News

ICTs, whole-of-society conflict prevention and peacebuilding and the EU

Jen Gaskell is a co-founder and co-director of Build Up and co-organiser of the Build Peace conference.
 
Build Up have been exploring the role and uses of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) for EU conflict prevention and peacebuilding for over a year and a half. After publishing a scoping study setting out our conceptual framings and definitions, we have undertaken to assess good practices in the field of ICTs and peacebuilding that would contribute to the overall evaluation. 
 
Why a whole-of-society approach?
A whole-of-society approach has both normative and operational dimensions. It means that peacebuilding and conflict prevention processes should be inclusive of a wide range of actors - and deals with the practicalities of making that happen. And this is an effective lens through which the nature of new ICTs and the impacts they have on peace and peacebuilding processes can be explored.
 
Traditionally ICTs in political contexts have been portrayed as a leveller - evening the playing field in a David versus Goliath narrative describing the relative positions of citizens and governments. This was most prominent in some of the earlier commentary on the Arab Spring and has led many to recognise the virtues of ICTs to topple oppressive regimes by giving the (wo)man on the street a voice and the ability to broadcast it to the world. While such portrayals have largely been abandoned or at least nuanced, the idea that technology can bring about change pervades. A whole-of-society approach allows us to explore the different ways different actors use ICTs - intentionally or not - the relationships between them and the consequences these may have.
 
Technology and peace
This idea of the role of technology itself in peacebuilding became a key discussion point during the roundtable event on ‘Uses of ICTs for Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding' which took place in Brussels on 23 June 2016.
 
Indeed one of the key reactions of the panelists and audience to the presentation by Build Up co-director Helena Puig Larrauri on peactech in policy and practice was that technology can never replace the critical trust-building that face to face interactions create. Interestingly though, there is some empirical evidence that technology-enabled projects are having real impacts, specifically where face-to-face interactions are not necessarily possible. Soliya's ‘Connect Program' for example brings students from across the Middle East, South Asia, Europe and North America in interactive, moderated online chatrooms for discussions aiming to ‘establish a deeper understanding for the perspectives of others around the world'. Evaluations of their work is showing to be affecting participants' empathy towards ‘others' during the program. Similarly organisations such as Sisi ni Amani and Una Hakika in Kenya that leverage new technologies (mobile phones, satellite imagery or drones) to prevent conflict by effectively and quickly dispelling untruthful, potentially incendiary rumours.
 
And so it seems that the reaction of the Brussels Roundtable participants speaks to a wider issue often not addressed in those conversations - technology in and of itself will do very little, certainly not bring peace. But the fact remains that ICTs penetration is growing, and fast. And that this is effectively changing the environment in conflict and post-conflict contexts. So at the very least, it is important to understand how peace and conflict actors are using these technologies, and how they can be leveraged to enhance and complement peacebuilding processes.
 
What next?
A focus on uses of technologies by different actors is enriched by a whole-of-society approach, particularly for an organisation like the EU engaged at all socio-political levels of peacebuilding work. As Peter Borsen, External Relations and Europe Director at the European Institute of Peacebuilding, stated at the Brussels ICTs Roundtable, it is important to broaden the review of peacetech practice beyond civil society organisations, as governments can also be seen to engage in that practice for example when they counter extremism on the web. And this perhaps one of the biggest contribution of a whole-of-society perspective to an evaluation of EU ICTs and peacebuilding capabilities. It points to the need to look at practices (uses) of a wide range of peacebuilding actors (local, government, international) with the understanding that these will vary according to institutional capabilities, contextual considerations and power dynamics. This in turns informs the range of strategies that the EU can consider when developing its ICTs and peacebuilding capabilities.
 

Videos

Improving EU Peacebuilding & Conflict Prevention

Why is Local Ownership to Peacebuilding Important?

Mary Martin on the Whole-of-Society Approach