Advocating in and on conflict situations · Advocating in and on conflict situations A quick guide...
Transcript of Advocating in and on conflict situations · Advocating in and on conflict situations A quick guide...
Advocating in and on
conflict situations: A quick guide to effective conflict advocacy
Advocating in and on conflict situations A quick guide to effective conflict advocacy
2
Understanding conflict
advocacy
What is advocacy?
There are two general definitions of
advocacy which are useful and
complementary:
Advocacy is a range of activities an
individual or organisation undertakes on
behalf of someone, and/or on an issue or
issues (common dictionary definition).
Advocacy is about getting a message
across to an individual/group in order to
influence a decision (Advocacy in
Programmesi, CAFOD).
The first definition focuses on the
victim/beneficiary/client and the
issue/abuse/case the advocate is undertaking
on his/her behalf.
The second definition focuses on the
resolution/outcome/change aimed for and the
adversary/actor/target that the advocate is
seeking to influence.
What is conflict advocacy?
‘Conflict advocacy’ is a broad term which
refers to advocacy carried out in conflict
situations, advocacy on conflict issues, and
‘conflict sensitive’ advocacy:
Advocacy in conflict situations refers
to the different approaches adopted for
conducting advocacy in different
situations, particularly in order to
manage the risks involved to the
agents/advocates and/or the
beneficiaries/clients concerned.
Advocacy on conflict issues refers to
the choice of underlying conflict issue to
lobby on, and the strategy adopted for
achieving the desired change.
Conflict sensitive advocacy refers to
the strategies adopted to both minimise
the harm/violence which any activity in a
conflict setting could inadvertently
cause; and equally to maximise the
positive/peaceful outcomes which any
activity could contribute to.
How to understand conflict?
Thorough and repeated context or conflict
analysis is essential in conflict situations.
Analysis should aim to precisely determine the
key concepts of conflict which will be affected
by the situation – whether the conflict is overt
or latent and how the situation is evolvingii.
Establishing
Reliable facts about
the conflict should be
the starting point of
conflict analysis. All
conflict situations are
subject to very rapid
change. Secrecy and
unpredictability are
common tactics in
conflicts and give
rise to rumour and
speculation, which in
turn are often
manipulated as a
further tactic. Addressing rumour by seeking
out and providing accurate information is
an important element of conflict advocacy
strategy and can be an issue which requires
dedicated attention. The development of civil
society networks to produce and disseminate
regular and reliable information has been one
method used in conflict situations by CAFOD
partners where to combat rumour and
prejudice.
Power and stakeholder analyses are
especially important but often complex and
sensitive to undertake in conflict situations
where power may be exerted violently by some
actors. Power may be used in different ways, it
may be hidden or invisible and threats may not
always be obvious. Invisible power (including
socio-cultural aspects) is often of equal
importance to other forms of power but perhaps
the hardest to describe and so easiest to
neglect. A deeper understanding of what shapes
consciousness, worth and agency in a conflict
and how it affects attitudes, behaviours and
beliefs is needed to refine several aspects of
conflict advocacy strategy such as the goal,
beneficiaries, target group and message.
Identifying the underlying or deep-rooted
causes or drivers of conflict is perhaps the
Main concepts
important for
understanding
conflict
Situation or
context
key drivers of
conflict
nature of
actors
power
relationships
Advocating in and on conflict situations A quick guide to effective conflict advocacy
3
Broad approaches to gender in
conflict situations:
1. The still common ‘gender-blind’
approach which ignores the
differential effects of conflict on men
and women and the resulting need
for women’s protection in conflict
situations.
2. The increasingly used UN Security
Council Resolution 1325
approach, in which it is axiomatic
that women are more vulnerable and
marginalised than men and gender
analysis is applied across the board
with the specific aim of counteracting
this tendency for the betterment of
women and of society more broadly.
3. The as yet under-represented
‘gender-relational’ approach
which starts with the context specific
relational gender analysis and aims
at better benefit sharing (including
protection) generally, on the
assumption that this leads to more
peaceful outcomes in the long-term.
most important aspect of conflict analysis from
which the aims and focus issues of a conflict
advocacy strategy are drawn.
How does conflict advocacy
fit?
Conflict advocacy and peace building:
Conflict advocacy has much in common with
peace building, drawing from many of its
principles and practices such as ‘Peace Writ
Large’iii. Peace writ large distinguishes
negative peace – the absence of conflict, from
positive peace – building a just and sustainable
peace. This distinction is important in
determining strategies for conflict advocacy in
conflict-affected countries. Whilst long-term
goals may often be framed in terms of positive
peace, negative peace can often be a
challenging and equally long term task requiring
large amounts of advocacy.
Conflict advocacy and conflict
sensitivity:
Conflict sensitivity directs the way activities,
including advocacy, are carried out in conflict
situations. It enhances a clear advocacy
objective (what is to be changed) by
articulating the appropriate behaviour and
actions to be adopted (how it is to be changed).
During conflict sensitivity analysis all project
activities are assessed and risks/the likelihood
that activities may either encourage violence or
positively promote peace are identified.
Appropriate actions are the taken to mitigate
risk promote positive outcomes. Often these
actions will include conflict advocacy.
Conflict advocacy and protection:
When carrying out conflict advocacy both
survivors of violence and also advocates are
subject to risk and need protecting. This
inclusion of advocates enlarges the notion of
protection as it is commonly understood
however both groups are at risk from violent
repercussions that conflict advocacy may in
some cases give rise to.
Creating a broader protective framework is also
important for advocacy in conflict situations.
Community protection may consist of being
informed about the local authorities, how to
contact them and how to claim justice within
the state legal framework. Moreover if
communities work together they can confront
authorities and even illegal armed groups more
effectively.
Conflict advocacy and gender:
A gender approach is a key component of
power analysis and essential for conflict
advocacy. In all too many places gender
analyses continue to reveal how little is known
about the impact of conflict on women , how
rarely they are able to speak about it, and how
seldom women meaningfully participate in
peace negotiations. Despite this experience
repeatedly demonstrates that unless women
are closely involved in peace building
sustainable peace is not achievable.
Women have enormous potential as peace
builders. There are many examples where the
capacity of women as peace builders has been
strengthened through advocacy on both a local
and international scale. Making sure that
conflict advocacy messages and activities are
based on an analysis of the specific contexts is
important for impact and also minimising risks
to women who are often extremely vulnerable.
Advocating in and on conflict situations A quick guide to effective conflict advocacy
4
Advocating in and on conflict
situations?
In programmes:
The programmatic lessons are grouped
according to the four elements of understanding
conflict described earlier: context, strategy,
focus issue, and actors (victim/client, advocate,
target actor).
Context:
There are as many different experiences of
‘conflict advocacy’ as there are contexts and
moreover conflict situations change rapidly. It is
therefore imperative that conflict analysis is
updated on a very regular basis. The practice of
conflict analysis is not a strait jacket and should
be viewed more as a continuous and wide-
ranging discussion accompanying other
activities. Likewise advocacy response needs to
be correspondingly adaptable and nimble as
opportunities for influence may arise suddenly
and judgements on the risks involved have to
rely on the existing bank of knowledge.
Strategy:
A clear advocacy strategy is essential as it will
articulate good conflict analysis and a vision for
positive peace. Broad and long-term overall
aims need to be broken down into realistic
milestones.
Conflict sensitivity processes need adequate
resourcing at the start of a programme
because they are complementary to context
analysis and bring focus issues and risks
together in a clear set of mitigating actions.
Conflict advocacy can contribute to change at
different levels from local to national, to
regional to international. As such the level of
advocacy needs to be appropriate to the
nature of the conflict. For example advocacy
work in and on the conflict in the Democratic
Republic of Congo (DRC) requires advocacy
action that is linked at all levels because the
complex web of relations and interests that
fuels the conflict exists from the top down to
the grass roots.
The potential for local level advocacy to
contribute to local level conflict resolution,
reconciliation and prevention of broader
escalation of conflict should not be
undervalued. Similarly middle-level advocacy
has in many situations been crucial for the
implementation of national level agreements
and polices. These levels of advocacy
sometimes not valued as highly as national or
international advocacy and thus neglected
however advocacy at these levels are critical
post peace agreement in helping to maintain
and support the peace and ensure ‘spoilers’ are
not permitted to influence the situation
negatively. It is important to recognise that
overall advocacy effectiveness is weakened
when ‘top down’ advocacy is not joined up with
‘bottom up’ advocacy but instead runs parallel
to it.
Focus issue(s):
Priority focus issues for advocacy should be
determined by the conflict analysis.
It is also often effective to combine conflict
advocacy with programme delivery as not only
do vulnerable populations receive material
benefits, advocacy activities gain credibility and
legitimacy from work which improves the lives
of people living in poverty in conflict affected
places.
Actors:
The many stakeholders in conflict situations all
require thorough understanding and careful
engagement.
Some advocacy actions will be uncomfortable,
such as identifying and seeking to reduce the
influence of ‘spoilers’ or reaching out to
understand actors with opposing views or
violent tactics (including the military or armed
groups). Engaging with government or other
actors such as local elites who hold economic
power and political influence is often
challenging too. However bridges can be built
with these groups if they are included in
training and workshops alongside community
members or other stakeholders or encouraged
to join in dialogue taking place in neutral
spaces. This strategy has been used in
programmes in Nigeria and Kenya to good
effect.
It is useful to identify allies, and where possible
and with extreme care, to engage with a range
of actors across the conflict spectrum. Such
initiatives increase the number of voices heard
on a particular conflict related issue or range of
Advocating in and on conflict situations A quick guide to effective conflict advocacy
5
Indicators for advocacy to
promote peace:
Communities/participants become
actors
Political institutions for handling
grievances that fuel conflict are
created or reformed
People increasingly resist violence
and provocations to violence
People’s security improves
Change is sustained and
proportional (i.e. national level
violence is reduced at national
level). This is the key to which level
of action to focus on.
Indicators for advocacy to
reduce harm:
Fewer divisions between conflicting
groups
Less danger for participants in
advocacy/peace activities
Reduced structural/overt violence
Human/material resources are more
directed to productive peace
activities
Less cynicism around ‘peace’ and
stigmatisation of those involved in
promoting it
Local people have been empowered
(not preached to, or avoided)
issues and create a better environment for
dialogue and reconciliation.
The choice of advocacy partners is also a
critical factor in conflict advocacy success; while
partners and their leaders will take a firm stand
on a given conflict, they will have impact if they
attract respect from all parties at the
appropriate level as well as the international
stage if this level is identified in the advocacy
strategy.
Indicators of successful conflict
Advocacy:
Articulating advocacy changes can be difficult.
The following indicators are broad and should
be specified further, along with appropriate
milestones, in actual programme design.
In institutions:
Ways of working:
‘Conflict advocacy’ is a hybrid approach which
draws on different disciplines and terminologies
often used by different departments within a
non-governmental organisation. These
departments need to work together to be most
effective.
Working for change in conflict situations is a
long, slow and intensive process that requires
special investment in staff. CAFOD has found
that care to support and accompany
Programme Managers and other staff working in
complex environments has been distinctive and
appreciated by its partners. The
accompaniment method can be especially
fruitful in conflict contexts where building
relationships of trust is so crucial.
In some cases partner exchanges can be
positive in bringing about desired change.
However such visits need careful preparations
and dedicated follow up to be fully productive.
Above all else, the quality of local leadership
has the strongest impact in effecting change.
Time and again the case studies bear witness to
charismatic civil society leadership which has
drawn respect from diverse warring parties. An
ability to recognise, support and nurture leaders
and leadership qualities can be extremely
fruitful.
Where there are appropriate skills and qualities
NGO staff can play a useful intermediary or
mediating role between different actors or
parties in a conflict. Mediation skills differ from
advocacy skills and so training in these skills
may be useful for staff and partners in some
conflict situations.
Maximising influence:
Change often takes place through influencing
key actors in effective ways. There are a range
of tools that can help analyse which actors to
influence and at what level: Stakeholder
Influence Mapping, IIED (2005)iv is one,
another is described in CDA’s ‘Confronting War’v
that focuses on the interconnections between
the approaches used and the levels targeted in
advocacy. CDA’s research highlights the
importance of transferring impacts to different
people and at different levels. Translating
Advocating in and on conflict situations A quick guide to effective conflict advocacy
6
Methods for managing risk:
Non-confrontational methods should
reduce risk by not inciting violent
reactions. Persuasive methods include
dissemination of information,
collaboration, and personal contact. Non-
violent methods are the preferred
strategy of conflict/peace advocates as a
more effective means to break cycles of
violence and avoid risk.
Seek allies, there is safety in numbers.
Creation of advocacy networks and
CSO coalitions opens up more
opportunities to influence power, and
reduces the risk of individual exposure to
reprisals or political manipulation.
Check out the facts carefully and
present a balanced view of a situation.
This means understanding the views of
aggressors as well as victims and not
taking sides. It is an important principle in
sensitive contexts such as Eastern DRC
where stereotypes and prejudices are
deep rooted.
Avoidance is rarely the most useful
strategy. However the best strategy may
sometimes be keeping quiet, or simply
showing human sympathy to the
victims of violence, whoever they are.
This was the response of Maralal Diocese
after a vicious attack on policemen by
Samburu and Turkana tribesmen in
northern Kenya. Timeliness is important
and may require swift, proactive action
based on sound judgement which takes
risk into account.
Develop appropriate protection strategies
that support peace campaigners and
human rights defenders and include such
elements as international visibility,
campaigns and urgent actions if partner
organisations or staff are at risk
Responding to felt needs or shared
interests can often unite communities
who are politically divided. Livelihoods
programming integrated with conflict
sensitive advocacy is often an effective
approach as shown in Maralal Diocese,
Kenya.
Conflict sensitivity exercises include a
comprehensive assessment of risk and
actions to mitigate it.
changes at the Individual/Personal level into
Socio/Political level action and at this level
connecting ‘More people’ and ‘Key people’ are
important actions that need to be considered in
conflict advocacy action. It can also sometimes
be the case that work is necessary at the
Individual/Personal level to ensure that
Socio/Political changes are internalized in the
behaviour of individuals.
It can be the case that NGOs focus more on
socio/political level action targeting more
people. In some cases this approach may need
to be reassess or supplemented with activity
targeting key actors or work at an
individual/personal level.
Managing risk to advocates in conflict
situations:
Managing risk to advocates is paramount and
complex in conflict situations. The risks involved
in responding to the factors of violence of a
conflict situation have greater physical and
human security implications. For instance
although the underlying causes may be
constant their effects may change dramatically
and frequently, so the analysis needs to be
constantly updated.
The role of International Agencies:
It is important that international non-
governmental organisations, when pursuing
advocacy work either on behalf of or with
domestic partners that they are grounded in
their partners’ experiences and speak on their
behalf. On the other hand as independent
institutions international NGOs may have a
more objective vantage point from which may
develop different positions from those of its
partners. Many partners, experienced in
‘conflict advocacy’, appreciate and respect the
independent voice of an outsider. So long as an
outsider organisation takes into account
partners’ views, and is neutral and impartial,
then it should be confident in its own
messaging.
Excessive caution can also, perversely, expose
partners to greater risk.
Advocating in and on conflict situations A quick guide to effective conflict advocacy
7
Characteristics of ethical
advocacy:
Honest (not over ambition)
Life giving
Reliable
Respects diversity
Models non-violent behaviour
Built on justice
Values local ownership
Characteristics of mature
advocacy partnerships:
Insiders – those vulnerable to the
changing dynamics of conflict, they
have a depth of knowledge.
However insiders can sometimes
gate-keep relationships.
Outsiders – those who choose to
become involved in the conflict,
have a breadth of knowledge.
Outsiders also may have the
capacity to protect advocates.
Joint planning, evaluation and
monitoring are important so as to
reflect complementary perspectives.
Take time to establish a relationship
of trust – recognising points of
convergence and divergence and
complementarity of skills etc.
The following highlights some desirable
institutional characteristics of those involved in
‘conflict advocacy’vi:
Conclusion: The experience of CAFOD and its partners in
conflict advocacy is rich and varied and has
further potential. To maximise the potential of
conflict advocacy to contribute to change, NGOs
need to broaden their conceptual frames of
reference (e.g. by using peace building
concepts more widely), practice conflict
advocacy more systematically and allow the
approach to feature more prominently and
properly in programme design, and take care to
manage risk on an ongoing basis.
Notes
i http://cafodportal/sites/ID/ID Tools and
Resources/pcm/PCM Handbook/Advocacy in programmes and projects.doc (Accessed 28/10/2013) ii One such method is the How To Guide to Conflict
Sensitivity, Conflict Sensitivity Consortium, Feb. 2012 iii See Confronting War: Critical Lessons for Peace
Practitioners, Mary Anderson and Lara Olson, CDA –
RPP, 2003 p12. iv Stakeholder Influence Mapping, IIED, 2005
http://www.policy-powertools.org/Tools/Understanding/docs/ stakeholder_influence_mapping_tool_english.pdf (Accessed 29/10/2013) v Confronting War: Critical Lessons for Peace
Practitioners, Mary Anderson and Lara Olson, CDA – RPP, 2003. vi Adapted from Anderson and Olson’s ‘Confronting
War’
Other Resources
CD STEPS project
Conflict Sensitivity in Emergencies – Current Practice
and Ways Forward, ODI/HPN, 2011
Confronting War: Critical Lessons for Peace
Practitioners, Mary Anderson and Lara Olson, CDA-RPP,
2003
Critical Path Analysis, The Change Agency
Do No Harm, Mary Anderson, Berghof, 1999
Empathy in Making Change Happen – learning from
Maralal experience, Open University, 2012
Gender in Peacebuilding: Taking Stock, Judy el Bushra,
International Alert, 2012
Oxfam: Quick Guide to Power Analysis. 2009
Oxfam: Within and Without the State, Power and
Fragility: Governance Programming in Fragile Contexts:
A Programme Resource, IDS, Oct. 2012
Stakeholder Influence Mapping, IIED, 2005
The Practice of Conflict Sensitivity in Kenya: Beyond
the concept, a documentation of case studies, Conflict
Sensitivity Consortium, Oct. 2009
The Rough Guide to Conflict and Peace Policy, CAFOD
briefing
Voice and Accountability Tool, CAFOD, 2011
Working for Reconciliation Manual, CARITAS
International