Building Resilience and Social Cohesion in Conflict
| Author | Chester A. Crocker,Pamela Aall |
| Published date | 01 June 2019 |
| Date | 01 June 2019 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12681 |
Building Resilience and Social Cohesion in
Conflict
Pamela Aall
U.S. Institute of Peace
Chester A. Crocker
Georgetown University
Abstract
Examinations of the effectiveness of diplomacy in conflict resolution generally focus on official political institutions and the
roles that they play. This article takes a different tack and focuses on the social institutions and groups that exist in and are
affected by a conflict environment. This article argues that conflict resilience—which we define here as the ability to resist
and recover from conflict —and its ability to contribute to social cohesion are key dimensions of the ability to manage con-
flict in the types of conflicts that are prevalent in the world today. We examine several different definitions and examples of
conflict resilience, and identify actions that outside actors can take to support resilient institutions and groups, particularly in
the areas of supporting effective domestic institutions, promoting inclusion and encouraging good leadership.
The ability to prevent or resolve conflict is a bit like garden-
ing –an interaction of many factors, some involving the gar-
dener, others the plant and still others the environment.
The gardener needs a few basic implements—perhaps a
fork, a spade, and a hose—as well as skill in the planting
and tending. However, much also depends on the sun, soil
and rain conditions of the general environment surrounding
the garden. Complicating matters, the garden exists in a
micro-climate—the conditions of the immediate patch of
ground differing from the larger environment in consequen-
tial ways—which may also determine whether the plants
live or die. Other factors include what kind of plant is
selected and its basic health, the types of threats from
insects and disease, and the remedies available. It adds up
to a complex system, some parts of which can be controlled
by the gardener and others of which are dependent on fac-
tors far out of the gardener’s reach.
Conflict prevention and resolution also depend on a com-
plex mixture of attributes of the peacemaker, the conflict,
the environment, and factors which lie outside anyone’s
ability to predict or control. Most analytical work on conflict
prevention and resolution focuses on the direct parties to
the conflict. This article will pull the camera back to focus
on the larger picture, and particularly on the role that social
institutions—the surrounding environment—play in helping
to aggravate conflict or to dampen it down. Our concern is
with the resilience of those institutions and their ability to
foster social cohesion in the face of conflict. We concentrate
on the social institutions and groups that exist in any con-
flict setting but are not the principal actors.
The social environment of conflict encompasses an open
ended universe of factors and resources composed of
societal actors, norms, and institutions that shape social atti-
tudes toward peace and conflict. Understanding the role
that this wider society plays presents a number of chal-
lenges, not least because ‘wider’society is a broad concept.
They include both official and informal institutions—orga-
nized civil society, religion, education, the security sector,
legal norms and traditions, identity groups, affinity groups,
private enterprise, the media (old and new), women’s
groups, and youth groups. Some of these groups and insti-
tutions will have a significant impact on conflict; this influ-
ence may be constant throughout the conflict or may wax
and wane over time.
How these institutions and groups interact with political,
economic, and demographic stresses and what impact they
have on societal stability is an important element in under-
standing conflict, but one that receives far less attention
than the actions of heads of conflict parties and their mili-
taries. These institutions, however, are often critical in set-
ting social attitudes toward these leadership groups and
toward the issues that underlie the conflict. This article sug-
gests that resilience—which we define as the ability to resist
and recover from conflict —and its ability to contribute to
social cohesion are key dimensions of the ability to manage
conflict in the present world disorder (Aall and Crocker,
2017).
Conflict and social stress
A portrait of the current international environment presents
a picture of division on nearly all dimensions—political,
economic, social, religious and cultural. The past consensus
on the main ideas of a global liberal order seems like a
©2019 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Global Policy (2019) 10:Suppl.2 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12681
Global Policy Volume 10 . Issue Supplement 2 . June 2019
68
Special Issue Article
To continue reading
Request your trial