The Context of Armed Conflicts and Civil Society’s Inclusion in Peace Processes

• In Event: Conflict Management Institutions in Post-Conflict Governance

Abstract

In 2012, the UN General Assembly identified inclusivity, understood as “the extent and manner in which the views and needs of conflict parties and other stakeholders are represented and integrated into the process and outcome of a mediation effort,” as one of eight fundamental principles for effective mediation (United Nations 2012). There is however little evidence-based data regarding the extent and the manner in which views, particularly of stakeholders other than conflict parties, are represented and integrated in mediation processes. If these are indeed essential factors for effective mediation, it is both theoretically and practically important to produce evidence-based research on inclusivity.
Current academic debates pit proponents of inclusivity against skeptics. Proponents argue that inclusion heightens public support for the peace process, provides local expertise and knowledge, broadens the discussion beyond the narrow interests of the negotiating parties, and increases the sustainability of peace agreements. Skeptics counter that inclusivity lowers the chances of reaching an agreement. They contend that agreement is easier reached amongst a limited number of actors; that exclusionary talks are sometimes necessary to achieve breakthroughs, and that selection problems prevent the real inclusion of societal views at the table.
This debate does not account for the impact of context. Skeptics and proponents of inclusion argue against or in favor of inclusion irrespective of the actors, the issues, and the nature of the conflict. In our research, we ask: What is the impact and the broader context and the conflict on civil society’s engagement and how does it relate to the inclusion of civil society in peace processes? To answer this question, we build a dataset of mediation attempts and conduct statistical analysis to test a number of hypotheses linking conflict type and conflict dynamics to inclusion that we derive from the literature. By studying the relationship between inclusion and context, we offer important insights into the manner in which decisions on civil society inclusion are affected by context.

Author

• Marie-Joelle Zahar, Universite de Montreal