Executive summary
As we started the planning for the 2024 State of Conflict Conference, we took a look back at our work together last November. We thought that a summary of our rich discussion that day might be useful to you. We also want to thank you for being there and for your contributions. Hereby, we provide you with an executive summary of the day, with some of our favourite photo’s. We hope to see you again on November 7, 2024!
Photo above: The morning opening by Fleur Ravensbergen and David Laws | Photo under: Responses from the audience
Theme: ‘Beyond the Stable State’
The 2023 Conference was centered on the theme: ‘Beyond the Stable State’. During the conference, participants navigated the intricate landscape of contemporary governance challenges, drawing inspiration from Donald Schon’s enduring analysis of the ‘stable state’. We engaged the challenges of working in a societycharacterized by rapid change and uncertainty as experienced practitioners and drew on the cumulative wealth of experience to explore the practical and organizational tensions that exist between the pursuit of stability and the imperative to learn and to adapt governance practices in response to change.
Schon’s account of the stable state resonated with experiences that demonstrate the pressures – often working at the margins of awareness – to preserve belief in the stable state. These pressures work to preserve a shared sense that society is ‘maakbaar’ – knowable and manageable – that screens out uncertainty and the need for change. In doing so, they interfere with efforts to develop “institutional structures” and “ways of knowing” that embrace change and that might contribute to the development of “an ethic for the process of change itself.” They distract us, not only from the need to learn, but to also to learn what learning involves and, thereby, to learn how to learn.
Together, we explored what it would mean to embrace change ‘beyond the stable state’. We engaged in reflection on change as an internal element of social life. We did this by looking at how institutions have become more provisional and at the challenges that uncertainty raises for the legitimacy of governance practices. We also reflected on the conditions that limit the success of practitioners who work in more ‘fragile’ contexts to sustain the capacity for legitimate and effective governance. Through this lens, we reflected on our own role as professionals, practitioners, and academics working in the conflict resolution field during a period of societal change.
Our exploration of these themes brought two practice domains that often operate independently into conversation with each other. The challenges and imperatives that shape policy and governance in the domestic sphere bear an increasingly strong family resemblance to problems that have plagued international peacebuilding and development. This family resemblance has been underscored in reflections on experience with liberal peacebuilding, as, for example, in a recent report from the Ministry of Buitenlandsezaken ( https://english.iob-evaluatie.nl/results/stability-in-fragile-contexts/ ). Such reflection has highlighted lessons that are well established in domestic governance – including the importance of local engagement in producing effective and legitimate governance – and, conversely, underscored the relevance of concerns for stability, security, and the rule of law in domestic settings. Taken together as a body of practical experience, this family underscores the fragility of – even developed – institutions and the contribution that learning and adaptation make to the practical governance.
Thematic working session: the morning
Ana Gabriela Rojo Fierro and Brunilda Pali reflected on the story of Cherán, an indigenous community in Mexico that moved from a period of violence, corruption, and conflict to a sustained period of peaceful self-governance. Their reflections showcased the transformative power of community-led action in response to violence and external threats. Viewed from the perspective of restorative justice, this story highlighted the significance of alternative justice mechanisms that address the need for flexibility and open dialogue and for a more organic understanding of justice. Challenges to fostering these spaces for development that the group identified included localizing responses to humanitarian crises and understanding the impacts when (international) aid comes from above. Creating space for locally rooted development and more open justice would require a high degree of creativity from the practitioners who work in these fields and put them in the role of ‘translators’ between local communities and national and international institutions.
Martien Kuitenbrouwer, residents of Oostenburg, and a representative of the municipality of Amsterdamreflected together on how conflicts develop between the Amsterdam municipality and neighborhood residents.They explored how a joint fact-finding dialogue prevented legal escalation in Oostenburg. Their reflections underscored the importance of recognizing the shadow of the past and focusing on procedural justice and acknowledgment throughout the process rather than maintaining an exclusive focus on the outcome. These insights emerged as crucial elements in conflict resolution. Lessons from the discussion highlighted the need for transparency, for acknowledging uncertainty, and for embracing tensions in citizen-government dialoguesthat seek to prevent similar situations in the future.
Wouter Mensink discussed a key challenge in organizing participatory projects. He emphasized the need for flexibility in the search to identify a participatory framework (the ‘forum’) that ‘fits’ the concerns in society (the ‘fuss’). Two case studies illustrated the complexities of involving citizens in addressing issues through public decision-making processes. Reflections on experience in the city center of Amsterdam and in the Hoekse Waard emphasized how important it is to think through how the forum and the fuss interact. The discussion also raised questions about how the (accepted) design of a forum can impact how a fuss is perceived and what factors shape whether or not participants feel that their advice is taken seriously.
Thematic working session: the afternoon
Gijsbert van Iterson Scholten shared his experience in a recent controversy in Alkmaar that developed whenthe city council designated a trailer park as a site to house Ukrainian refugees. The Council’s decision triggered a controversy when other residents – who had also been promised housing – responded to the Council’s decision. The dynamics that followed revealed a deeper alienation – rooted in history – that shaped the way that residents interpreted, and responded to, the Council’s effort to address an urgent need. Simone Remijnse drew parallels between the experience in Alkmaar and her experience in conflict regions. The discussion that followed highlighted the importance of trust-building in navigating challenges posed by tensions between the demands of the past and the urgency of the present. These insights underscored the significance of acknowledging people’s experience and concerns in efforts to build rapport and trust and emphasizied howprotests often express valid concerns that require direct and immediate attention, especially in times of political change. Finally, the comparison between experience in Alkmaar and international settings highlighted the importance of having a diverse team, being flexible, and using humanizing approaches to ‘disarm’ aggrieved citizens and, thereby, enhance the chances for building understanding and for resolving the conflict.
Mart Scheepers and Robin Schram facilitated a session that addressed the widening gap between formal institutions and society in the Netherlands and in other countries. They showed how this gap reflects mutual distrust and introduced the AARC framework, as an approach that addresses this gap by engaging the concerns of stakeholders in a meaningful and productive way. The framework emphasizes the importance of (A)cknowledgement, (A)gency, (R)eciprocity, and (C)larity. They showed how it can be used to enrich projects and to foster positive experiences. Participants discussed the challenges that practitioners face when they seek to build trust and create meaningful participation. Identified challenges included power imbalances and the willingness of established institutions to give up power.
Nanke Verloo presented insights from fieldwork into citizen participation in urban planning in Bogotá and Amsterdam West. The discussion underscored the importance of understanding emotions and lived experiences in citizen participation processes. Reflections emphasized the need for empathy and for creating spaces for emotional expression. Critical moments throughout the process challenged relationships. Efforts to engage memory and imagination were essential for success in addressing these challenges. The discussion highlighted how critical moments can provide insights into how to turn disruptions into “productive” moments. Finally, it was argued that role-playing and the normalization of emotions can contribute to efforts to facilitate productive conflict resolution outcomes through citizen participation.
Closing
Closing
The conference closed with a world café that brought participants in these parallel conversations together to reflect on the meaning that the (un)stable state has in their work as professionals. Together, we reflected on the origins of our unstable state, how we can best organize practice when we need to deal with uncertainty and instability, and how we might make use of the unstable state.
In pursuing these themes, the conference provided a comprehensive exploration of the role that conflict resolution has in our changing world. Key takeaways include the importance of embracing flexibility, recognizing historical context, and acknowledging emotions, and the role that local interactions have in fostering understanding, trust, and creative improvisation in conflict resolution processes. The insights that we shared contributed to a deeper understanding of how governance practices can effectively navigate conflicts in today’s dynamic societal landscape.
We would like to close by thanking you on behalf of Wesselink Van Zijst, Public Mediation, and the University of Amsterdam for your contribution to the conference. We hope to see you later this year at the Seventh edition of the State of Conflict Conference.