ECD Programs, Peacebuilding, and the SDGs: Opportunities for Interdisciplinary Research and Multisectoral Partnerships

• In Event: 3-151 - Developmental Science and Pathways to Sustainable Early Childhood Development: Implications for UN Sustainable Development Goals

Integrative Statement

Introduction
Early childhood development (ECD) programs, services, and interventions are rarely discussed in the context of their broader contribution to peacebuilding and social transformation in Low and Middle Income Countries (LMICs).We argue that leveraging ECD programming as a pathway to peacebuilding is of importance in situations of acute crises (such as conflict, war, post-war, displacement, natural disasters) as well as among stable societies affected by contextual risks, which are precursors of violence and social instability (Connolly et al., 2006; Chaudry, et al., 2017). Our work aims to highlight the opportunities and challenges faced by developmental science to align with the peacebuilding agenda in light of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Methods
We conducted an expert consultation and generated a compendium of examples whereby impacts of ECD programs are linked with indicators of peacebuilding and sustainable development. In order to systematically explore the connections between ECD, the SDGs and peace, our analysis was guided by two globally recognized frameworks: (1) Galtung’s conceptualization of negative and positive peace which was utilized by the Institute of Economics and Peace (IEP) in creating measurable peace indicators for the Global Peace Index (IEP, 2015); and (2) the United Nations SDGs. An analysis of the illustrative examples was used to generate a theory of change that considered the linkages following different social ecology levels: (1) policy and societal level; (2) community and peer relations; (3) caregivers and family; and (4) the child level.
Results
The theory of change resulting from our analysis proposes that if governments, institutions, and organizations design and implement quality ECD programs that take into account conflict risk factors and that intentionally build peace-relevant attitudes, skills and knowledge in children, families, and governments/institutions in order to contribute to mitigating these risks, then this will contribute to two outcomes. The first are increased vertical cohesion (or societal trust in institutions) and horizontal social cohesion (societal connections across different sociodemographic groups). The second is increased economic growth, equity and sustainable development opportunities across communities. In turn, social cohesion, economic growth and equity are key prerequisites for violence reduction and peace promotion.
Implications
The outcome of our analysis is two-fold. One, we provide a common theoretical framework to mobilize the peacebuilding through ECD agenda from research, policy and practice perspectives, while emphasizing the importance of multidisciplinary research and multisectoral partnerships in the process. Two, we identify overarching areas that require further research, which include: longitudinal impact evaluations of ECD programs on the promotion of prosocial and prevention of antisocial behaviors in LMICs; impact evaluations on two-generation programs exploring effects on social cohesion and other markers of social factors associated with peace; process evaluations that inform program characteristics and attributes of programs’ implementation that maximize participation, adherence and effectiveness of the programs; and policy analyses to understand the formulation, implementation and scalability of cross-cutting policies relevant to conflict mitigation and peacebuilding through ECD.

Authors

• Liliana Angelica Ponguta, The Yale Child Study Center
  Presenting Author

• Chelsea Donaldson, Empatico, The KIND Foundation
  Non-Presenting Author

• Friedrich Affolter, United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund
  Non-Presenting Author

• Paul Connolly, Centre for Evidence and Social Innovation, Queen’s University Belfast
  Non-Presenting Author

• Laura Dunne, Centre for Evidence and Social Innovation, Queen’s University Belfast
  Non-Presenting Author

• Sarah Miller, Centre for Evidence and Social Innovation, Queen’s University Belfast
  Non-Presenting Author

• Pia R Britto, UNICEF
  Non-Presenting Author

• Rima Salah, Yale Child Study Center
  Non-Presenting Author

• James Leckman, The Yale Child Study Center
  Non-Presenting Author