Building Social Building Social Cohesion from Cohesion from BelowBelow

Based on: Based on: The learnings from the The learnings from the Laletek Laletek (Bridge) Project (Bridge) Project 2010-20122010-2012

Presentation by: Catharina Maria, Presentation by: Catharina Maria, M.A.M.A.On Timor-Leste Update, ANU, On Timor-Leste Update, ANU, Canbera, 28-29 November 2013Canbera, 28-29 November 2013

What we will discuss:What we will discuss:

Communal Conflict in Timor-Leste

CRS and Laletek (Bridge) Project

Key Baseline Study Results

Strengths: Evidence-based Peacebuilding

The strengths of the project

Most Significant Changes

The Necessary Conditions

Communal Conflict in Communal Conflict in Timor-LesteTimor-Leste

Small-scale communal conflict was a fact of life in Dili.

Small disputes often escalated due to rumors and lack of actions.

Peacebuilding efforts at times top-down and focus on the main conflict line

Laletek (Bridge) Project

Two Year Project: March 2010 –2012

Funding: USD 684,000 from the Office of Conflict Mitigation and Management/USAID and CRS

Implemented by CRS and DJPC Dili

Target Area: 22 hamlets in 6 villages

in Dili

Project goal: Opposing groups in targeted aldeias reduce violent conflict with each other.

Two Strategic Objectives:1. Opposing Groups develop healthy

relationships, and2. Collaborate non-violently to manage local

infrastructure.

Key Baseline Study Key Baseline Study ResultsResults

The sources of conflicts varied greatly in each suku/aldeia

The actors involved in conflicts and the point of entry were identified.

The existing/potential local peacebuilders and conflict resolution mechanisms were identified.

The recent history of development and conflicts were developed

The barriers of peace were discussed

=> The Baseline Study helped the project to be more precise and tailor the activities, timing and targets based on the different realities.

Laletek StrengthsLaletek Strengths1. Evidence-based Peacebuilding

2. The process is as important as the result.

3. Targeting the troublemakers while strengthening local peacebuilders

4. Multi-pronged approach which targeted the multi-level nature of conflict

5. Church-led: Consent and Ownership

6. Coordination and Collaboration (to national level)

7. Built something together at the end

Most Significant Changes: Most Significant Changes:

Final Project Evaluation, James Scambary, Feb 2012Final Project Evaluation, James Scambary, Feb 2012 Five out of six communities

believed Laletek projects had brought peaceful change to their communities

Two communities thought this change was exclusively a result of Laletek’s programs

Four communities thought Laletek had reinforced other community or NGO activities

Two non-beneficiary communities confirmed that they now had no conflict with four neighbouring beneficiary communities

The Necessary The Necessary ConditionsConditions

Community buy in – cooperation and readiness of those involved.

Should be bottom up and not top down approach.

Long term process: needs a lot of resources, including skilled and motivated staff.

A thorough process for identification of issues and its possible resolution, troublemakers as well as peacebuilders.

Women and youth's participation is crucial.