Western Dissensus, Non-Western Consensus: A Q Study Into the Meanings of Peace

  • Gijsbert M. van Iterson ScholtenEmail author
Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)


This chapter reports the results from a Q study amongst professional peace practitioners. It introduces five different visions of peace, that are compared along the dimensions identified in Chap.  2. The main argument developed in the chapter is that rather than a (Western) liberal peace consensus, a non-Western consensus can be observed. According to most of the Lebanese and Mindanaoan interviewees, peace is a personal endeavour. The Dutch, on the other hand, are divided over all five visions.

The chapter also trims down the seven dimensions found in Chaps.  2,  3 and  4: ontology (whether peace is seen as a process or a goal); domain (whether it is a personal or a political objective), its embedding in individuals or institutions and the scope of a vision. These four dimensions make up the peace cube that is used in the rest of the book.


  1. Advisory Group of Experts (2015). The challenge of sustaining peace. Report of the Advisory Group of Experts for the 2015 Review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  2. Autesserre, S. (2010). The trouble with the Congo: Local violence and the failure of international peacebuilding. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Babo-Soares, D. (2004). “Nahe Biti: The philosophy and process of grassroots reconciliation (and justice) in East Timor.” The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 5(1): 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Björkdahl, A., K. Höglund, et al. (2016). Peacebuilding and friction: Global and local encounters in post conflict-societies. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Boege, V., M. A. Brown, et al. (2008). “States emerging from hybrid political orders: Pacific experiences The Australian Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies Occasional Papers Series.” Australian Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies. The Occasional Papers 10(11): 1–41.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, S. R. (1993). “A primer on Q methodology.” Operant Subjectivity 16(3/4): 91–138.Google Scholar
  7. Carothers, T. (1998). “The rule of law revival.” Foreign Affairs 77: 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chandler, D. (2017). Peacebuilding: The twenty years’ crisis, 1997–2017. Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Charbonneau, B. and G. Parent, Eds. (2013). Peacebuilding, memory and reconciliation: Bridging top-down and bottom-up approaches. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Davenport, C., E. Melander, et al. (2018). The peace continuum: What it is and how to study it. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. De Coning, C. (2018). “Adaptive peacebuilding.” International Affairs 94(2): 301–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. de Graaf, G. (2001). “Discourse theory and business ethics. The case of bankers’ conceptualizations of customers.” Journal of Business Ethics 31(4): 299–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De la Rey, C. and S. McKay (2006). “Peacebuilding as a gendered process.” Journal of Social Issues 62(1): 141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dietrich, W. (2012). Interpretations of peace in history and culture. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Firchow, P. (2018). Reclaiming everyday peace: Local voices in measurement and evaluation after war. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hilhorst, D. and M. Van Leeuwen (2005). “Grounding local peace organisations: A case study of Southern Sudan.” The Journal of Modern African Studies 43(4): 537–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Krijtenburg, F. (2007). Cultural ideologies of peace and conflict: A socio-cognitive study of Giryama discourse (Kenya). Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  18. Mac Ginty, R. (2010). “Hybrid peace: The interaction between top-down and bottom-up peace.” Security Dialogue 41(4): 391–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mac Ginty, R. (2011). International peacebuilding and local resistance: Hybrid forms of peace. New York and Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mac Ginty, R. (2013). “Indicators+: A proposal for everyday peace indicators.” Evaluation and Program Planning 36: 56–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mac Ginty, R. and P. Firchow (2016). “Top-down and bottom-up narratives of peace and conflict.” Politics 36(3): 308–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mac Ginty, R. and O. P. Richmond (2013). “The local turn in peace building: A critical agenda for peace.” Third World Quarterly 34(5): 763–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mac Ginty, R. and O. Richmond (2016). “The fallacy of constructing hybrid political orders: A reappraisal of the hybrid turn in peacebuilding.” International Peacekeeping 23(2): 219–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mahmoud, Y. and A. Makoond (2017). Sustaining peace: What does it mean in practice. Issue Brief. New York: International Peace Institute.Google Scholar
  25. Millar, G., J. Van Der Lijn, et al. (2013). “Peacebuilding plans and local reconfigurations: Frictions between imported processes and indigenous practices.” International Peacekeeping 20(2): 137–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Paarlberg-Kvam, K. (2018). “What’s to come is more complicated: Feminist visions of peace in Colombia.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 21(2): 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Paris, R. (2004). At war’s end: Building peace after civil conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Richmond, O. P. (2005). The transformation of peace. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Richmond, O. P. (2011). A post-liberal peace. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Richmond, O. P. (2013). “Peace formation and local infrastructures for peace.” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 38(4): 271–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Spivak, G. C. (1988). “Can the subaltern speak?” In Can the subaltern speak? Reflections on the history of an idea. New York: Columbia University Press: 21–78.Google Scholar
  32. Tadjbakhsh, S. and A. M. Chenoy (2012). Human security: Concepts and implications. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Tasew, B. (2009). “Metaphors of peace and violence in the folklore discourses of South-Western Ethiopia: A comparative study.” In Department of social and cultural anthropology. Amsterdam: VU University.Google Scholar
  34. Upham, F. (2010). “Mythmaking in the rule of law orthodoxy.” In Promoting the rule of law abroad: In search of knowledge. T. Carothers (Ed.). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press: 75–104.Google Scholar
  35. van Leeuwen, M., W. Verkoren, et al. (2012). “Thinking beyond the liberal peace: From utopia to heterotopias.” Acta Politica 47(3): 292–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Van Tongeren, P., M. O. Ojielo, et al. (2012). “The evolving landscape of infrastructures for peace.” Journal of Peacebuilding & Development 7(3): 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Von Clausewitz, C. (1984 [1832]). On war. Indexed edition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations