Planned Interventions and Piecemeal Peace-making

Karen Trew, Evanthia Lyons, & Christopher Cohrs

CResPP, School of Psychology

Queen’s University Belfast

Research, policy and practice

There is a fundamental divide existing between scholars, our traditional research providers, and policy makers and practitioners, particularly in the field of conflict prevention and management. (Fitzduff, 2000)

One could draw a contrast with the last round of troubles in Ireland, in 1916-23. Then there were no academic researchers, roaming the country. There were no political scientists making elite studies, no social psychologists carrying out attitude surveys, no anthropologists studying specific communities. But the people muddled through to some kind of settlement, and indeed took considerably less long than this time around. From Irish experience one might deduce that research actually does harm: that the more work is done on a problem, the longer it takes to solve it. (John Whyte , 1983: Is Research on the Northern Ireland problem worthwhile?)

Why research?

Whyte (1983) suggested: Hope of influencing policy aiding future generations of scholars testing general theories

Opportunity for psychology to be involved in peace-building policy and practice

Background

Relevant psychological research in Northern Ireland: 1969-2000

The focus of current psychological research Overview of peace-building achievements

5

Background:Historical role of psychologists

Little research before 1980 Interventions

• Workshops (Doob & Foltz, 1973, 1974) – Tavistock approach; American ‘academic tourists’

Focus on children Impact of Integrated schools Impact of community relations holiday projects

(in USA, in camps) Research on social categorisation and

development of social identity

Background: Examples of current psychological research

Social identity and intergroup relations ( e.g. multiple identities; intergroup trust and forgiveness; impact of contact; mediators and moderators of contact; impact and nature of integrated education; development of sectarian identities; meaning and content of socio-political identities, etc)

Coping with conflict (e.g. PTSD; well-being & identity; victims)

Perceptions of conflict and collective memories (e.g. patterns of collective memory; impact of media on knowledge and memory)

Main focus on individual as member of group but little research on societal factors such as community and ideology

Background: Peace-building

Good Friday/Belfast agreement (1998)/ St Andrew’s agreement (2006) Shared government (or shared out)?

Positive changes Legal changes and new institutions have reduced inequalities in

material distribution employment, housing welfare and income Decommissioning and de-militarisation reduced violence

Ongoing but not completed changes A Shared Future (published proposal) Victim policy Bloody Sunday Inquiry to be reported Policing reform

Projects which are not yet priorities Limited focus on truth and justice issues and promoting shared

identity and common symbols

Background:Funding & Reconciliation

Core funding from British and Irish governments

Specific large scale projects and programmes (funded by Ireland Fund and large charitable trusts, British lottery, major peace charities etc

The EU Programme for peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland and the Border Region of Ireland (over €2,000 million) PEACE I 1995 (€536 million)

Capacity-building philosophy - 13,000 projects PEACE II 2000 (€707 million)

Economically and job-creation focused - 5,000 projects PEACE II+ extension of Peace II to 2006 (€120 million)

Focused on reconciliation, and narrower project base – adopted Hamber & Kelly reconciliation definition based on research

PEACE III 2007-2013 (€433 million) Renewed emphasis on reconciliation More strategic approach based on local peace and reconciliation plans Retains strong emphasis on ‘grass roots up’ approach to development

Background: Overview

In Northern Ireland, there have been recent large scale research projects on social psychological dimensions of reconciliation such as trust, forgiveness, contact.

Individual psychologists are involved in training, evaluation and planning peacemaking policy and reconciliation projects

BUT There is little evidence of psychological theory or

explicit accounts of processes of change in the academic and official literature on the peace process or in the accounts of individual projects.

Questions arising from gap between research and practice

Why is there a problem for psychology?

Why has psychological research and theory not been more influential?

How can psychological theory and research become more involved in peace-building?

Question 1: Why is there a problem for psychology?

Useful social psychological ideas and expertise are overlooked by practitioners and policy makers.

By not engaging with real life problems psychologists do not have the opportunity to test their theories in the real world and therefore do not learn.

Hinders attraction of resources and students. 

12

Question 2: Why has psychological research and theory

not been more influential?

General concern (also in education, health etc) Timing Lack of consensus etc

Specific to psychology Discipline structure: Applied topics low status and journals low impact Evaluation of research by RAE and funders Our theories not easily communicable and applied especially if they are

complex and multi-layered Much psychology essentialist and therefore does not promote a focus

on variable change Unwillingness of social psychologists to engage or move from neutral

scientist etc Northern Ireland

Psychologists’ definitions of problems are narrow: Focus on individual beliefs

Question 3: How can psychological theory and research become more

involved in peace-building?

Employ methodological expertise e.g. contribute to evidence based practice (e.g. random control trials;

development of appropriate outcome measures such as measures of respect etc; use of qualitative approaches in a systematic way)

Develop partnerships and networks to: Strengthen communication channels with practitioners and policy makers Develop partnerships with practitioners to take account of their expertise and

localized knowledge Provide new perspectives to make explicit social psychological processes

contributing to reconciliation such as: Leadership roles and rhetoric (Rosler, 2009) The process of change and its concomitants (Shapiro, 2006) The function of community social norms and of societal beliefs and the

development of an ethos of peace (e.g. Bar-Tal & Halperin , 2009)

You cannot win hearts and minds without understanding social psychological processes of peace building