Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Current peacebuilding debates centre around the idea that international and local activities need to be better aligned. However, the distinction between ‘local’ and ‘international’ actors and processes obscures both power and interest differentials among actors and the various interconnections between international, national and local actors and discourses. This article proposes stakeholder analysis as a way to help understand power relations among various actors. This approach is applied to an empirical sample of land conflicts in Cambodia, in which local residents saw their livelihoods threatened by collusion between international private investors and national and local political interests. The findings suggest that building peace in insecure settings is not just a matter of harmonising approaches to strengthen the state with initiatives to support local groups. The reflex of international peacebuilders to strengthen the state and promote the rule of law overlooks the fact that governments may be unaccountable and laws may be illegitimate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ngin et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: