LLC.

As seen above, peacebuilding takes place within various spheres of life and at different levels.

This thesis will focus on the socio-economic level of post-conflict peacebuilding, which deals with

financial aid, retraining, employment, and the encompassing work of development. Within the socio-

economic component of peacebuilding, Lederach proposes that contextualization and empowerment are

tools that are required within peacebuilding frameworks. Michael Pugh says that, the ownership of

peacebuilding needs to be in embedded in local communities (cited in Lambourne & Herro, 2008, p.

280). Sustainability and legitimacy are the results of local ownership of peacebuilding according to

Barnes (Lambourne & Herro, p. 280). The need for social reconstruction must be contextualized and


22/84

12

adapted to each unique post-war settingbeing informed by the opinions, attitudes and needs of the local

population (Stover & Weinstein as cited in Lamborune & Herro, p. 280).

Lisa Schirch also offers important information for peacebuilding research. She has observed that

peacebuilding prevents, reduces, transforms, and helps people to recover from violence in all forms

while at the same time empowering people to foster relationships at all levels to create structural justice

(in Mertus & Helsing, 2006, p. 64). Schirch emphasizes the important concept of just peace which

recognizes that justices pursued violently contributes to further injustice and human rights violations (in

Mertus & Helsing, pp. 64-65). Therefore, peace without justice is unable to meet the basic needs of

people living with the aftermath of conflict. She goes on to note that because peacebuilding coordinates

the activities of a wide range of actors at all levels of society over a period of months, years, and

decades, it is necessary to have a variety of different, collaborative approaches (Schirch in Mertus &

Helsing, p. 65).

Lastly, inBuilding Sustainable Peace Andy Knight gathers insights from many experts in the

field of peacebuilding. For example, he approvingly quotes Kenneth Bush, who states:

In the broadest terms, peacebuilding refers to those initiatives which foster and supportsustainable structures and processes, which strengthen the prospects for peaceful coexistence and

decrease the likelihood of the outbreak, reoccurrence, or continuation, of violent conflict. Theprocess entails both short- and long-term objectives, for example, short-term humanitarian

operations, and longer-term developmental, political, economic and social objectives (cited inKnight, 2004, p. xxxvi).

Peacekeeping & Conflict Management. Peacebuilding transcends the concepts of

peacekeeping and conflict management, says Knight (2004), in that it embodies more than simply

band-aid and reactive solutions to dealing with violent conflicts (p. 356). The underlying structural

causes of conflict must be addressed by peacebuilding through decentered socioeconomic and political

structures and bottom up processes (Knight, 2004). This type of critical peacebuilding is currently being

promoted as more sustainable and effective than more contemporary problem-solving approaches.

Workers in the peacebuilding field are realizing that critical and problem-solving approaches need to

be combined. For this reason, Knight argues that it would be futile to pour resources and personnel into


23/84

13

every problem associated with complex humanitarian emergencies and violent outbreaks if the peace that

results cannot be sustained (Knight, 2004, p. 357, emphasis added). Thus, seeking sustainable peace in

post-conflict areas must be intentional when deciding to intervene with resources, aid, or projects on the

ground in any way.

Characteristics of Peacebuilding Strategies. According to Reychler and Paffenholz (2001, p.

12) there are four aspects that make up the necessary requirements needed for the creation of sustainable

peace: (1) Effective communication, consultation, and negotiation at different levels; (2) Peace-enhancing

structures; (3) An integrative moral-political climate; (4) Objective and subjective security.

Figure 1.3. Essential Characteristics for Sustainable Peacebuilding. Adapted fromPeace-building: AField Guide (p. 12), by Reychler & Paffenholz (Ed.), 2001, Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Additionally, peacebuilding must include two strategies and two different levels. (1) the level of

regional and international regimes and (2) in-country peacebuilding measures (Keating & Knight in

Knight, 2004, p. xli). It is the latter strategy on which this paper will focus. In-country peacebuilding is

defined by Keating and Knight as: National and local level efforts, involving both governmental and

civil society actors, that are aimed at economic development, institution building and, more generally, the

creation or restoration within countries of the conditions necessary to bring about stability and sustain

peace (p. xli).

It is necessary to note the importance of the role of regional and international regimes along with

in-country peacebuilding: the latter is aided by the former. One must compliment the other.


24/84

14

Development

History of Development. Hart explains that the idea of development assistance came out of a

need to reconstruct countries after World War IIwhich created an awareness of the need to eradicate

poverty (2008, p. 4). The development process started out as a linear one in which the goal was to get

underdeveloped countries up to par with the developed world. Since then, this approach has had its

share of criticism because of its paternalistic and colonialist underpinnings (p. 4). Moreover, there was

a paradigm shift in regard to development in the early 1990s. This shift occurred because there were

issues, as there are now, regarding access to resources and the abundance of poverty despite tremendous

progress in health care, education and other standards (p. 4); this added to the perception that

development strategies were generally ineffective and in need of review.

Galtung (1994) speaks to this idea of progress within development strategies when he discusses

three development concepts: blue development, red development, and green development. Blue

[development], Galtung explains, [is] economic growth [that] is spearheaded by an entrepreneurial class

unfettered by state control or imitative, guided by the market (p. 109). Red development is the reaction

to blue development. It is economic growth controlled, even initiated by a state bureaucracy, but

spearheaded by the labor movement (p. 109). The third kind of development, the green kind, is a

reaction to both blue and red development. It is based more on the autonomy of local level and the

presumed beauty of the smaller economic cycles, also for world solidarity, and spearheaded by the new

social movement. Think globally, act locally in other words (p. 109).

According to Galtung, the history of development indicates that there four styles of development

varying on two dimensions: (1) level (macro-oriented vs. micro-oriented), and (2) aspect (one-

dimensional vs. multi-dimensional). Macro-oriented development builds strong countries with strong

entrepreneurial and/or bureaucratic elites [with] an international order accommodating the power and

privileges of these interest elites (p. 110). Micro-oriented development builds strong human beings and

strong local communities (p. 110). One-dimensional development tends to focus one dimension of

growth, be it economic, institutional, ecological, cultural, etc. Multi-dimensional development seeks a


25/84

15

more holistic approach to development taking the totality as the focusencompassing a number of

dimensions (p. 110).

Table 1.3

Development Styles

LEVELASPECT Macro-oriented Micro-oriented

One-dimensional Macro-oriented& One-dimensional

Micro-oriented& One-dimensional

Multi-dimensional Macro-oriented

& Multi-dimensional

Micro-oriented

& Multi-dimensional (Green

Approach)

Note: Adapted fromHuman Rights in Another Key (p. 110), by Galtung, 1993, Cambridge: Polity Press.Galtung, J. (1994). Human rights in another key. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Galtung observes that what has mostly been seen is a macro-oriented, one-dimensional approach

and that a shift to a greener approach is beginning to occur. It is not necessary to be encompassed within

one style of development because our current development framework is a macro-oriented, one-

dimensional one, and it takes a proper balance to be successful. This is not to say that we should not think

about green approaches to development, but in the unbalanced developmental system in which we find

ourselves, it is correct to emphasize the importance of micro-oriented, multi-dimensional development.

The goal is to develop greener approaches, not necessarily completely green ones. Such a development

approach will leave communities isolated without a state to unite the economies together. A greener

approach can be found in the concept of human development.

Conceptual Framework. The United Nations Agenda for Development first expressed the

concept of human development, which says that human development strives to promote freedom from

fear and want, emphasizing participatory processes and improving the quality of life for all peoples

(Hart, 2008, p. 4). Allowing people to engage in development strategies through participatory process

places human needs at the center of development goals. Human development focuses on issues such as

poverty reduction, employment, social integration, and environmental protection (Hart, 2008).


26/84

16

Two concepts have emerged out of international development: participation and sustainability

(p. 5). Participatory development is

an approach that recognizes that for a project to be successful over the long-term, it must be

based on the needs, wishes, and participation of local or recipient actorsSustainability [means

that] the development project does not consume more economic, environmental or humanresources than are available in any given setting, thus limiting its long-term viability (p. 5).

Jennings refers to participation as the involvement by local populations in creation, content and

conduct of a program (2000, p. 1). Participation can be achieved through the building of local assets and

capacities which helps to avoid the imposition of priorities from the outside, increases the likelihood of

programs staying on target and will result in higher sustainability. Participatory development promotes

equality and the idea that local decision-making is just as important as top-level mandates in regard to

development projects, and it is driven by the importance of entrusting citizens with the responsibility to

shape their own future (Jennings, 2000).

The World Bank, the Canadian International Development, USAID, and the International

Relief/Development Project have examined participatory approaches in various case studies. Each review

concluded that while participatory methodologies may require greater up front investment in staff

training and operation expenditures (up to 15%, on average, according to the World Bank study), through

the life of programs overall costs average lower in programs that do not rely on local capacities

(Jennings, 2000, p. 3).

Linking Peacebuilding and Development in Post-Conflict Areas

Peacebuilding has many different approaches. Peacebuilding synthesizes the values, relational

skills, analytical frameworks, and processes used in each of these fields or approaches (Schirch in

Mertus & Helsing, 2006, p. 65). The figure below represents peacebuilding approaches from many

different fields. Although there are many different fields, this paper is concerned with peacebuilding

through a developmental approach (economic, social, and political development) when differences are

viewed in the context of the Peacebuilding Nexus.


27/84

17

Figure 1.4. The Peacebuilding Nexus. FromHuman Rights and Conflict: Exploring the Links Between

Rights, Law, and Peacebuilding(p. 66), by Mertus & Helsing, 2006, Washington, DC: United StatesInstitute of Peace Press

Barry Hart developed the Peacebuilding Wheel shown below. The Peacebuilding Wheel is a

model that shows the interface of the tangible and intangible elements of peacebuildingCulture and

contextis always assumed in this model as the need for gender mainstreaming (Hart, 2008, pp. viii-ix).

Each section of the wheel contains elements of peacebuilding needed for initiatives to be transformative

and holistic. In terms of the Peacebuilding Wheel, this paper will focus on Humanitarian Assistance &

Development.


28/84

18

Figure 1.5. The Peacebuilding Wheel. From Peacebuilding in Traumatized Societies (p. ix), by Hart,

2008, Lanham: University Press of America.

Development and Conflict. As noted earlier, most of todays violent conflicts are taking place

in developing countries (Leonardt in Reychler & Paffenholz, 2001, p. 238). This means that there is a

need for development projects, primarily conflict-conscious ones. Development projects in these

struggling areas must take into account those areas social, political, and conflictive contexts. An

increasing number of conflict-related humanitarian emergencies have diverted scarce resources from


29/84

19

long-term development to humanitarian assistance (Leonardt in Reychler & Paffenholz, p. 238). This

sparked a discussion regarding the relationship between aid/development and security/peace. The

discussion within the development community included the need for socially sustainable development.

Firstly, there is growing consensus that development projects should not just produce economic

growth within a community but also create socially sustainable structures that prevent violent conflict and

are intentional in building peace. Secondly, the discussion focused on the negative effects of aidany

development project has the potential for peace and reconciliation or can further propagate violent

conflict through unstable power relationships and unfair access to resources. Thirdly, the reactive

approach to conflict has to be revised, which corresponds to the general shift in development thinking

toward enabling environments, which emphasizes good governance, rights-based development, and a

strong civil society (Leonardht in Reychler & Paffenholz, p. 239).

Humanitarian aid, development, and the ways in which conflict is dealt with need a new proactive

approach. This poses new challenges to aid agencies because they need to acquire additional instruments

and tools: conflict analysis, socially sustainable planning, identifying peace constituencies, and

monitoring impact of aid activities on conflict.

There are three main areas in which development aid can play a positive role in promoting

peace: long-term conflict prevention, supporting peace processes, and addressing localized violence

(Leonardht in Reychler & Paffenholz, p. 240). It is imperative that development projects understand and

embrace their peace-enhancing components so that developers can simultaneously address the material

conditions of violence and empower people to resolve their conflicts peacefully (p. 242).

Local Capacities for Peace Framework.

Perhaps one of the most important contributions to the field of community development and

peacebuilding was the Local Capacities for Peace framework (LCP). World Vision, a Christian

humanitarian organization, has gotten a hold of this framework and has aided them in making their

community development approaches conflict sensitive. This framework provides a method of analysis

that assists NGOs towards achieving the goal of doing no harm while providing aid and helping NGOs to


30/84

20

recognize and support the peoples local capacities for peace (Lowery in Garred, 2006, p. 2).

External assistance to conflict situations has the potential to either alleviate or worsening a

conflict: it can free intergroup tensions and weaken intergroup connectionsConversely, aid can help

war to end by lessening intergroup tensions and strengthening intergroup connections (Anderson, 1999,

p. 69). Figure 1.5 shows the interaction of aid to conflict. This framework has three basic steps and a

feedback process for ongoing assessment of a situation and appropriate program redesign (p. 69).

The first step is to identify the dividers, tensions, and war capacities in the context of conflict and

assessing their importance. The second step involves identifying, and assessing the importance of, the

connectors and local capacities for peace in the same context. The third step involves identifying the

pertinent characteristics of the aid agency and its program and assessing (reassessing) their impacts on the

dividers, tensions, and war capacities and the connectors and capacities for peace (Anderson, 1999).

Figure 1.6. The Impact of Aid on Conflict: Categories of Dividers and Connectors. FromDo No

Harm: How Aid Can Support Peaceor War(p. 74), by Anderson, 1999, Boulder: Reinner Publishers

Inc.

Other Important Contributions.Viven Erasmus contribution to Reychler & Paffenholz

Peacebuilding: a field guide is important in coupling development and peacebulding into a community


31/84

21

development framework through LCP. According to Erasmus, community mobliziation is a means of

tapping into the knolwedge and resources of the local community and fostering a spirit of community

ownership (Erasmus in Reychler & Paffenholz, 2001, p. 249). It is one of most effective tools for

minimizing dependency and reducing conflict at a grassroots level. In the LCP framework, community

mobilization would most likely occur at step two: identifying, and assessing the importance of, the

connectors and local capacities for peace. The purpose of community mobilization should be:

To create dialogue between the community, donors, and service provides; to promote structures

and systems for involvement of the community;

To optimize utilization of existing community resources; to ensure full cooperation and

collaboration between all stakeholders; to advance community empowerment and ownership; and

To resolve conflicts and grievances (Erasmus in Reychler & Paffenholz, p. 249).

Here, community mobilization resembles asset-based community development, capacity building,

community organizing and community building techniques. Indeed, these are overlapping concepts. One

starts to see the importance of involving the community in, even letting the community take leadership of,

the development projects; even though doing so may redefine objectives and priorities.

Furthermore, adding to the need for community development strategies within mainstream

development projects, Stiefel states that the external assistance must be carefully timed to local

dynamicsThey must move away from a preoccupation with urgent action and quick fixes and define

their role in a medium- to long-term perspective (Stiefel in Reychler & Paffenholz, p. 272).

Sustainability is more readily achieved when development projects promote local and national ownership.

On another note, there is a need for development to happen in impoverished communities as,

oftentimes, one of the determinants of whether crime and conflict will arise again maybe the degree of

economic and social development that has been achieved in the mean time and the fair distribution of its

fruits to different groups of the population (Junne & Verkoren, 2005, p. 1). Development projects can be

seen as an instrument to conflict resolution. As the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, says, The


32/84

22

prevention of war begins and ends with the promotion of human security and human development (cited

in Junne & Verkoken, p. 114).

Community Level Peacebuilding through Development Projects

Andrew Sheriff, Program Manager of Development & Peacebuilding in the London based

organization Dolby House, understands the importance of addressing issues at the community, national,

regional, and international levels in mutually reinforcing ways (2002). He observes that an important key

to building sustainable peace and development is supporting community-based peacebuilding (p. 1).

Moreover, Sheriff encourages the acknowledgement of the complimentarity between community

development and peacebuilding (p. 2).

After reviewing the literature and seeing the need to connect post-conflict development and

peacebuilding initiatives through participatory methodologies, community developers and non-

community developers alike can see the overlapping themes. The main element connecting peacebuilding

and post-conflict development is a participatory approach, given that both fields have an understanding of

the social context of the post-conflict area and its populace.

Figure 1.7. Community Development Strategies Encompasses Peacebuilding and Post-Conflict

Development.

The field of community development encompasses peacebuilding and post-conflict development.

Researchers and workers in both fields are looking for ways, and have come up with frameworks and

models, to accomplish more sustainable and effective development and more holistic peacebuilding.

Peacebuilding from a developmental approach requires community development strategies that can work


33/84

23

in aiding development projects to achieve peacebuilding in post-conflict areas. Furthermore, community

development is inherently a method by which sustainable peace can be established. This should enable

community development workers to constantly have the goal of peace in view during their efforts.

Additionally, it should allow current developmental approaches to peacebuilding, and indeed any

peacebuilding initiative, to simplify their methods in regard to researching effective strategies. The closer

to a community development strategy a peacebuilding or development project looks, the more effective it

should be.

Theological Framework

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a prophet of peace and justice, proclaimed, Without justice there

can be no peace (Lame, 2009). This has also been a rallying cry among peace activists demanding that

the establishment of justice act as the foundation of peace. Biblical insight agrees with this notion. The

prophet Isaiah says this: The way of peace they do not know, and there is no justice in their paths

(Isaiah 59:8, New Revised Standard Version).

One would do well to recall that the ultimate goal of community development is social justice.

Development projects seek to improve standards of living. As previously stated, some indicators that

social justice is occurring are decreased infant mortality and increased life expectancy. Interestingly, the

Hebrew Bible regards such a change in trends as being a part of the new creation, a peaceable realm

founded on justice that would come with the establishment of the Kingdom of God. Isaiah 65:20 says,

No more shall there be in it an infant that lives but a few days, or an old person who does not live out a

lifetime (NRSV). These improved living conditions lead to peace within a community, and this is the

goal of development projects at community, national, regional, or international level.

Development projects can lead to peace by establishing relationships in the process, which is in

the end what the Kingdom of God is abouta relational kingdom. The theological framework in this

research is heavily influenced by Eric Jacobsen, who stresses the importance of physical development

projects not as and end in and of themselves but as a means to an end. Jacobsen and Peterson(2003) says

that perhaps what [is] being accomplished [is] the shaping of a people more than the shaping of a city


34/84

24

although the shaping of the city may [be] an important means to an end (p. 71). Moreover, he says that,

the conditions of city life create opportunities for the fruits of the spirit to grow (p. 72). This indicates

the it is important to give importance to the physicality and the structures, or lack thereof, of the places in

which we live. Its design, placement, and functionality affect communal relationsthey can aid in

fostering peace or conflict.

The building of peace can only be pursued wherever there is a foundation of justice. Justice,

achieved through participatory development at a community level, cultivates relationships and leads to the

building of peace.

Methodology

Approach, Procedure, and Analysis

The approach of this thesis is an extended literature review. In chapter 2, various sources will be

reviewed in order to provide descriptions of different community development strategies and how they

have an inherent capacity to build peace. In the third chapter, case studies will be reviewed and analyzed.

There are various criteria for the choosing of these case studies. The case studies are chosen if they show

that:

It takes place after a situation of conflict, violence, civil strife, or war.

Development projects are initiated to rebuild the loss of, or simply obtain for the first time,

infrastructure and improve the quality of life.

Project initiators (whether external or internal) are aimed at involving the community through

participatory processes

The procedure of analysis will consist of evaluating each case study by how it incorporates all the

different asset-based community development characteristics shown in Figure 1.1. In the evaluation of

each characteristic, the analysis will mention how these components enhance local capacities for peace.


35/84

25

Significance of Study

Those involved in community development need to be aware of the potential community

development strategies have for building peace within a region. The need for civil and peaceful relations

in any area where tensions are high and interests are conflicting is vital. This need is constant within any

country or culture. It is vital in downtown Miami where luxury residential apartment complexes make life

harder for those in the surrounding poor community, thus creating animosity among local poor residents

toward those in power. It is likewise vital in post-genocide Rwanda where infrastructure development

may benefit one group of people and not another, thus straining group relations, rehashing old ethnic

rivalry, and triggering more violent conflicts.

Community developers work within a community to develop active and sustainable

communities based on social justice and respect (Community Development Exchange, n.d., para. 1).

Furthermore, community development approaches recognize that economic, environmental, and social

challenges are interdependent, complex, and ever-changing (Canadian CED Network, n.d., para. 2). The

implementation of community development strategies to manage community inequality and

accompanying conflicts results in the building of social capital through the establishment and cultivation

of cooperative relationships. When interdependent relationships are cultivated in a region, within groups

and between conflicting groups, the potential for peace is greater, as the need to work together for the

common good becomes more relevant to group interests.

Community development strategies incorporated in peacebuilding initiatives lead to more

sustainable peace. At the same time, community development strategies help development projects take

advantage of their peacebuilding potential by involving the community, specifically conflicting parties.

Therefore, research should look into how community development strategies can be included in post-

conflict development projects. This is what I intend to do here. This will allow for the establishment of

community development as a key peacebuilding approach in post-conflict areas by synthesizing

peacebuilding and development projects. Those involved in community development at any level should


36/84

26

harness the peacebuilding capacity of their strategies and work in their communities with the ultimate

goal of building sustainable peace.


37/84

27

C h a p t e r 2

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES


38/84

28

Capacity-Building Development

Capacity-building refers to a development approach that enables people to develop their

resources together in order to increase their capacity to meet their communitys new needs, engage new

opportunities, and let go of things they no longer need (Faculty of European Studies, 2009, slide 6). As

we settle into the 21st

century, the shift in development approaches has been toward sustainability. In

order for capacity-building development to have more sustainable results, it requires people, as a

community, to keep aware of their situation, to integrate the various resource development domains, and

to bring new people in to sustain the communitys ongoing capacity development efforts (slide 6).

Capacity-building development relies heavily on indigenous empowerment and skills development, with

the focus being on building local capacities, both individual and communal, in order to advance

developmental visions for a particular community. According to Eade (2008, p. 27), key questions of

capacity-building are: Who are the poor and oppressed in this society, why, and in what ways? How will

supporting structure X or activity Y help to change the overall balance in favor of those who lack access

to power and resources?

An easy way to understand capacity-building is to think of it in terms of helping people and

communities manage change. The way in which communities manage change depends on the skills they

possess to do so. There are several capacity domains that have to be properly developed and nurtured for

communities to feel empowered enough to take on challenges with a positive return on investment:

human, organizational, infrastructure, and financial. These four capacities develop an overarching

capacity to manage change. (Fettig, 2007).

Fettig says that that development strategies may vary but all development requires capacity

(2007, p. 2). One begins to see that capacity-building is being understood not just an approach in and of

itself, but as an integrate part to development projects across the board. Aside from enabling change

management, capacity is also the key to discovering development opportunities and implementing

successful projects (2007, p. 5). Eade, et al. assert that, strengthening peoples capacity to determine

their own values and priorities, and to organize themselves to act on these, is the basis of development


39/84

29

(1995, p. 9), and it is this foundational philosophy that must be integrated into all development projects.

Development projects certainly require external organizations, but it is more important that these external

entities enable communities to maintain long-term sustainability, capacity, and success by supporting a

locally driven grassroots effort. This type of development should focus on the capacities needed by a

range of different people working in the same environment and addressing a common concern (Eade,

2008, p. 28) rather than on a particular organization.

Since capacity-building is more of a critical part of development, rather than a more definite

approach (e.g. women-centered development, economic development), the purpose becomes different at

different stages of the development process. Capacity-building can be the means to, the process for, or the

ends of a specified project. Figure 2.1 elaborates on the different purposes capacity-building has. This

paper is concerned mainly with capacity-building in civil society.

Figure 2.1. Stages of Capacity-Building in NGOs and Civil Society. From Capacity-building: An

Approach to People-Centred Development(p. 35), by Eade, 2008, London: Oxfam Publishing.

Source: Eade, 2008, p. 35

Capacity-building is continual; both a goal and a process. For this reason, it is hard to measure

qualitative learning and growth even though it is essential to healthy development. Aside from this,

capacity-building can go wrong when it creates dependency, weakens the state, is viewed as a separate

activity from the development process, or concerns itself soley with financial sustainability.


40/84

30

In light of all of this, one can reflect on the previous statement made by Eade, et al. that

strengthening peoples capacity to determine their own values and priorites, and to organize themselves

to act on these (1995, p. 9) is the basis of development; all the more so with capacity-building. When

development projects are working with a range of different people in the same environment and

addressing a common concern, then local capacities for peace are nurtured.

Capacities for peace are certainly developed when the capacities of primary stakeholders to

implement defined activites are strengthened because of the empowerment experienced. This

empowerment may enable groups to analyze and choose to carry out non-violent methods of acquiring

what they need. Fostering communication plays a central and vital role in peacebuilding, thus making

capacity-building a must in the peacebuilding process. Finally, strengthening the capacities of primary

stakeholders to participate in the political and socioeconomic arena is critical for peacebuilding: for

peace, justice, and a fair democratic process go hand in hand.

Community Economic Development

Community economic development (CED) is a community-based and community-directed

process that explicitly combines social and economic development and is directed towards fostering the

economic, social, ecological and cultural well-being of communities and regions. As such it recognizes,

affirms and supports all the paid and unpaid activity that contributes to the realization of this well-being

(Simon Fraser University CED Centre, 1997, para. 2).

Like capacity-building, CED is an evolving, on-going process which has emerged as an

alternative to conventional approaches to economic development (para. 3). Also like capacity-building,

economic developers are understanding the need for sustainable economic development, which means

involving the communities by allowing them to directly face the problems affecting them. A participatory

economic development process allows for needs to be addressed holistically and sustainably.

According to the Simon Fraser University CED Centre, these are the general values for CED:

equity, participation, community-building, cooperation and collaboration, self-reliance and community

control, integration, living within ecological limits, capacity-building, and diversity. Furthermore,


41/84

31

appropriate indicators of success are defined by the community rather than through conventional

measures and standards (1997, para. 15).

Figure 2.2 shows four components of local economic development which have evolved over time

into new concepts which increase strategy effectiveness and sustainability.

Figure 2.2: A Reformulation of the Component of Local Economic Development. FromPlanningLocal Economic Development: Theory and Practice (p. 67), by Blakely & Bradshaw, 2002, Thousand

Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

Community economic development is important, as will be seen in the next chapter, because, as

noted in Chapter 1, violence and communal conflict is often triggered by unfair access to resources,

economic marginalization, and unstable power structures. Local economic development initiatives started

by community members are usually sustainable, respected, and help build trust within communities and

conflicting people groups.

Social Capital Formation

Because economic marginalization leads to conflict within communities, social capital is an

important factor in the success of community development programs. To form social capital is,

essentially, to build relationships. Thus, social capital formation can be used as a tool to reduce such

injustices and poverty, thereby leading to a reduction of conflict.


42/84

32

Adler and Kwon make a note of the benefits of social capital formation on the economic situation

of a person: social capital influences career successhelps workers find jobs...creates a richer pool of

recruits for firmsand facilitates entrepreneurship (2002, p. 17). Social capital is simply the networks

within and between groups of people that enable some form of action, in this case, development within

communities. According to Woolcock, sets of social ties are crucial for providing informal insurance

mechanisms and have important impacts on the success of development projects (2002, p. 22). For this

reason, social capital formation is a crucial variable for community development.

Community development must consider integrating the poor with the non-poor, thereby

increasing bonding and bridging social capitalthe strengthening of social ties enable underserved

communities to discover opportunities and achieve more.

It is necessary to mobilize the poor if any changes in their living conditions are to occur. It is

necessary to make the poor part of political life for their voices to be heard and for democracy todevelop. It is necessary to open up and let the poor into civil society if they are to become part ofsociety at large. It is necessary to increase the social capital of the poor if civil conflicts are to be

avoided. For all these reasons, it is vital for the poor, as well as for the non-poor, that social capital

formation among the poor be increased. Over time, and in conjunction with a whole set of otherstrategies, such as the redistribution of major resources, social capital may lead to poverty

reduction. It may take a generation or more (Oliveira, 2002, pp. 13-14).

The formation of social capital undoubtedly happens during times of social interaction. These

interactions increase developmental capacity by expanding individual human skills (Parr et al. cited in

Fred-Mensah, 2004, p. 444). Fred-Mensah agrees that opportunities and incentives must be created for

people to grow their skills. Thus, capacity developmenttakes place not just in individuals, but also

between them, in the institutions and the networks they createthrough what has been termed social

capital that holds societies together and sets the terms of these relationships (p. 444). The formation of

social capital is important to the success of development projects and especially peacebuilding initiatives.

The strengthening of social ties is fundamental to the success of development projects and the furthering

of community progress, especially in post-conflict situations. The reason being that, the norms of trust,

which are essential elements of social capital, tend to become the chief victim of social strife, particularly

in violent conflicts (p. 451).


43/84

33

Asset-Based Community Development

This section will recap what was thoroughly discussed in the first chapter about asset-based

community development (ABCD). ABCD considers local assets as the primary building blocks of

sustainable community development (Northwestern University, 2009., para. 1) and encourages

communities to be directly mobilized and invested in the transformation of their communities while at the

same time receiving outside resources. The three principles of ABCD is that it starts with what is present

in the community, it is internally focused, and relationship-driven.

Relationship-driven community development is essential for peacebuilding. As mentioned in the

previous chapter, one of the central challenges for asset-based community developers is to constantly

build and rebuild the relationships between and among local residents, local associations and local

institutions (Kretzmann & Knight, p. 9). As we know, post-conflict situations are tense and are afflicted

by broken relationships between people groups within a community. Stiefel states that the destruction of

relationships and the loss of trust, confidence, dignity, and faith (Stiefel in Reychler & Paffenholz, 2001,

p. 265) are problems that overshadow all the various problems in war-torn societies. When peacebuilding

initiatives start with local capacities and create spaces for relationships to be built and nurtured, making

peace last will be an easier task. In times of conflict, group polarization acts to break the trust within

communities furthering the continuation of conflict in an area. According to Mathie & Cunningham,

social capital is present in the networks, norms, andsocial trustinherent in associations whose members

work together in concerted collaborative action (2003, p. 6, emphasis added). Thus, intentional

grassroots relationship building while working with the capacities of the community is essentia

peacebuilding and cmty development zolondek

Documents