Conflict sensitive approaches to development, humanitarian assistance and peace building

Next: 2 Assessing institutional capacity for conflict sensitivity

1.3 Background

Table 1: The ‘What’ and ‘How’ of conflict sensitivity
What to do	How to do it
Understand the institutional context	Carry out an institutional analysis
Understand the interaction between the institutional context and the capacity building needs	Link institutional capacity building to the institutional analysis
Use this understanding to address weaknesses and build on strengths	Plan, implement, monitor and evaluate conflict-sensitive capacity building

There are some very real institutional challenges that need to be addressed, even in the most capable organisations, if conflict sensitivity is to become a reality in terms of organisational strategy and operational practice. Although many organisations have made quite considerable progress in recent years in promoting good practices in conflict and conflict-prone areas, and donors, national governments, INGOs and local civil society organisations have developed and adapted many aspects of their own institutional capacities, particularly since the mid-1990s, they all have some way to go before becoming genuinely conflict sensitive. Even those that have made significant progress acknowledge that new challenges arise daily, and that these challenges require the development of appropriate institutional responses. Some of these challenges are recurrent and common to organisations working in highly fluid contexts where, for example, there may be an absence of effective and / or legitimate partner organisations, or where the situation is so insecure and volatile that institutional development is seen as impossible. Indeed, many of the factors that negatively impact on an organisation’s capacity for mainstreaming conflict sensitivity, such as lack of institutional commitment, high staff turnover, lack of institutional memory, and weak analytical capacity, are linked to both difficult operating environments and funding structures that emphasise ‘acting’ above ‘thinking’.

There are, however, ways to look systematically at institutional challenges, to learn how others have attempted to respond to them, and also to prioritise key areas of action. Again, there are often considerable internal and external challenges that must be overcome to effect change. At times it is necessary to gain some distance from one’s working environment and one’s own place in it in order to fully understand all aspects of the challenges and opportunities that exist. Understanding institutional dynamics, connections and disconnections is particularly important when attempting to improve an organisation’s conflict sensitivity.

Increasing institutional capacity for conflict sensitivity – preferably through mainstreaming across all programme areas – helps organisations better to manage their relationship with a volatile context, and improves the quality of their work. Table 1 in Chapter 1 suggests a framework for implementing a conflict-sensitive approach. Table 1 above suggests a similar approach to mainstreaming conflict sensitivity within an organisation.

Box 1: Organisational capacity assessment
A consultant undertook an assessment for CARE International of existing organisational strengths and capacities relevant to the successful mainstreaming of conflict sensitivity in the organisation. The main purpose of the review was to clarify CARE’s stance and role(s) relative to conflict sensitivity and peacebuilding, and to make recommendations on how to strengthen its capacity to support country office operations in conflict-affected areas. Staff in the field and headquarters, as well as other organisations, were consulted. One of the key findings was that organisational culture can be a key constraint; many CARE field staff felt overwhelmed by the roll-out of many different initiatives. It was therefore seen as critical that conflict sensitivity should not be viewed as yet another initiative, but rather that CARE should develop capacity and competence in an incremental manner at different levels, without compromising its traditional core strengths; and should ensure that conflict-related work remained consistent with CARE’s vision and mission. It was recommended that the process be supported through focal points at various levels of CARE rather than by creating a separate conflict transformation and peacebuilding unit. A key priority, given the feeling of initiative overload, was for the process to remain demand and country office driven, while modestly increasing capacity.

Conflict sensitivity is not an easy add-on, or something that can be acquired by undertaking one or two specific and discrete ‘peacebuilding’ projects. It means integrating the appropriate attitudes, approaches, tools and expertise into an organisation’s culture, systems, processes and work. This cannot be brought about overnight; it will take time and needs to be based on an understanding of the institutional context and in particular the capacity, and the limitations, of the organisation when it comes to mainstreaming conflict sensitivity.

For example there may be reasons why, initially, a minimalist approach may work better than a full-blown rollout across the organisation – see Box 1 above.

Table 2 lists what are likely to be the essential prerequisites for developing a sustainable capacity for conflict sensitivity.

Table 2: Five essential prerequisites
A. Institutional commitment This is indispensable to making conflict sensitivity a reality; without support from the top, organisational change will not happen. If an organisation’s leadership is not actively and enthusiastically supportive of conflict-sensitive approaches, there may nevertheless be scope to pave the way for incremental organisational change if some key individuals and / or departments of the organisation are supportive. B. Willingness to make changes in organisational culture and institutional structures Such changes are likely to be needed if a conflict-sensitive approach is to take hold. It may be that a full-blown roll-out is not feasible, and indeed many organisations will recognise the ‘initiative fatigue’ illustrated in Box 1. But most organisations will have offices, teams and / or individuals who are open to learning, risk-taking and self-reflection – including on conflict and peace issues – and who may be able to act as drivers of change. C. Support for capacity development Needed to keep and build momentum as a process of change in organisational culture and institutional structures starts to occur. While many organisations do not have in-house staff development programmes, mainstreaming conflict sensitivity requires at a minimum providing space and encouragement for staff to pursue and share their own related research and learning. D. Conducive external relationships Needed both in the implementing area and outside it. For example, funding parameters that emphasise output over process, or programme implementation over longer-term capacity development, will make it difficult for organisations to fund conflict-sensitive programmes and / or invest in organisational capacity building. In addition, effectively mainstreaming conflict sensitivity requires at a minimum the willingness of partner organisations to engage in some level of joint review and mutual improvement of practices. E. Accountability mechanisms Needed to underpin and reward staff and teams who incorporate conflict sensitivity in their daily practice. While organisations do not need to have a fully developed accountability framework to begin implementing conflict sensitivity, they do, at a minimum, need measures on multiple levels of the organisation that encourage learning – and acting on learning – from past and ongoing experiences.

Building on the above five key aspects, this chapter offers a six-step framework for starting the process of mainstreaming conflict sensitivity within an organisation, including deciding whether and where a minimalist or a more comprehensive approach, or something in between, is most appropriate. The framework will help you to understand the strengths and weaknesses of your institution in relation to conflict-sensitive policy and practice, and to think about how to promote and support the development of institutional capacity for conflict sensitivity

The six steps fit within the larger framework of conflict sensitivity, and can be seen as a process for gaining a fuller understanding of the institutional context in which you operate, understanding the interaction between the institutional capacity building and the institutional analysis, and finally acting on that understanding. Table 3 brings together the six steps and the overall approach suggested in Table 1.

Table 3: Six steps
Framework	Step	Question
Understand the institutional context in which you operate	Step 1: Assess your organisation’s institutional capacity for conflict sensitivity	What is the current institutional context?
Understand the interaction between institutional capacity building and the institutional analysis	Step 2: Assess how the different institutional aspects (ie A to E in Table 2) connect	What is the relationship between the different institutional elements?
	Step 3: Reflect on one’s own and others’ experiences	What experiences can we learn from?
	Step 4: Identify key opportunities and challenges	What opportunities exist and why do existing challenges exist (and persist)?
Act on the understanding	Step 5: Prioritise, develop and implement a plan of action	Based on what we now know, how do we proceed?
	Step 6: Monitor and evaluate results and review plan of action	What have we learned so far and how can we improve?

Next: 2 Assessing institutional capacity for conflict sensitivity