Do postwar peacebuilding interventions work to keep peace? How do we measure the effectiveness of such international interventions? Join former USIP Jennings Randolph Senior Fellow Pamina Firchow as she discusses her findings on how to measure the impact of local-level interventions on communities affected by war. 

Firchow shows in her book "Reclaiming Everyday Peace: Local Voices in Measurement and Evaluation after War" that efforts by international organizations to implement peacebuilding interventions are often ineffective, overly focused on reconstruction, governance, and development assistance while paying significantly less attention to rebuilding local community relations.

Firchow presents empirical evidence from villages in Uganda and Colombia on local level peacebuilding effectiveness using community generated indicators that reflect how people measure their own everyday peacefulness. Firchow develops a new way of establishing accountability of international and domestic actors to local populations and opening more effective channels of communication among these groups.

Join USIP for a discussion on how the international community can build sustainable peace from the bottom up. Take part in the conversation on Twitter with #LocalPeacebuilding.

Speakers

Kevin Avruch, Opening Remarks
Dean, The School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University

Kathleen Kuehnast, Introduction
Director, Gender Policy and Strategy, U.S. Institute of Peace

Pamina Firchow
Assistant Professor, The School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University

David Connolly
Director, Learning, Evaluation & Research, U.S. Institute of Peace

Roger MacGinty
Professor, School of Government and International Affairs, Durham University, United Kingdom

Anthony Wanis-St. John
Associate Professor, School of International Service, American University

Related Publications

For the Afghan Peace Process to Work, Women Must be Involved

For the Afghan Peace Process to Work, Women Must be Involved

Monday, October 29, 2018

By: Belquis Ahmadi; Marjan Nahavandi

The bottom line is Afghan women want peace and they want to have a say in how it is negotiated. Without women at the negotiation table, a long-term and inclusive peace is dramatically less likely. Indeed, studies show that the inclusion of women in peace negotiations, leads to peace agreements that are representative of the needs of the people they affect and, therefore, more sustainable.

Gender; Peace Processes

To Better Halt Wars, Does America Need a ‘Crisis Command’?

To Better Halt Wars, Does America Need a ‘Crisis Command’?

Friday, October 26, 2018

By: USIP Staff

A string of violent crises since the 1990s—from Somalia to Iraq to others—has underscored America’s need to coordinate better among military forces, relief and development organizations, diplomats and other responders, retired Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni said this week. The United States should consider creating a standing “interagency command” for such crises, Zinni told listeners at USIP.

Civilian-Military Relations; Peace Processes

If we want to build peace, we can’t keep women out.

If we want to build peace, we can’t keep women out.

Thursday, October 18, 2018

By: Danielle Robertson; Tabatha Thompson

When nations affected by violent conflict try to make peace, the evidence is clear on what works. For a durable peace agreement, women must be included throughout the process. While the U.N. Security Council unanimously endorsed that goal in 2000, women still are excluded from peace processes. Among 504 peace accords signed by 2015, only 27 percent even mentioned women. A U.N. study of 14 peace processes from 2000 to 2010 found that women comprised only 8 percent of negotiators and 3 percent of signatories.

Gender; Peace Processes

View All Publications