This chapter reviews decolonization in peacebuilding, critiquing Eurocentrism while suggesting pluriversal strategies.
This chapter reviews some of the decolonial theory that has had significant impact on thecurrent research that seeks to decolonize peace and conflict studies, as well as potentialpathways for the further decolonization of the field. Much decolonial research on peace andconflict studies has critiqued the Eurocentrism and universalism that persists in the globalpeacebuilding architecture. Research that comprises this decolonial turn in peace studies oftenimplements a pluriversal approach to conflict analysis and peacebuilding in opposition to theuniversalistic “expertise” through which Eurocentric peacebuilding often travels, as outlined inthis chapter. We connect pluriversal peace research to the decolonial potential of subalterncosmopolitanism, the latter of which is already underway and yet has seen little engagement inpeace and conflict studies. The emergent project of subaltern cosmopolitanism, along with thepluriversal and postabyssal way of thinking from which it issues, can support thedecolonization of the practice of peacebuilding, its institutional contexts, and its academicstudy. To demonstrate the practical importance of subaltern cosmopolitanism and indigenousepistemologies, this chapter highlights approaches to justice and reconciliation in Colombia andRwanda. We conclude by emphasizing some aspects of peace and conflict that could beillumined and problematized through further decolonial research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Golding et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: