Macro-Conflict Analysis

  • Objective: To provide not only a better context understanding, but also an understanding of the interaction between the intervention and the context.

What is Conflict?

According to GTZ (2002), conflict is defined as:

“A relationship between two or more interdependent parties in which at least one of the parties perceives the relationship to be negative or detects and pursues opposing interests and needs. Both parties are convinced that they are in the right. Conflict is an essential ingredient of social change. What is important is that conflicts should be solved in a peaceful and constructive manner.”

While this is a useful working definition, conflict is an ambiguous concept that takes on different meanings for different groups and in different contexts. There is no standard definition—different communities, donors, and organizations may all have a different view of what it is. Some definitions understand conflict as a negative phenomenon, synonymous with violence. But a broader approach to understanding conflict is also possible, recognizing that differences in interests and opinions between groups are natural and that conflict is present in every society.

The key question is how such differences are expressed and managed. Conflicts may be managed through structures, processes and mechanisms within society that enable the peaceful and constructive management of differences, for example, access to justice, or traditional community arbitration. Conflict becomes violent when parties no longer seek to attain their goals peacefully, but resort instead to violence in one form or another.

 

CARE and Conflict Analysis

Whether a Country Office intends to work directly on the causes of conflict or whether it is ensuring that all of its programming is based on a good understanding of the local conflict dynamics in each country, conflict analysis is an important step in project or program design. It is a key part of conflict sensitivity and can provide not only a better context understand, but also an understanding of the interaction between the intervention and the context.

Conflict analysis can be done at local community level, at provincial level, at national level, or at an international/regional level to capture cross-border dynamics. The issues and dynamics at the national level may be different from those at the local level. While the level of analysis should correspond to the level of programming intervention, good conflict analysis should also seek to find the links between the different levels and understand how they impact on one another. There are many different tools that can be used at each different level, and some are listed in the resources section below. This section focuses on guiding questions for macro (national or regional) conflict analysis.

CARE has not developed standard conflict tools or best practices that are in use across all Country Offices. Much of CARE’s macro conflict analysis is conducted ad hoc, as desk research, and often by consultants. While many of these analyses have been vital to informing CARE programming and program shift, there is also interest across CARE in exploring other macro tools with more emphasis on staff participation that may help in the design of conflict-sensitive programming—particularly in extremely fragile or complex contexts with cross-border and regional dynamics. World Vision has been using a set of conflict analysis tools known as Making Sense of Turbulent Contexts (MSTC), which uses an interactive and participatory workshop methodology to capture the economic and social dynamics of violence and conflict. This is included among the tools below, and, at writing, is being piloted within CARE.

However, Country Offices are mainly conducting conflict analyses to better understand the historical and structural drivers of violent conflict through more traditional desk reviews, key informant interviews and mapping. Recognizing that conflict analysis is still a fledgling field, this section provides some key concepts and questions that should be covered in these analyses, however they are conducted.

 

Analyzing Conflict

Conflict analysis is the systematic study of the profile, causes, actors, and dynamics of conflict. At the macro level, this involves understanding long-term, cyclical and political characteristics of contexts chronically affected by conflict. Understanding conflict is about understanding the background and historical trends/context of a situation, along with the key stakeholders and their views within a given context. However, conflict analysis can be carried out at various levels (community, regional, national) and the issues and dynamics at the national level may be different from those at the local level. It is important to determine the linkages between levels of conflict dynamics as a part of the analysis process.

While conflict is natural and can catalyze positive change, the key question is what drives conflict to escalate into violence. There is an increasing consensus that developmental “business as usual” often exacerbates the situation. It is important to develop a strategy that is sensitive to the conflict environment, and takes into account the underlying causes of conflict and how they can best be addressed.

Related Tools

View more tools related to:

Categories of Conflict (CARE DRC)

Conflict rooted in interests:
Either material (wealth, resources) or immaterial (benefits, authority, respect)

Conflicts due to competing values:
Based on competing ideologies, identity, etc.

Conflicts over means for resolution:
Where consensus in the identification of problems is agreed, but actors disagree on the means to resolve them.

False conflicts:
Conflicts that emerge due to miscommunication, lack of access to information or the development of stereotypes.

Sources of Information

  • Communities and beneficiaries
  • Informant interviews and key staff
  • News Sources
  • Literature on the conflict and interpretations of key trends, triggers, actors, etc., such as reports from International Crisis Group, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, OCHA and other UN situation reports, and analysis done by other agencies.
  • Customary law or policy documents
  • Cultural, anthropological and sociological literature focused on the people or context
  • Political-economy texts focused on the context
  • For global indicators: The Global Peace Index

Areas of Inquiry

Key domains of conflict analysis include:

  • Structures: Long-term factors underlying conflict (security, political, economic, social)
  • Actors: Their interests, capacities, agendas and incentives
  • Dynamics that characterize relations between actors, and in their interaction with structures that may escalate to trigger or perpetuate violent conflict, or to manage/mitigate conflict.

Structures

Actors

Dynamics

  • What are the key sources of tension that have led to, or are likely to lead to, open conflict?
  • What are trigger events that have led to violence in the past?

Possible approaches:

  • History of the conflict, with key turning points (e.g. See Figure 7: Conflict Timelines).
  • Mapping out and weighting, in terms of relative importance, the sources of tension and conflict. Identifying the linkages and connections between sources of tension in differentsectors and levels.
  • Developing, based on the above, an initial judgement of the key causes of conflict and tension. For example, inter-state tensions, failure of governance, growing exclusion.
  • Who are the key groups, individuals and institutions both contributing to the context and affected by it?
  • At what level (community or micro, meso, macro) are they active, and what are their relationships?It may be helpful to think across three categories of stakeholders:
    • Key questions that should be answered in an actor analysis include:
      • Who are the main actors?
      • What are their main interests, goals, positions, capacities, and relationships?
      • What are the institutional capacities for peace?
      • Are there spoilers? (e.g., groups benefiting from the conflict?)
    • Primary Stakeholders: those engaged in the conflict and actively associated with it or affected by it.
    • Secondary Stakeholders: those who are intermediaries in the conflict and can influence its trajectory (potential partners).
    • External stakeholders: those not directly involved in the conflict but who have interests concerning it.
Based on the analysis of structures and actors, it is possible to understand their interaction—or the conflict dynamics. It should be possible to start to see longer-term trends and triggers, and develop possible future scenarios.

It may also be useful to differentiate between:

  • Structural causes – embedded in policies, social norms or structures and other preconditions for conflict
  • Proximate causes – or accompanying factors like the proliferation of weapons or conflicts in neighboring countries that may further destabilize the region
  • Triggers – Key single events or acts that escalate violence like assassinations or a sudden natural disaster.

Methods

In Conflict Analysis, key methods to answer these questions include:

  • Making Sense of Turbulent Contexts: A tool developed over the past ten years by World Vision, MSTC is an intense participatory workshop that seeks to harness the collected wisdom of the participants, including NGO staff and trusted informants. MSTC aims to equip NGO staff to analyze and articulate the actors, symptoms, political economy, trends and triggers of ongoing and sometimes chronic political and economic instability. The outcomes of MSTC Analysis help NGO staff respond in the most effective and beneficial way. It looks across:
    • Trends/cycles of peace and conflict;
    • The political economy of a given context;
    • Stakeholder groups and their relations with one another; and
    • The symptoms, causes and drivers of conflict.
  • Stakeholder and Institution Mapping
  • Conflict-Partnership Matrix
  • Conflict Timeline
  • Root Causes Analysis
  • Positions-Interests-Needs (PIN) Analysis

 

Resources

  • S Cussen (2011). Conflict Analysis. From: Situational Analysis for Program Design: methods guidance for macro, meso and micro levels. CARE: East and Central Africa Regional Management Unit.

Sources Cited

  • P Clifford (2010). Conflict Analysis Tools. CARE South Sudan.
  • J Gouzou (2010). Analyse des conflits en République Démocratique du Congo (RDC). InDevelop-IPM for CARE DRC.
  • For a good basic field manual on tools and exercises for conflict analysis: S Fisher (2000). Working with Conflict. London: Zed Books.
  • WO Lowrey and Matthew JO Scott (2002). Making Sense of Turbulent Contexts. World Vision International.
  • International Alert (January 2010). Programming Framework for International Alert: design, monitoring and evaluation.
  • D Nyheim, M Leonhardt, C Gaigals (2001). Development in Conflict: A Seven Step Tool for Planners (version 1). FEWER, International Alert and Saferworld.
  • Anderson, M (1999). Do No Harm: How Aid Can Support Peace or War. Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Donor Guides

  • Forum on Early Warning and Early Response (1999). Conflict and Peace Analysis and Response Manual, 2nd Edition. London: FEWER.
  • J Goodhand, T Vaux and R Walker (2002). Conducting Conflict Assessment: Guiding Notes. DFID.
  • M Leonhardt (2001). Conflict Analysis for Project Planning and Management: A practical guideline. GTZ: Sector Project Crisis Prevention and Conflict Transformation, Division 43.
  • UNDP (2003). Peace and Development Analysis Resource Pack.
  • P Wam and S Sardesai (2002). Conflict Analysis Framework. World Bank: Conflict Prevention and Reconstruction Team, Social Development Department.
  • Office of Conflict Management and Mitigation (2004). Conducting a Conflict Assessment: A Framework for Analysis and Program Development.