Conclusions: Embracing Affirmation

  • Jan PospisilEmail author
Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)


The provision of inclusionary hooks, creative non-solutions and efforts of disrelation are three promising pathways in pragmatic transitions in situations of formalised political unsettlement. These practices potentially enable to overcome the still predominant solution-based, outcome-focused perspective in peacebuilding and to move towards focusing on the transitional process. When utilising these components for regaining agency in peacebuilding’s current state of affirmation, serious normative questions invite further reflection. In particular, the relationship between pragmatism and the existing international normative and legal framework needs to be carefully considered. The conclusions suggest some principles that may support external engagement in navigating pragmatic transitions.


Peacebuilding Affirmation Conflict management Relational engagement Local turn Pragmatic peace Pragmatic transitions 


  1. Allen, Tim. 2007. Defending the ICC. Prospect Magazine, 134, 26 May.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, Mary B. 1999. Do No Harm: How Aid Can Support Peace—Or War. Boulder, CO and London: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  3. Bell, Christine. 2015. What We Talk About When We Talk About Political Settlements: Towards Inclusive and Open Political Settlements in an Era of Disillusionment. PSRP Working Paper No. 1. PSRP, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  4. Bush, Kenneth D., and Robert J. Opp. 1999. Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment. In Cultivating Peace: Conflict and Collaboration in Natural Resource Management, ed. Daniel Buckles, 185–202. Washington, DC: World Bank Institute, International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
  5. Dietrich, Wolfgang, and Wolfgang Sützl. 2006. A Call for Many Peaces. In Key Texts of Peace Studies, ed. Wolfgang Dietrich, Josefina Echavarría Alvarez, and Norbert Koppensteiner, 282–302. Vienna: Lit Verlag.Google Scholar
  6. Galtung, Johan. 1996. Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization. London and Thousand Oaks, CA, and New Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Gray, John. 2000. Two Faces of Liberalism. New York, NY: The New Press.Google Scholar
  8. King, Stephen D. 2018. Grave New World: The End of Globalization, the Return of History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Levy, Brian. 2014. Working with the Grain: Integrating Governance and Growth in Development Strategies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mac Ginty, Roger. 2012. Against Stabilization. Stability: International Journal of Security and Development 1 (1): 20–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. North, Douglass C. 1991. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Paris, Roland. 2004. At War’s End: Building Peace After Civil Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Schmidt, Jessica. 2013. The Empirical Falsity of the Human Subject: New Materialism, Climate Change and the Shared Critique of Artifice. Resilience: International Policies Practices and Discourses 1 (3): 174–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ASPR—Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict ResolutionViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations