This report focuses on the challenges most post-conflict countries face and the lessons learned in undertaking post-conflict reconstruction. It is based on findings from the Ad Hoc Expert Group Meeting (AEGM) organised by the Division of Public Administration and Development Management (DPADM) of the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA).
Key findings:
- The challenges faced by countries in crises and post-conflict situations are complex, multifaceted and vary due to the variety of different historical root causes of conflict and the different political, social and geographical contexts. The strategies to address these challenges and effectively support a country on a path of recovery, development and durable peace are therefore diverse. What works in one country does not necessarily work in another. However, there are some universally shared values, principles and key elements that have been found across many cases studies to be sine qua non for the development of sustainable peace. These comprise, amongst others, legitimacy of and trust in state institutions; political will and committed leadership, security, a capable public service, effective delivery of basic services, rule of law, transparency and accountability, access to information, sound dialogue between the government and civil society, national mediation capacities and community and civil society participation.
Lessons Learned:
- Leadership capacity development is imperative for successful reconstruction of governance and public administration in a post-conflict situation. Leadership is not a once-in-a-time activity. Leaders who emerge after conflict must understand that good leadership will not start and end with them and that whatever capacities will be reconstructed for public service, they cannot be sustained without continuous supportive development-oriented leadership.
- It is imperative that the government after conflict is immediately able to provide public services including security, law and order, education, health, etc. To do this it needs at its disposal a capable public service. Therefore efforts of rebuilding governance and public administration after conflict must include primarily the strengthening of the capacity of the public service.
- The design and development of local representative structures is a key element of peace-building efforts in conflict and post-conflict situations. However, experience shows that decentralization cannot by itself resolve the intractable problems that led to violence or the post-war challenges. When decentralized governance is not well managed, it can lead to instability and conflict rather than peace. This is because a successful decentralization process – since it entails a division of power, authority, responsibilities and resources between the centre and the local governments – requires consultations and participatory actions. These processes are unlikely to develop in the immediate aftermath of war or conflict without concerted actions. Therefore, supporting capacity building for decentralization, especially the delivery of basic services in an inclusive and participatory manner, is a critical element. Also effective local governance structures and institutional arrangements provide a training ground for leadership in the country.
- A broad range of actors must be involved in the elaboration and implementation of practical prevention policies and mechanisms, which should address the root causes of conflict in particular situations. This calls for a new spirit of collaboration among national and international actors and involves the development of common tools and institutional mechanisms for addressing potential crisis, which take account of the perspectives of the parties to the conflict.
- The breakdown of a country’s governance and public administration institutional capacity through violent conflict needs to be understood from the stand point of the history of the country in question. Likewise the reconstruction of its governance and public administration capacity has to be done based on its socio-politico-economic history and context.
