Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
This introductory chapter provides an overview, main objectives, key arguments and the significance of the study. This book is a result of collective efforts by those who are interested in advancing the discourse on hybrid peacebuilding in Asia in two aspects. First, by drawing on a diverse array of relevant theoretical perspectives gained from the discussion on complexity, identity and feminism, it aims to operationalise hybrid peacebuilding theory from various perspectives of Asia, which was designed to serve as a descriptive lens to elucidate the dynamic and interactive nature of the process of hybridisation. This attempt is concurrently administered by a critical effort to refine the typology of the ‘local mid-space gatekeepers’ proposed in Hybrid Peacebuilding in Asia (Uesugi 2020). Second, by investing empirically the mechanism of hybridisation in the peacebuilding process in Cambodia and Mindanao, it seeks to demonstrate, without falling into the pitfalls of binary, how mid-space actors in these settings served or failed to serve as bridges to close cleavages in the conflict-affected society. These in-depth empirical findings are complemented by another set of case studies which focuses on two leading peacebuilding actors in Asia, China and Japan, to illustrate the need to expand the horizons of the research on hybrid peacebuilding to include the impact of non-Western approaches on the practice of peacebuilding.
This introductory chapter provides an overview, main objectives, key arguments and the significance of the study. This book is a result of collective efforts by those who are interested in advancing the discourse on hybrid peacebuilding in Asia in two aspects. First, by drawing on a diverse array of relevant theoretical perspectives gained from the discussion on complexity, identity and feminism, it aims to operationalise hybrid peacebuilding theory from various perspectives of Asia, which was designed to serve as a descriptive lens to elucidate the dynamic and interactive nature of the process of hybridisation. This attempt is concurrently administered by a critical effort to refine the typology of the ‘local mid-space gatekeepers’ proposed in Hybrid Peacebuilding in Asia (Uesugi 2020). Second, by investing empirically the mechanism of hybridisation in the peacebuilding process in Cambodia and Mindanao, it seeks to demonstrate, without falling into the pitfalls of binary, how mid-space actors in these settings served or failed to serve as bridges to close cleavages in the conflict-affected society. These in-depth empirical findings are complemented by another set of case studies which focuses on two leading peacebuilding actors in Asia, China and Japan, to illustrate the need to expand the horizons of the research on hybrid peacebuilding to include the impact of non-Western approaches on the practice of peacebuilding.
This opening literature review connects hybrid calls and criticisms to the development of peacebuilding debates at large. First, it briefly presents some of peacebuilding’s ontological aspects, as they may be found both in academia and practice. With such a contrasting framework at hand, the following section explains some core arguments in the existing literature in favour of adopting hybrid peacebuilding. Lastly, voices are raised to show how hybridity has been criticised both within its own circles and by others. Showcasing the various aspects of peacebuilding, and hybridity specifically, this chapter sets the stage for a new set of discussions in the subsequent chapters.
Complexity science provides us with a theoretical framework for understanding how complex social systems lapse into violent conflict, and how they can prevent, or recover from conflict. For a peace process to become self-sustainable, resilient social institutions need to emerge from within, i.e. from the culture, history and socio-economic context of the relevant society. International actors can assist and facilitate this process, but if they interfere too much, they will undermine the self-organising processes necessary to sustain resilient social institutions. Adaptive Peacebuilding navigates this hybrid peacebuilding dilemma with an adaptive methodology where peacebuilders, together with the communities and people affected by the conflict, actively engage in a structured process to sustain peace and resolve conflicts by employing an iterative process of learning and adaptation. A complexity informed approach to hybrid peacebuilding aims to safeguard, stimulate, facilitate and create the space for societies to develop resilient capacities for self-organisation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.