Search

Begin New Search Topic Peace Political Geography Global Focus

241. 2015 Global Peace Index

Author:
Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP)
Publication Date:
06-2015
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP)
Abstract:
A statistical analysis of the state of peace in 162 countries outlining trends in peace and conflict, the economic cost of violence, and an assessment of the attitudes, structures and institutions that sustain peaceful societies.
Topic:
Economics, Conflict, Institutions, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus

242. Peace and Corruption

Author:
Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP)
Publication Date:
05-2015
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP)
Abstract:
This report explores the connections between peace and corruption, focusing on the empirical trends between the most authoritative measures of peace and corruption. It fills an important gap as the linkages between peace and corruption are still being deeply studied. The analysis finds that there is a statistically significant relationship between peace and corruption. The most striking aspect of this relationship is the presence of a ‘tipping point’. If a country has low levels of corruption then increases in corruption will have little effect on peace. However, once a certain threshold is reached then small increases in corruption can result in large decreases in peace.
Topic:
Corruption, Government, Peace, Police, and Judiciary
Political Geography:
Global Focus

243. Advancing Women’s Agency in Conflict Settings through Health Work: A Comparative Evaluation of the Dr. Hawa Abdi Foundation and the Panzi Foundation

Author:
Patty Chang, Mayesha Alam, Roslyn Warren, Rukmani Bhatia, and Rebecca Turkington
Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security (GIWPS)
Abstract:
Women historically have been, and remain, marginalized from the highest echelons of political power. As a result, their experiences, perspectives, leadership, and potential are untapped in governance. In international peacemaking, women are grossly underrepresented, especially in high-level processes. There are growing calls – by both international policymakers and feminists – to do more to include and uplift women in peace and security efforts, as originally directed in UN Security Council Resolution 1325. Today, this is increasingly framed as not only the “right” thing to do, but also the “smart” thing to do. But what does this mean? And what can we learn from women who have mobilized and engaged in peacemaking already? This study examines women’s political participation in peace negotiations, focusing on four cases where women have gained access to high-level official negotiations. Each case study – Northern Ireland, Guatemala, Kenya, and the Philippines – is framed by eight overarching research questions: Why did women mobilize for peace? How did women mobilize and organize to gain access to high-level peace negotiations? How did they form coalitions and alliances? How did they assemble and shape agendas? How did they set priorities for their activities? How did their priorities change when they participated in high-level peace negotiations? How did they negotiate their goals? And, to what extent were their objectives or priorities represented in the resulting peace agreement? As a departure from publications of a similar nature, this study offers a comprehensive, systematic literature review and a series of new findings on women participating in high-level peace processes in Northern Ireland, Guatemala, Kenya, and the Philippines based on a political economy approach. It analyzes nearly 100 in-depth, face-to-face interviews collected in-country with diverse women in civil society, and applies a rigorous two-stage coding method to examine emergent themes. All data are triangulated against existing secondary literature and primary source documents to improve the reliability and validity of results. Although this is not a cross-comparative study, there are interesting commonalities in women’s experiences that are decipherable. For example, in each case, women were primarily motivated by a desire to end violent conflict, and they seized opportunities that emerged within the process to play more prominent political roles in the formal negotiations. Women drew upon their personal connections and leveraged their interpersonal and professional skills, as well as their political capabilities, to advance their goals. In Northern Ireland and Kenya, for example, women drew on pre-existing and new networks, which proved vital to mobilization. In Guatemala and the Philippines, women forged strategic alliances and relentlessly lobbied at multiple levels in order to negotiate their goals. At the same time, in each case, external actors – within and outside of the country in question – influenced women’s mobilization. Despite the similarities between the four cases, there are also many important distinctions in how women negotiated their goals, shaped agendas, formulated proposals, and influenced the content of peace agreements. In Northern Ireland, the NIWC established a precedent for political participation and engaged in women’s collective political consciousness-raising. In Guatemala, provisions inserted in the final agreement tracked back to the Women’s Sector’s agenda, but overall the language on gender lacked the strength and depth the Women’s Sector desired. In Kenya, women in CSOs held mixed sentiments about their degree of influence on the process, but generally felt the mediation agenda reflected the issues for which they lobbied. In the Philippines, the dual effects of women officially embedded in the peace talks and external pressure from civil society women’s networks influenced the language, agenda, and format of the power-sharing agreement. The differences of women’s experiences, resulting from unique conditions in each case, reinforce the understanding that women are not a monolithic demographic anywhere. Rather, race, religion, ethnicity, economic status, cultural background, and other characteristics shape their identities, perspectives, agendas, and lived experiences. This report describes and analyzes the specificity of women’s political participation in each country in detail, demonstrating the myriad ways in which women can and do engage in peacemaking, as well as the challenges they face and the limits of their participation. 12Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security Overall, this study provides a comprehensive understanding of not only why and how women in CSOs mobilized for peace, but also how they shaped negotiations and outcome documents within a specific context. More importantly, this study finds that how women in civil society gain access to high-level peace negotiations is contingent not only on the careful selection of tactics and strategies, but also on the dynamic relationships and iterative interactions between different parties (i.e., government officials, rebel organizations, key constituents), the opportunity structures that permit participation, and the socio-political context that shape the interactions. This report is a unique and a significant contribution not only because of its methodological rigor, but also because it brings the voices of different women peacemakers to the fore, highlighting their perceptions, reflections, and lessons-learned. In doing so, the findings here describe how women’s participation affects negotiations and their outcomes. Having a woman at the formal negotiation table does not guarantee that she will raise issues of gender equality and women’s empowerment, as demonstrated by Raquel Zelaya, who was a member of the Guatemalan government’s peace panel. At the same time, depending on which and how many women are at the table, it is possible that issues affecting women and their families may be taken more seriously, as was increasingly evident in the Philippines. Outside of the confines of official negotiations, women in civil society tend to seek transformative change in a way that conceptualizes peace beyond the cessation of hostilities and the disarmament of warring troops. Irrespective of their strategies and approaches to engagement, this was true for civil society women in Northern Ireland, Guatemala, Kenya, and the Philippines, and it is by no means unique to those four countries. The frequent, if not consistent, abrogation of peace agreements coupled with the continued marginalization of women from the business of peacemaking poses two problematic, and possibly correlated, challenges that stymie the durability and inclusivity of peace agreements. In recognition of the unfinished business of gender equality, this timely report offers a detailed historical account of women’s participation in four contexts. There are many important lessons-learned about women’s participation and leadership in peace processes, which are shaped by their circumstances, but hold relevance beyond the four respective contexts. As such, the study also acts as a resource for women in civil society currently engaged in peace activism in conflict settings around the world. At the same time, in a world fraught by violent conflict, this report serves as an informative tool for representatives of international institutions that promote governance, security, and development.
Topic:
Health, Governance, Women, Conflict, Peace, and Political Participation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

244. Financing for the Implementation of National Action Plans on UN Security Council Resolution 1325: Critical for Advancing Women's Human Rights, Peace and Security

Author:
Dewi Suralaga and Mavic Cabrera-Balleza
Publication Date:
10-2014
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Global Network of Women Peacebuilders (GNWP)
Abstract:
In 2000, the United Nations Security Council adopted the landmark resolution 1325(2000) on Women and Peace and Security, a historic recognition of the gender dimension of conflict, the disproportionate impact of conflict on women and girls, and the significant, yet often unrecognized, contributions women have made – frequently in the face of grave threats and unrelenting opposition – to sustained conflict resolution and peacebuilding. As we approach the 15-year anniversary of the resolution and the world continues to be plagued by unresolved conflicts and new threats to peace, human security and dignity, efforts to implement UNSCR 1325 and, indeed, the full Women and Peace and Security agenda) must be redoubled. The time is ripe to accelerate adequate and predictable funding. Though a host of factors contribute to the success of resolution 1325 (2000) implementation, adequate funding remains paramount among these. Yet, OECD recently reported that only three per cent of peace and security funding targets gender equality and women’s empowerment as a principal objective.1 Therefore sustainable and adequate financing continues to be a significant challenge. Despite being at the forefront of work to advance the Women and Peace and Security agenda, women’s rights groups, networks and movements face uniquely difficult obstacles in accessing sustainable funding for their work, particularly at the grassroots level. While governments hold primary responsibility for the implementation of resolution 1325(2000), women’s rights groups and movements are vital to addressing the context specific root causes of conflict and building a transformative and sustainable peace. Funding women’s rights groups and movements would go far in addressing the “implementation deficit” faced by the WPS agenda.
Topic:
Security, Gender Issues, United Nations, Women, Peace, and WPS
Political Geography:
Global Focus

245. Women Count: Security Council Resolution 1325: Civil Society Monitoring Report 2014

Author:
Mavic Cabrera-Balleza, Eleonore Veilet Chowdhury, Helena Gronberg, and Annalise Moser
Publication Date:
10-2014
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Global Network of Women Peacebuilders (GNWP)
Abstract:
The forthcoming 15th anniversary of UNSCR 1325 once again brings to the fore the importance of monitoring policy implementation. In the last 15 years, greater accountability to the resolution has been a consistent call from civil society, the UN and Member States. However, only a handful of Member States are actually monitoring the progress and achievements as well as the gaps and weaknesses in the implementation of the resolutions. The 2014 edition of Women Count, Security Council Resolution 1325: Civil Society Monitoring Report, demonstrates once again that while it is labor intensive and time consuming, monitoring is a doable and relevant exercise. It also illustrates that while funding is absolutely necessary, the lack of it should not be an excuse to not monitor. On the fifth year of Women Count, the civil society monitoring of UNSCR 1325, civil society groups from Azerbaijan, India, Iraq, Kenya and Libya are participating in this independent monitoring report for the very first time. Moreover, we are for the first time including a territory, Nagorno-Karabakh in monitoring and analyzing the applicability of the WPS resolutions in different socio-political and cultural contexts. 21 countries were monitored in 2014 bringing the total number of countries monitored in the last five years to 24. Beyond just a figure, this number represents the wealth of data, information and analysis on how UNSCR 1325 has impacted the lives of women around the world—in conflict-affected countries, in developed and non-conflict countries, in middle income countries; in countries with or without National Action Plans. GNWP’s participation in the ongoing Global Study on Women, Peace and Security is informed by the findings and recommendations in the last five years of this monitoring exercise. I would like to emphasize that some of the findings and recommendations such as those on women’s lack of representation in official peace negotiations, lack of local level action, as well as the persistent problem on lack of funding for women’s peacebuilding work at the grassroots level are not new and in fact some of them have been articulated prior to 2010. However, the civil society monitoring initiative presents new evidence and fresh insights.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Security, Gender Issues, United Nations, Women, Negotiation, Peace, and WPS
Political Geography:
Global Focus

246. Globalization, Peace & Stability, Governance, and Knowledge Economy

Author:
Voxi Amavilah, Simplice A. Asongu, and Antonio Rodríguez Andrés
Publication Date:
08-2014
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for Advanced Development Studies (INESAD)
Abstract:
A previous analysis of the impact of formal institutions on the knowledge economy of 22 MiddleEastern and Sub-Sahara African countries during the 1996-2010 time period concluded that formal institutions were necessary, but inadequate, determinants of the knowledge economy. To extend that study, this paper claims that globalization induces peace and stability, which affects governance and through governance the knowledge economy. The claim addresses one weakness of previous research that did not consider the effects on the knowledge economy of globalization. We model the proposition as a three-stage process in four hypotheses, and estimate each hypothesis using robust estimators that are capable of dealing with the usual statistical problems without sacrificing economic relevance and significance. The results indicate that globalization has varying effects on peace and stability, and peace and stability affect governance differently depending on what kind of globalization induces it. For instance, the effects on governance induced by globalization defined as trade are stronger than those resulting from globalization taken to be foreign direct investment. Hence, we conclude that foreign direct investment is not a powerful mechanism for stimulating and sustaining the knowledge economy in our sample of countries. However, since globalization-induced peace and stability have both positive and negative effects on governance simultaneously, we also conclude that while the prospect for knowledge economy in African countries is dim, it is still realistic and attainable as long as these countries continue to engage in the kind of globalization that does indeed induce peace and stability. We further conclude that there is a need for a sharper focus on economic and institutional governance than on general governance as one possible extension of this paper.
Topic:
Globalization, Governance, Political stability, Peace, and Knowledge Economy
Political Geography:
Middle East, Global Focus, and Sub-Saharan Africa

247. Peace and Religion

Author:
Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP)
Publication Date:
10-2014
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP)
Abstract:
This report presents empirical research conducted by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) in conjunction with the Religious Freedom and Business Foundation1 that aims to get beyond ideology to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how religion interacts with peace. Quantitative analysis has revealed that many of the commonly made statements surrounding the relationship between peace and religion are not supported by the analysis contained in this study. This report answers five common questions relating to religion and violence. To determine the list of questions the most common themes of discussion and opinions expressed in the media were identified. The scope of the research highlights key relationships between peace and religion and provides a platform and opportunities for further research. The five questions addressed in this report are: Question 1 — Is religion the main cause of conflict today? Question 2 — Does the proportion of religious belief or atheism in a country determine the peace of the country? Question 3 — In Muslim countries, does the demographic spread of Sunni and Shia determine peace? Question 4 — Is religion key to understanding what drives peace? Question 5 — Can religion play a positive role in peacebuilding?
Topic:
Islam, Religion, Conflict, Peace, and Peacebuilding
Political Geography:
Global Focus

248. The Economic Cost of Violence Containment

Author:
Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP)
Publication Date:
02-2014
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP)
Abstract:
One of the major challenges in developing policies aimed at increasing peace is the difficulty of being able to accurately gauge the benefits that result from peace. Recognising this, the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) has developed a new and ground breaking methodology to estimate the cost of violence to the global economy, including calculations for 152 countries that detail the costs of thirteen different types of violence. This deeper insight into the breakdown of national costs of violence allows for better targeting of development assistance and also enables national governments to more accurately assess the costs associated with violence and the likely benefits that would flow from improvements in peace.
Topic:
Economics, Economy, Violence, Peace, and Containment
Political Geography:
Global Focus

249. Measuring Goal 16

Author:
Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP)
Publication Date:
09-2014
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP)
Abstract:
This short paper identifies existing indicators that can be applied to measuring progress in targets for goal 16 for the SDG/post-2015 development agenda. It uses existing sources of information from previous expert meetings and consultations which identified mostly current available data sources. It assesses these existing data sources based criteria of practicality, if they are input, output or outcome oriented, and whether they meet statistical and normative criteria. This is intended to provide input into broader efforts to prioritize indicators and targets for goal 16 and to identify data gaps and overlaps. It is a draft paper that can be further developed in consultation with other key stakeholders providing input into the SDG/ Post-2015 development agenda. Goal 16 aims to ‘promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels’. There are twelve key targets ranging from measures to reduce violence, strengthen institutions and increase the inclusiveness and accountability of institutions. The inclusion of goal 16 in the SDG/Post-2015 framework is a large step forward in recognizing the importance of peace, conflict and violence to the traditional development agenda of poverty alleviation. By analyzing each target and indicator area of goal 16 against a set of basic criteria including; practicality, orientation to preventative aims, objectivity and accountability, and on basic technical and normative principles, it may be possible to better prioritize particular indicators in the agenda.
Topic:
Development, United Nations, Sustainable Development Goals, Conflict, Accountability, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus

250. 2014 Global Peace Index

Author:
Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP)
Publication Date:
06-2014
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP)
Abstract:
This is the eighth edition of the Global Peace Index (GPI), which ranks nations according to their level of peace. The Index is composed of 22 qualitative and quantitative indicators from highly respected sources and ranks 162 independent states, covering 99.6 percent of the world’s population. The index gauges global peace using three broad themes: the level of safety and security in society; the extent of domestic or international conflict; and the degree of militarisation. In addition to presenting the findings from the 2014 GPI and its seven-year trend analysis, this year’s report includes an updated analysis of the economic impact of violence as well as a detailed assessment of country risk using risk models developed by IEP based on its unique datasets.
Topic:
Security, Violence, Risk, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus