Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Rehabilitation after violent conflict is today relevant to many countries - especially but not only in SSA - and hopefully will become so for more. It is in generally too narrowly specified, too short term and too fragmented with no macro strategic or conceptual frame. Further it is usually based on quite inadequate knowledge of the history, priorities and dynamics of the afflicted country. Rehabilitation has-or should have-interacting economic (especially livelihood rebuilding), social (stress and perceived inequity reducing) and political (reconciliation and legitimacy restoration not least by rehabilitating basic service access including user friendly, personal security oriented civil police and magistrates courts system). In severely war impacted countries these are likely to be among the most economically efficient ways to regaining growth and restructured economic development as well as of rebuilding social and political reconcilliation and religitimisation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Reginald Herbold Green (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: