Peace processes are a long neglected development opportunity: For many bilateral and multilateral development agencies, conflict situations are often perceived to be outside their mandate; some withdraw in the face of rising levels of armed violence and do not want to place staff and resources at risk; yet others make development engagements dependent on the formal ending of hostilities through a peace agreement. Such attitudes towards peace processes and engagement in conflict situations are often justified with reference to the bounds of institutional mandates, the rejection of politicising aid, and the difficulty of cooperating with rebel groups. In a national context, the topics of war and peace often fall more directly into the domain of other ministries – such as Defence or Foreign Affairs – that are more directly responsible.
The traditional understanding of the role of development agencies during armed conflict and in peacemaking have become increasingly overtaken by the realities on the ground as well as the evolution of development policy (see Box 1). Development agencies often maintain operations in countries that slide into armed conflict as well as in non-conflict countries with high levels of instability and criminal violence. There has also been an ever-increasing awareness of the nexus between development and security that many development agencies embrace.
To a certain extent, one can say that development agencies may even wish to attempt recapturing “their” development space after nearly a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan has seen an ever greater involvement of military actors in classic development tasks, especially in early recovery operations that initiate post-conflict development transitions.
This practice note explores how peace processes can strengthen prospects for post-conflict economic recovery, and investigates the potential implications for development agencies. It makes the following points:
- Peace processes are a development concern because they often set out future political and economic orders that frame post-conflict economic recovery and long-term economic development.
- Development agencies can be strategic actors for peace processes, especially as these near their conclusion and the parties craft new economic futures. They are also important for the implementation phase and how ex-combatants and local populations experience life after armed conflict.
- Development agencies have occupied various roles in past peace processes. In some contexts, they have been important in facilitating dialogue between various parties to a conflict, managing expectations in the economy, and mobilising funding for post-conflict economic recovery.
- The development community can play a valuable role in transforming the practice of peace mediation from an ad-hoc response to a crisis, to the creation of long-term national peace architectures. While there is an emerging mediation support infrastructure aimed at ending armed conflicts, there is no comparable effort to strengthen transitional pacts in the aftermath of war and forge the multi-stakeholder coalitions necessary for peace to last.
