The vast majority of serious armed conflicts today are not between states but are internal or regional in nature. This makes conflict analyses complicated, but all the more crucial for any intervention in a country experiencing conflict. How best to proceed?
These guidance notes from the Department for International Development (DFID) explain the principles and methodology of conducting effective strategic conflict analyses (SCAs). DFID’s SCAs have three key aims: to map out causes and trends in a conflict; analysis of international responses to it; and development of future policy options. An abridged example is given as an appendix to the guide, along with sources of further information. SCAs should include international factors, risks and impacts of development interventions, and suggestions for making policies more conflict-sensitive. Flexibility is key: adapt SCAs to the end user’s needs; be aware of the nature and phase of conflict; identify particular actors and triggers which could cause latent tensions to erupt into conflict.
A multi-leveled approach to SCAs is advocated because conflicts have multiple structural causes, and actors and interests all may vary over time. Root causes can become less relevant in protracted cases where the conflict itself has generated new dynamics.
- A political economy approach is useful. Analyse the interests of those involved in conflict and their motivations for continuing/desisting in terms of ‘greed’ (opportunities for predatory accumulation) and ‘grievance’ (negative reactions from disadvantaged).
- Analyse structures: underlying political, economic, military and social factors.
- Analyse actors: specific interests, capacities, peace agendas and relationships between them; also what incentives could encourage peace- making.
- Analyse dynamics: long-term trends, triggers for violence, capacities for containing conflict, likely future scenarios.
- Conduct all of the above at local, national, regional and international levels and determine key factors for each.
- Map international responses in a similar fashion – different actors, even within governments, often have different interests and their policies may undercut each other in the field.
Analysis should not only describe the conflict situation itself, but also the relationships between conflict and development or aid interventions. Typically, interventions work around conflict, seeing it as an obstacle to be coped with. This considers the impact of conflict on interventions, but not vice-versa. Instead they should work in conflict ensuring that interventions do not inadvertently exacerbate tensions or on conflict actively seeking to contain or end it. SCAs provide the basis for coordinating and developing appropriate responses to conflict:
- Determine whether existing interventions are likely to have a negative effect on tensions through opportunities for greed and grievance.
- Consider whether development funding is significant compared to other finances and whether conflict actors are therefore susceptible to pressure.
- Look for structural tensions such as poor governance or inequitable distribution of development benefits which interventions could influence.
- Share analysis, forge common approaches with other external actors, and aim to sensitise them to conflict issues. An economic policy prescription may be good in a general analysis, for instance, but could trigger conflict in a particular situation.
- Identify gaps in current responses and encourage better coordination amongst actors.
