Peacebuilding 2.0: Mapping the Boundaries of an Expanding Field

Conclusion
Peacebuilding 2.0 recognizes that the field is not a single silo of
peacebuilding actors but rather a rich mosaic of interlocking institutions
whose work in concert can be far more effective than any single
organization working alone.
Peacebuilding 2.0 encompasses new ideas of
“wholeness” and systems thinking and envisions
harnessing technology in creative and innovative ways
in order to share data and information in conflict zones.
Under Peacebuilding 2.0, organizations must learn
to speak each other’s language and understand each
other’s modalities for intervening in conflict to find new
ways of collaborating for greater impact. Yet, we still
need to learn a great deal about the theory and practice
of these new, cross-sectoral practices. Universities must
cross their own disciplinary lines, and practitioners
must reach outside their comfort zones, to find creative
paths toward peace in volatile regions. Even groups
working outside the peacebuilding field must use a
conflict lens to examine all their interventions in fragile
situations, ensuring that they “do no harm” while doing
good. Whether describing a development organization
that builds water systems using a consensus process
among village leaders or a doctor who makes sure that
a polio vaccination program does not stir up resentment
or political violence, Peacebuilding 2.0 offers an
expansive vision for change.
Note, however, that this report focuses on the US
peacebuilding field and barely scratches the surface
of the international peacebuilding community,
which, of course, intersects with a vast range of other
regional and international organizations. Questions
of how international peacebuilding organizations
align their interests and collaborate with local civil
society organizations in conflict zones constitute
fertile ground for study. Furthermore, analysis of how
the international peacebuilding field—writ large—
intersects with global, regional and local actors would
offer fruitful insight into the shape of the global
peacebuilding community. An important component of
Peacebuilding 2.0 will be the coordination of this larger
community, with a special focus on how international
civil society meshes with local peacebuilding efforts in
conflict areas around the world.
In the meantime, the US peacebuilding community
has much work to do in restructuring its practices and
aligning its ambitions to achieve the substantive impact
envisioned in Peacebuilding 2.0. In addition to the
44 PEACEBUILDING 2.0 Mapping the Boundaries of an Expanding Field