Mapping the field of international peace education programs and exploring their networked impact on peacebuilding

Published date01 September 2019
Date01 September 2019
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21256
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Mapping the field of international peace education
programs and exploring their networked impact on
peacebuilding
Jeffrey D. Pugh | Karen Ross
Department of Conflict Resolution, Human
Security, and Global Governance,
University of Massachusetts Boston,
Boston, Massachusetts
Correspondence
Jeffrey D. Pugh, Department of Conflict
Resolution, Human Security, and Global
Governance, University of Massachusetts
Boston, Wheatley Hall 04-128a,
100 Morrissey Blvd, Boston, MA 02125.
Email: jeffrey.pugh@umb.edu
Abstract
Conventional wisdom holds that international education
builds cross-cultural capacity, and evaluations of
peacebuilding interventions point to significant impacts.
Yet, little scholarship links these fields or explores the sig-
nificance of networks of participants in either area for
mobilizing transnational peacebuilding capital. We
address this by examining how peace and conflict-oriented
international education (PCIE) programs enable construc-
tion of lasting alumni networks, and how these can contrib-
ute to longer-term conflict prevention and peacebuilding
activities after participants return home. We draw upon an
original dataset of 178 PCIE programs and a survey of pro-
gram founders and staff.
1|INTRODUCTION
International educational exchange is the most significant current project designed to
continue the process of humanizing mankind to the point, we would hope, that men can
learn to live in peaceeventually even to cooperate in constructive activities rather
than compete in a mindless contest of mutual destruction. (Fulbright, 1976)
Conventional wisdom holds that international education builds cross-cultural capacity and
increases understanding among people of different nationalities, ultimately contributing to interna-
tional peace and understanding. In some cases, international trainings, workshops, and exchange that
occurs in peace and conflict-oriented international education (PCIE) programs can represent a form
of citizen diplomacy or Track II/III dialogue among participants from the academy and civil society
(Chigas, 2003). From the other side of the pipeline, many peacebuilding professionals got their initial
Received: 28 February 2019 Revised: 10 April 2019 Accepted: 12 May 2019
DOI: 10.1002/crq.21256
Conflict Resolution Quarterly. 2019;37:4966. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/crq © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 49
inspiration to enter the field through this type of capacity-building international experience, and
social entrepreneurs who establish nongovermental organizations (NGOs) or interventions in conflict
regions often rely on knowledge, transnational networks, and resources they acquired in such
programs.
Despite much promising work on rigorous evaluation of the impact both of international educa-
tion programs and of peacebuilding interventions, a more sophisticated understanding of how the
two are linked through networks of past participants would help to enable the intentional mobiliza-
tion of new forms of transnational social capital for peace. This paper goes beyond examining indi-
vidual knowledge acquisition, attitude changes, and problem-solving to examine how PCIE
programs work to construct lasting alumni networks that contribute to longer-term conflict preven-
tion and peacebuilding activities after participants return home. In doing so, it draws on previous
work on intergroup encounters and contact theory, social capital, study abroad impact, and networks.
The empirical component of this study relies on an original dataset of 178 PCIE programs, as well as
a survey of these programs' founders and staff (n= 27).
2|ADDRESSING CONFLICT THROUGH NETWORKS AND
RELATIONSHIPS FORMED IN PCIE PROGRAMS
Given the complex and transnational nature of many of today's most important conflicts, solutions
require a flexible approach that can operate across geographic, temporal, and identity boundaries.
Effective peacebuilding does not rely only on a one-time transfer of knowledge or on importing an
institutional design from another context that assumes that establishing a mediation center, a public
awareness campaign, or a training will necessarily lead to reduced prejudice or violence (Pugh,
Sulewski, & Moreno, 2017; Salem, 1993). Instead, Lederach (2005) suggests that peacebuilding
must be locally embedded within a relational webthat connects actors within a conflict society and
disrupts oppressive and coercive hierarchies, tapping into local knowledge and needs articulation.
Peacebuilding interventions that rely on such relational networks, mobilize transnational social capi-
tal, and transcend the limitations of an artificial 2-year project cycle are more likely to lead to sustain-
able changes at the system level, rather than only individual-level attitudinal changes (Pugh, 2016;
SaferWorld/Conciliation Resources, 2016). The structure of such relationships provides connections
through which people and organizations can access and share information and resources, organizing
collective responses to challenges and building trust to achieve common goals (Westaby & Redding,
2014; Balyk & Pugh, 2013). The social capital that can be drawn upon as a result may serve a bridg-
ing function to establish a (potentially weak) tie between groups that otherwise would not interact, or
a bonding function to deepen the connections among members of an existing group (Cox, 2009;
Putnam, 2000).
According to Allen Nan, Eliatamby, and Kanyako (2007), Networks thrive on both close trusting
relationships amongst members, and on clear autonomy of members(p. 4). Both of these types of
social capital can play a role in networks that build peace, although in contexts of high polarization
or segregation, the strength of weak tiesargument says that bridging capital can be especially
important in reducing intergroup distrust and facilitating peacebuilding action (Allen Nan, 2009;
Granovetter, 1973). Networks among organizations and people can help to channel activism, infor-
mation, and political influence at local, national and international levels to achieve a range of out-
comes, from reducing violence or human rights violations to developing sustainable development
solutions that reduce poverty (Hafner-Burton & Montgomery, 2006; Keck & Sikkink, 1998;
Ricigliano, 2003; Wilson, Davis, & Murdie, 2016).
50 PUGH AND ROSS

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT