Publication: Building for Peace: Reconstruction for Security, Equity, and Sustainable Peace in MENA
Loading...
Published
2020-07-15
ISSN
Date
2020-07-15
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
Tragic levels of death, destruction, displacement, and disorder from ongoing conflicts in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Yemen require a new approach focused on building – not rebuilding – to support transitions to sustainable peace. This is the key message of this new World Bank report funded by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). Building for Peace combines the latest development thinking with original research and proposes an integrated approach to look at reconstruction, development, and the transition to sustainable peace for conflict countries in the Middle East and North Africa and globally. It argues that, because the nature of conflict has evolved, the ways of planning and prioritizing interventions should also evolve, as must the ways that governments, development actors, and donors engage in those environments. Building for Peace advocates a more bottom-up approach that complements the approaches centered on physical reconstruction and central government institutions and that links past, present, and future. It suggests starting by understanding the past and the factors that led to conflict and by making sense of the present by identifying the power and incentives of existing actors, the existing allocation of resources, and the political and economic interests revolving around war. This more nuanced and holistic analysis helps to map the future by developing a long-term vision for sustainable peace. That vision is anchored on the priorities of the communities affected and the associated risks, constraints, and tradeoffs. It also addresses past grievances by building on existing assets and not just on physical damage—and by focusing on creating economic opportunities for all people affected by the conflict.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“World Bank. 2020. Building for Peace: Reconstruction for Security, Equity, and Sustainable Peace in MENA. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/34106 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Ending War, Building Peace(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-05)The National Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Program (NDDRP) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) was implemented over a period of seven years (2004- 2011) with the World Bank's support and funding. The NDDRP had three objectives: 1) disarmament of all combatants willing to be granted a status of demobilized person; 2) demobilization of all ex-combatants who met the conditions for a return to civilian life through a downsizing process of armed forces or groups; and 3) reintegrate the demobilized in the social and economic practices of the community of their choice with opportunities and conditions similar to those of other members of the community. To achieve these objectives, the DRC government initially established a National Commission of Demobilization and Reinsertion (CONADER, 2003), then established the NDDRP (2004), and finally created a new NDDRP Implementation Unit (IU-NDDRP, 2007). NDDRP was divided into three distinct phases, each capitalizing on the gains as well as the mistakes of the past. Economic reintegration of demobilized ex-combatants represented four out of five demobilized as recorded by the program. At the program's conclusion, the implementing partners decided to support the creation, legalization, and strengthening of demobilized persons' economic associations. This model of economic and social reintegration developed by the NDDRP can serve as a model framework for future rehabilitation and reintegration processes in DRC as well as in other countries. Finally, as the results were not as high as expected in regard to the number of women as well as wounded and disabled veterans demobilized, the NDDRP can be lauded for successfully reaching and reintegrating a highly significant number of Children Associated to Armed Forces and Groups (CAAFG) through special projects executed by different implementing partners.Publication Forced Displacement(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2009-12)This note discusses the development dimensions of forced displacement, and the potential role of the World Bank to address these dimensions and contribute to durable solutions for group's who have returned from or are in displacement situations. For the purposes of this note, forced displacement refers to the situation of persons who are forced to leave or flee their homes due to conflict, violence, and human rights violations.Publication Forced Displacement in Europe and Central Asia(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011-10)This paper describes forced displacement in the Europe and Central Asia Region (ECA) and the vulnerabilities associated with being a displaced person. It analyzes the development challenges of forced displacement particularly protracted displacement in the region and the prospects for durable solutions. Displaced persons face challenges related to recovery of or access to housing and land, employment and livelihoods, access to services and public goods including health, education, and infrastructure, and accountable and responsive governance.Publication Political Economy and Forced Displacement : Guidance and Lessons from Nine Country Case Studies(Washington, DC, 2014-06-17)This report was produced for the Global Program on Forced Displacement and describes why and how to conduct political economy analysis (PEA) of forced displacement. It also illustrates how PEA may contribute to understanding forced displacement crises with nine case studies: Casamance (Senegal), Colombia, Cote dapos;Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, the Philippines, Somalia, South Sudan, and Zimbabwe. Forced displacement is understood here as a situation where persons are forced to leave or flee their homes due to conflict, violence, or human rights violations. The key elements of forced displacement PEAs include: i) a review of the historical context and displacement characteristics; ii) durable solutions prospects; iii) environmental, geographic, social, political, and economic drivers, constraints and opportunities; (iv) needs of the displaced and hosts; v) existing policies, government/institutional context, and operations; and vi) recommendations. Recommendations on development policies and programs that result from a PEA characteristically fall into at least four categories, namely: i) improving access to land, housing and property; ii) reestablishment of livelihoods; iii) improving delivery of services; and iv) strengthening accountable and responsible governance. PEAs of forced displacement analyze the contestation and distribution of power and resources along with the development challenges associated with forced displacement crises. By nature of their marginalization and the frequently protracted nature of their exile, the forcibly displaced are especially vulnerable as power and resources are disputed. The purpose of conducting a PEA on forced displacement is to inform policy dialogue and operations so that the interests of vulnerable forcibly displaced populations and their hosts are effectively accommodated in resource allocation decision-making and in poverty alleviation initiatives. From the earliest design phase to dissemination of the results, the PEA is essentially an exercise in effectively collecting relevant data, analyzing these, and then marketing the analysis and its operational implications to the right stakeholders. This report is intended to be an aid in navigating these decision points and activities and to encourage more frequent and better use of political economy analysis in evaluating and addressing forced displacement.Publication Financing Peace(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2010-10-06)After more than a decade of experience and research on financing arrangements in post conflict countries and fragile states, a consensus has emerged on at least one matter. The core objective is to build effective and legitimate governance structures that secure public confidence through provision of personal security, equal justice and the rule of law, economic well-being, and essential social services including education and health. These governance structures are necessary to ensure that countries do not turn, or turn back, to violence as a means of negotiating state-societal relations. This paper discusses a number of the weaknesses in current financing arrangements for post conflict countries and fragile states, with a focus on Official Development Assistance (ODA). We argue that tensions persist between business-as-usual development policies on the one hand and policies responsive to the demands of peace building on the other. The preferential allocation of aid to 'good performers,' in the name of maximizing its payoff in terms of economic growth, militates against aid to fragile and conflict-affected states. If the aim of aid is redefined to include durable peace, the conventional performance criteria for aid allocation lose much of their force. Compelling arguments can be made for assistance to 'poor performers' if this can help to prevent conflict. Yet the difficulties that initially prompted donors to become more selective in aid allocation remain all too real. Experience has shown that aid can exacerbate problems rather than solving them.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
No results found.