Civilian Peacebuilding

Peace by bureaucratic means?

Laurent Goetschel, Tobias Hagmann

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

This article draws attention to the shortcomings of civilian peacebuilding, which donors, aid agencies and NGOs have adopted in their policies and projects in
recent years. It argues that government sponsored peacebuilding propagates a
conception according to which peace can be achieved by bureaucratic means. Although peacebuilding is committed to what peace esearch considers positive peace, its discourses and practices tend to depoliticise peace. Hence, peacebuilding represents a top-down variant of liberal peace, the meanings, substance and causal beliefs of which are taken for granted and less and less
debated among practitioners and policymakers. Reviewing a growing body of
literature that takes a critical stance towards peacebuilding, this article identifies
some of the conceptual and ethical problems shared by contemporary peacebuilding activities. It calls upon policy-makers and peace researchers to pay more attention to the prescriptive and instrumentalist logic of peacebuilding and encourages academics to rejuvenate a critical peace research tradition
that offers alternative and more participatory approaches to peace.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftConflict, Security & Development
Vol/bind9
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)55-73
ISSN1467-8802
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2009
Udgivet eksterntJa

Citer dette

@article{62957fefb94f4d529c5c2b8451aa73f2,
title = "Civilian Peacebuilding: Peace by bureaucratic means?",
abstract = "This article draws attention to the shortcomings of civilian peacebuilding, which donors, aid agencies and NGOs have adopted in their policies and projects inrecent years. It argues that government sponsored peacebuilding propagates aconception according to which peace can be achieved by bureaucratic means. Although peacebuilding is committed to what peace esearch considers positive peace, its discourses and practices tend to depoliticise peace. Hence, peacebuilding represents a top-down variant of liberal peace, the meanings, substance and causal beliefs of which are taken for granted and less and lessdebated among practitioners and policymakers. Reviewing a growing body ofliterature that takes a critical stance towards peacebuilding, this article identifiessome of the conceptual and ethical problems shared by contemporary peacebuilding activities. It calls upon policy-makers and peace researchers to pay more attention to the prescriptive and instrumentalist logic of peacebuilding and encourages academics to rejuvenate a critical peace research traditionthat offers alternative and more participatory approaches to peace.",
author = "Laurent Goetschel and Tobias Hagmann",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1080/14678800802704911",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "55--73",
journal = "Conflict, Security & Development",
issn = "1467-8802",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "1",

}

Civilian Peacebuilding : Peace by bureaucratic means? / Goetschel, Laurent; Hagmann, Tobias.

I: Conflict, Security & Development, Bind 9, Nr. 1, 2009, s. 55-73.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Civilian Peacebuilding

T2 - Peace by bureaucratic means?

AU - Goetschel, Laurent

AU - Hagmann, Tobias

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - This article draws attention to the shortcomings of civilian peacebuilding, which donors, aid agencies and NGOs have adopted in their policies and projects inrecent years. It argues that government sponsored peacebuilding propagates aconception according to which peace can be achieved by bureaucratic means. Although peacebuilding is committed to what peace esearch considers positive peace, its discourses and practices tend to depoliticise peace. Hence, peacebuilding represents a top-down variant of liberal peace, the meanings, substance and causal beliefs of which are taken for granted and less and lessdebated among practitioners and policymakers. Reviewing a growing body ofliterature that takes a critical stance towards peacebuilding, this article identifiessome of the conceptual and ethical problems shared by contemporary peacebuilding activities. It calls upon policy-makers and peace researchers to pay more attention to the prescriptive and instrumentalist logic of peacebuilding and encourages academics to rejuvenate a critical peace research traditionthat offers alternative and more participatory approaches to peace.

AB - This article draws attention to the shortcomings of civilian peacebuilding, which donors, aid agencies and NGOs have adopted in their policies and projects inrecent years. It argues that government sponsored peacebuilding propagates aconception according to which peace can be achieved by bureaucratic means. Although peacebuilding is committed to what peace esearch considers positive peace, its discourses and practices tend to depoliticise peace. Hence, peacebuilding represents a top-down variant of liberal peace, the meanings, substance and causal beliefs of which are taken for granted and less and lessdebated among practitioners and policymakers. Reviewing a growing body ofliterature that takes a critical stance towards peacebuilding, this article identifiessome of the conceptual and ethical problems shared by contemporary peacebuilding activities. It calls upon policy-makers and peace researchers to pay more attention to the prescriptive and instrumentalist logic of peacebuilding and encourages academics to rejuvenate a critical peace research traditionthat offers alternative and more participatory approaches to peace.

U2 - 10.1080/14678800802704911

DO - 10.1080/14678800802704911

M3 - Journal article

VL - 9

SP - 55

EP - 73

JO - Conflict, Security & Development

JF - Conflict, Security & Development

SN - 1467-8802

IS - 1

ER -