This book examines the possibilities and limitations of corporate social responsibility in minimising the violent conflict often associated with natural resource exploitation. Through detailed and penetrating empirical analysis, the author skilfully asks why previous corporate social responsibility practices have not always achieved their aims.
Recent years have witnessed a resurgence of interest in indigenous, traditional and customary approaches to peace-making in the context of civil wars. Supporters claim that indigenous approaches to peacemaking are participatory and relationship-focused, and that peaceful outcomes have a higher chance of community adherence than template-style international peace interventions effected through the `liberal peace'. Using historical and contemporary examples, this article assesses the feasibility of a complementary relationship between customary and Western forms of peace-making.
With the proliferation of civil wars since the end of the Cold War, many developing countries now exist in a "postconflict" environment, posing enormous development challenges for the societies affected, as well as for international actors. Postconflict Development addresses these challenges in a range of vital sectors—security, justice, economic policy, education, the media, agriculture, health, and the environment in countries around the globe.
The international community has recently hailed the restoration of property rights for people uprooted by armed conflict as a means of remedying forced displacement. Proponents of property restitution assert that this remedy can enhance the rule of law in a post-conflict society by promoting reconciliation and bolstering economic and social stability. A United Nations (U.N.) subcommission has endorsed a set of legal and technical guidelines for constructing a property restitution scheme.
Recent critical analyses of global land grabs have variously invoked global capitalism and neocolonialism to account for this trend. One line of inquiry approaches land grabs as instances of “primitive accumulation of capital” whereby lands in the Global South are “enclosed” and brought within the ambit of global capitalism. Another perspective invokes the history of Anglo‐American colonialism for critiquing the developmentalist discourse that depicts Africa as the “last frontier” to be tamed by the techno‐industrial civilization of the North.
This contribution suggests how to identify and deal with ex-combatants in (un)peaceful post-war environments from a methodological perspective. While it is obvious that large-N studies or standardized interviews fall too short to depict post-war dynamics and related conflict risks, ethnographic methods face numerous challenges, too. First, the identification of and access to former combatants may prove to be difficult. Often being stigmatized or perceived as outlaws they may not wish to get in touch with ‘outsiders’, like academics.
This guide is intended for practitioners who are confronted with land conflicts in the course of their work or are in a position to prevent them and/or include land governance as one pillar in their policies. It aims to broaden the understanding of the complexity of causes that lead to land conflicts in order to provide for better-targeted ways of addressing such conflicts, and provides a number of tools with which to analyse land disputes. In addition, this guidebook discusses a wide variety of options and tools for settling ongoing land conflicts and for preventing new ones.
At its fifty-sixth session the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human
Rights, in its resolution 2004/2, welcomed the progress report of the Special Rapporteur and
requested the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to circulate
the draft principles on housing and property restitution for refugees and displaced persons
contained therein widely among non-governmental organizations, Governments, specialized
agencies and other interested parties for comment, and requested the Special Rapporteur to take
The article debunks the conception that peace agreements are all equal. Distinct from the conventional monocausal assessment, I view the peace agreement as a cohesive whole and evaluate its strength in terms of its structural and procedural provisions. I use data on the length of intrastate peace episodes during the period from 1946 to 2010. My key finding is that the design quality of the peace agreement has a significant impact on the durability of peace.
This Policy Brief presents a comprehensive review of the literature on environmental conflict and peacebuilding. It traces the development of the field from its beginnings in the 1980s until today, identifying several distinct stages which are characterised by specific research questions, approaches and findings. Based on this literature review the authors address major gaps and shortcomings as well as problematic implications of the research so far.
Through our robust search engine, you can search for any item of the over 64,800 highly curated resources in the Land Library.
If you would like to find an overview of what is possible, feel free to peruse the Search Guide.
