GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • Projects
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»The Nexus between Violent Conflict, Social Capital and Social Cohesion

The Nexus between Violent Conflict, Social Capital and Social Cohesion

Library
N J Colletta, M L Cullen
2000

Summary

What is the interaction between social capital, social cohesion and violent conflict? How can governments and international actors foster the socially cohesive relations necessary for conflict prevention, rehabilitation and reconciliation? This World Bank report uses data from two communities in Cambodia and Rwanda, in high and low intensity conflict areas. It is argued that the higher state responsiveness and cross cutting network relations intersect, the more likely society will have the inclusion and cohesiveness necessary to mediate conflict and prevent violence.

The Cold War masked many local intrastate conflicts by internationalising them. Support for authoritarian regimes concealed deeply rooted divisions, a significant number of which erupted into civil wars as external power conflicts withdrew their interests. Interactions between social capital, cohesion and violent conflict triggered the violence.

  • Unlike interstate conflict, which often mobilises national unity, intrastate conflict serves to weaken the social fabric. Populations are divided as social norms, bonds and values are destroyed.
  • Social cohesion is the key intervening variable between social capital and violent conflict. The degree in which vertical and horizontal social capital intersect is vital in mediating conflict and aiding cohesion.
  • Social capital can be perverted to undermine social cohesion and fragment society for individual and group gain, as seen by the actions of the Rwandan elites and Cambodian Angka.
  • Social capital underpins violent conflict in regards to vertical and horizontal relations. A lack of bridging links, and unequal distributions of power, can trigger violent conflict. Thus social capital can be negative as well as constructive.
  • Violent conflict can destroy primary bonds and undercut social capital. However, social capital can serve as a key source of reconciliation and reconstruction through the formation of broad and diverse networks.
  • Violent conflict and genocide can boost social capital and social cohesion within groups, acting as a powerful communal building exercise, as seen amongst the Hutu.

Nation building remains a challenge as states reside over old societies and divisions in the post-colonial period. The cross cutting of social capital can initially be created by stealth through managing basic services. However, a long term, flexible approach that incorporates the ability to listen and learn, and make few assumptions, is vital.

Good governance is key in strengthening social capital at every level. The bridging and bonding of social relations can be achieved through:

  • Social reconciliation connecting groups and balancing power. Cross-cutting social capital needs to be nurtured, occurring across civic and market spheres horizontally as well as vertically.
  • Empowerment through decentralisation, in order to dismantle the legacy of central control. This will act to give a sense of control and cut ties across social divides.
  • Ensuring existing social capital bases are not eroded and they are incorporated into the reconstruction process. The aim should be to strengthen indigenous capabilities, bridging new roles, functions and relationships.
  • Development efforts should empower decision making and facilitate decentralisation. They should not create or encourage dependency, nor undercut local actors, thereby weakening local leaders.

Source

Colletta, N. J. and Cullen, M. L., 2000, 'The Nexus between Violent Conflict, Social Capital and Social Cohesion: Case Studies from Cambodia and Rwanda', World Bank, Washington DC

Related Content

Affirmative action around the world Insights from a new dataset (update)
Working Papers
2023
Responses to conflict, irregular migration, human trafficking and illicit flows along transnational pathways in West Africa
Conflict Analysis
2022
Cross-border pastoral mobility and cross-border conflict in Africa – patterns and policy responses
Conflict Analysis
2022
Increasing Birth Registration for Children of Marginalised Groups in Pakistan
Helpdesk Report
2021

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2026; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2026; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2026

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".