|Year of Publication||2017|
|Authors||Galvanek, JB, Planta, K|
|Subtitle / Series Title||‘Traditional’ and ‘Non-traditional’ Conflict Resolution Mechanisms|
This report is the final analytical report of a comparative research project generously funded by the German Foundation for Peace Research and implemented by the Berghof Foundation. The project analyzes the forms of coexistence between ‘traditional’ (indigenous, local, community-based) and ‘non-traditional’ (imported, liberal, state-based, Western) approaches to conflict resolution, and is based on field research in Colombia, Liberia and Northeast India.
Its central line of inquiry examines whether the coexistence of traditional and non-traditional mechanisms of conflict resolution leads to tension and competition
between these mechanisms, thereby potentially furthering conflict, or whether the coexistence leads to more (or better) conflict resolution options for the population, thereby promoting conflict settlement processes and outcomes. We conclude that both situations can be true under specific conditions. For instance, coexistence can have a positive effect if the options for conflict resolution are well understood and managed, if responsibilities and competencies of the mechanisms are clear, and if actors treat each other respectfully and do not struggle over power. However, if this is not the case, coexistence can indeed lead to tension and further conflict.