bridging the gap: rhetoric and practice in security & rule ... the gap... · bridging the gap...

BridgingtheGap:RhetoricandPracticeinSecurity&RuleofLaw7thAnnualConferenceSummaryReport|December2019

AcknowledgementsTheSecretariatof theKnowledgePlatformSecurityandRuleof Lawwould

like to thank some of the individuals and teams that contributed to the

success of the 2019 Annual Conference. Thank you to our designers,

Lammert Jonkman and Errol Konat, for their creative energy and thehard

workthatwent into thedesignof theAnnualConference.MarijeSantand

the Congress by Design teamwere a tremendous help in the registration

and organization of the event. Mariska Kerpel photographed the Annual

Conferencebeautifully and captured the uniquemomentsof learning that

tookplace throughout the day. Galin Shopov,our videographer andvideo

editor, created the Annual Conference Video that recapped our signature

event, with the additional help of his colleague, Natália Lienerova, who

conducted the interviews in thevideo.Thankyou to all of the interns and

colleagueswho tooknotes throughout the day tomake sureeach session

receivedthoroughcoverage.Weappreciate thehospitality fromour venue

hosts at the COMM Museum, now known as “Beeld en Geluid”, in The

Hague.Lastbutnotleast,wewanttothankournetworkmembersforyour

activeparticipation,creativeideas,commitmentto learningandwillingness

to engage in dialogue at every event we hold.We appreciate everyone’s

dedicatedeffortstoensuringtheConferencewasoneofourbestyet.

AnnualConferenceReport2019BridgingtheGap

Chapter1

Introduction

The Knowledge Platform Security & Rule of Law brings together practitioners,researchers,andpolicymakersworkinginthefieldofSecurity&RuleofLaw(SRoL).We are a vibrant network of over 2,500 experts working on generating, sharing,interrogatingandapplyingevidencetostrengthenSRoLpolicyandprograms,makingthemmore efficient, effective and people-centered. At the heart of our collectivemission, is the desire to improve the learning capacity and knowledge base of theSRoLsector.

TheAnnualConferenceisoursignatureevent,whichweholdeachyeartoenableournetworkparticipantstoshowcasetheirlatestideas,mostrevelatorydiscoveriesandfreshest initiatives. Every year, we hope this day is seized by all attendees tochallenge themselves and one another, to set aside assumptions and be open todifferent perspectives, and to establish partnerships even with unexpectedcollaborators.


Thethemeoftheday:BridgingtheGap“BridgingtheGap”speakstoakindof‘tension’thatexistsinoursector.Whileweareworking diligently,we are not always living up to ourwords, our goals, our policyrhetoric,andourcommitments.Theday focusedon the gaps that exist betweenour aspirations for the Security&Ruleof Law sector andhow things actually operate.Our speakers andparticipantsfelt challenged to be bold and honest in discussing these gaps, specifically in thefollowingareas:1. Partnership&Power:wemustworktogether,butwedon’talwaysacknowledge

powerimbalances2. Learning& Innovation: thebestwayto learncanbethroughfailure; it requires

risk&investment3. Rhetoric&Policy:SRoLpolicyrhetoricreflectsvisionandambition,butthepolicy

andpracticeoftenfallsshort

Aimsofthe2019AnnualConference:

• Bring together our community to exchange insights, share new evidence anddata,andtochallengeoneanothertostrengthencurrentSecurity&RuleofLaw(SRoL)policy&practice

• Mobilizenationalandinternationalparticipantstoforgenewcollaborationsandpursueinnovativeideasinthespiritofequalpartnerships

• Encourage attendees to embrace the obstacles,missteps and failures that canleadtoreallearning,asanecessarypartofclosingthegapbetweenourrhetoricandpractice

Participants worked in different workshops and sessions, designed to go beyondsimply ‘describing’ thegaps identified.Rather, thesessionsdelveddeeper intowhy


thesegapsexistandpersist.Attendeeswereasked intheOpeningPlenarytofocusonthefollowingkeyquestionsthroughouttheday:

• Whatarethedeeperpoliticalorstructuralfactorsthatcreate,contributeto,

andperpetuatethesegaps?

• How can I, as an individual – but also as amember of an organization, anempoweredgroup,oracommunityofaction–worktoaddressthegap?

Practicalinformationabouttheday:

On10October2019,theAnnualConferencetookplaceattheCOMMMuseum,nowknownas“BeeldenGeluid”,inTheHague.BeeldenGeluidisconvenientlylocatedinthecenterofTheHague,astone’sthrowfromthePeacePalace.After the morning Opening Plenary, the AnnualConferencewasorganized into fivebreakout rooms for18 sessions to takeplace throughout theday,with fivesessions taking place simultaneously for most of theevent.This year, to review the conference agenda, timetable,create a personalized schedule for the day, view theinteractive venue map, message and set up meetingswith other attendees, and find links to social mediaplatforms, we created an Annual Conference App. Wewerehappyto learnthat themajorityofourattendeesreviewed the App positively in the post-Conferencesurvey.SurveyData:

DisseminatedviatheAnnualConferenceAppande-mail,thepost-Conferencesurveygathereddata from98 respondents this year.Overall, theeventwas rateda4.2/5average - a score that we are both proud of and eager to continue to improve.Participants seemed quite happy with the opportunities to network, the clarity ofinformation,andthevenue&cateringquality.The majority were initially inspired to attend the Annual Conference because thesession topicsand theconference themewere relevant to theirwork,andbecausetheyhadthedesiretosimplymeetpeopleinthenetwork.80%ofoursurveytakersfelt that they learned something the day of the Conference that made themreconsider their assumptions or ideas. 84% felt that they would follow up withsomeonenewthattheymetatourevent.


Chapter2

Who was there?

Diversityofaudience,diversityofthought

Each year, we strive to expand the reach of our Annual Conference to attract adiverseaudienceofpractitioners,researchersandpolicymakersworkinginthefieldsofsecurityandruleoflaw.WealwaysmakeaconcertedefforttoexpandbeyondtheDutch borders, involving experts from other parts of Europe, Africa, Asia, NorthAmerica and beyond, with the hope of including representative experiences andultimatelybreakingoutofourechochambers.Togetherwithgeographicdiversity,twootherdimensionsofdiversitythatwetrytoensurearegenderrepresentationandprofessionalexpertise.


Geography:Thisyearwewelcomedparticipantsfrom52differentcountries,a19%increasefromlastyear’sAnnualConference.Ofthe52countriesrepresentedattheConference,37werefromnon-EUcountries.Outofourtotalnumberofparticipantsinattendance,approximately 21% were from the Global South. While the most representedcountry at the Conference was the Netherlands, this year we were excited towelcomemoreguestsfromfurtheraway,suchasBrazil,theDemocraticRepublicoftheCongo,China,Iraq,Kyrgyzstan,Curaçao,Myanmar,SierraLeoneandZimbabwe.Women’sParticipation:This year therewere52%women represented attheAnnualConference,whichwehavetakennoteisslightlylowerthanlastyear’s57%.TheOpeningPlenaryhowever,wasentirely ledbywomen thisyear, as we welcomed Marriët Schuurman,Director of Department of Stabilization &Humanitarian Aid (Dutch Ministry of ForeignAffairs) topresentheropening remarks, followedby our Keynote Speaker, Dr. Priscilla Schwartz,AttorneyGeneralandMinisterof JusticeofSierraLeone, and Irene Khan, Director of InternationalDevelopment Law Organization, who concludedthe Opening Plenary by joining in conversationwithDr.Schwartz.


ProfessionalExpertise:The majority of this year’s Conferenceparticipants registered themselves aspractitioners,at41%.Wewereveryhappyto see our participants from the policycommunityincreasefromlastyear,to32%thisyear.Researchersremainthefewestinnumbers at 26%, however we did see aslight increase in representation from lastyear. Overall, we are moving in thedirection of an increasingly balancedprofessional expertise composition, andwewill continue towork toward thisgoalfornextyear.


Chapter 3

The Sessions

OpeningPlenary

Asearliermentioned,theOpeningPlenarythisyearwasentirelyledbywomen.Aftera warm welcome address by Platform Secretariat Head of Office, Megan Price,Marriët Schuurman, Director of Department of Stabilization & Humanitarian Aid(DutchMinistryof ForeignAffairs) presentedheropening remarks.Her candid andreflectivespeechsetthetonefortherestoftheConference,challengingparticipantstoboldlyspeakupaboutthegapsthatexistintheirrespectivesectors.


KeynoteAddressMrs.SchuurmanintroducedtothestagetheKeynoteSpeaker,Dr.PriscillaSchwartz,Attorney General and Minister of Justice of Sierra Leone, where Dr. Schwartzcontinued the tone-setting for the learning that would take place throughout theday. The theme of her keynote address was rhetoric on local ownership andaccountability,inrelationtoactualpracticeand“bridgingthegap”.Theaddresswasstructuredintofourparts:1)issuesoflocalornationalownership,2)theimportanceandvalueof localownershipdrawingexamplesfromSierraLeone,3)thedilemmasandobstaclesthatimpede‘localownership’and4)explainingwhatmixoflocalandinternational ownership will produce sustainable gains in ‘bridging the gap’. Areaswhere Dr. Schwartz concluded we must focus our efforts and work togetherinternationally are on data, gathering evidence of what works and onmaking thecaseandmobilizingtheinvestmentsthatarenecessaryforsuccess.

“Countriesdonothavehearts,buttheyhavebravepeoplewhocarry their hearts to defend the rights of the poor, thevulnerable, the disadvantaged and the oppressed in societiesacross theworld. This is local ownership; this is accountability;andthisisbridgingthegap!”

–Dr.PriscillaSchwartzFollowing the keynote address, Dr. Priscilla Schwartz was joined by Irene Khan,Director of International Development Law Organization. The discussion betweenIrene Khan and Dr. Schwartz highlighted and flagged some ofmost the importantgapsthatexistinthejusticesector,includingthegendergapthatexistswithregardto who holds seats of power. The three speakers who opened the AnnualConferencewereregardedasthehighlightofthedayformanywhoparticipated in


taking the post-Conference survey, noting that the speakers presented concretelyandwithpassion.Therewere fivebreakout rooms inwhich the18AnnualConference sessionswereheld throughout the day. These room are: Plenary Room, Newsroom, Lab, CommMeetandCommCreate.Whattopicswerepresentedinthesessionsandbywhom?

WorkingPrinciplesforDevelopingRoLContextsAnneMarieBrinkman&DouweBuis,BureauEnsemble

Keyarguments:In the discussions that took place in this session, participants learned thatwhen itcomes to research, the aim is not just to generate more knowledge, but also toconsider the consequences for policymakers. It is too easy for policymakers to tellresearchers,“Wealreadyknowthat”;thereneedstobemorepersonalinvolvementonthepartofpolicymakers.Researchexistinginandofitselfhasbecomeanexcusenottoact,becauseitisnotbeingpairedwitheffectiveaction.Bureau Ensemble proposed 5 working principles for policymakers and researchersalike:

1) Breakingdowncomplexity2) Stackingcommunication3) Gatheringcreativity4) Seekingconsensus5) Committoaction

This sessionwasanopeninvitation tojoin the Bureau Ensemble team inlooking for informed divergence ofexisting routes in policy-making &implementation through acombination of five perspectives:breaking complexity down, stackingcommunication; gathering creativity;seeking consensus; commitment toaction. Based on insights fromresearch in Libya, Mali and Niger onthe role of traditional authorities instabilizing the complex context in theSahel,theaimwasnottocallfora‘system innovation’, but rather for incremental adjustment fueled by thereflectionsandfollow-upactionsoftheinvolvedprofessionals.Whatdoesitmeanto be a policy-maker or implementer and how does that affect your ability tocontributetochangeprocesses?


Maingapsoutlined:Themaingaps identifiedbysessionparticipantsvaried,butoneofthebiggestgapsthatwasraisedexistsbetweenthepractitionersandthedonors.Somefoundthatonpaper, projects are seemingly perfect, but the reality is far different for thepractitioners.Othersfeltthereisaproblemwithselectiveresearch,wheredonorsorpractitioners/policymakers will only commission research that supports theirprogram or identifies a convenient problem. When discussing the differencesbetween research and practitioner roles, session participants discussed howresearcherscananalyzeasituationandbeexplicitabouthowbadorhopeless it is,meanwhilepractitionersstillneedtotrytofindawaytoworkwithinsuchconditions.Recommendations/findings:Aftergroupworktookplaceinthesession,theparticipantsreconvenedtodiscusstherecommendationsandfindingsfromtheirconversations.Someoftheoutcomesincludethefollowing:

• Thereneedstobeacultureoflearningfromeachotherwithinthissector–whetherdonors,researchersorpractitioners.Onlythroughlearningcanreallyinnovativeprojectsbecreated

• Trustistheessentialcomponentbetweenallelementsofthedonor-researcher-practitionerrelationship.Itcantakeoveradecadeforsufficienttrusttobeestablishedbeforeaneffectiveworkingrelationshipcanexist

Co-creation:BridgingResearch,Policy&Practice?DavidBetge,ZOA/FaisalKhan,ICCT/DanielBlocq,EmpatixJairvanderLijn,SIPRI/CatrienBijleveld,NSCR

Security & Rule of Law research,policy and practice sometimesseemtwoworldsapart,whiletheyshould beofmutualvalue.Duringthis session, stakeholders fromdifferentbackgroundsreflectedonand discussed the enabling anddisabling factors of a co-creationapproach when it comes tobridginggapsbetweentheoryandpractice. The focus was on threegaps: External interventions &Local perceptions, Practice &Science,andKnowledge&Change.Participants were invited to share and reflect on how a co-creation approach to

policy-orientedresearchcancontributetofillingthesegaps


Keyarguments:Theobjectiveofthissessionwastoexploreif/howtheco-creationapproachcanhelpbridge gaps between policy, practice and research. The definition of ‘co-creation’that is used in ARF6 calls for proposals is based on the idea that differentstakeholdersareinvolvedatdifferenttimes.Theideaisthatpractitionerswillbeableto have better, more evidence-based policies. Together, practitioners andresearchers define and conduct research aswell as communicate on progress andresults, in order to produce jointly valued outcomes. One lesson learned when itcomestoco-creationisthatitisnotnecessarilyaboutbalanceofpowerandallbeingequal–itismoreaboutcomplementingpowers.Maingapsoutlined:Thethreemaingaps identified inthissessionweregeneratedfromthegroupworkdiscussions.Thefirstgapaddressesthefactthatexternalinterventionsoftendonottakeintoaccountorincludethediversityoflocalpractitioners.Thesecondgapisthatstakeholders (research and practice) are not convinced of the mutual benefits ofcollaboration. The third gapnotes that the creationof knowledgedoesnot alwaysleadtowarduptakeandchange.Recommendations/findings:After groupwork took place in the session, the participants reconvened to discusstherecommendationsandfindingsfromtheirconversations.Someoftheoutcomesincludefromthedifferentgroupsincludethefollowing:

• Local perceptions can be a big ‘rabbit hole’ of different perceptions. Co-creationcanbeveryhelpful,butyoucanalsofalldownintotherabbithole;as a researcher you can never get started. At the local level there aregatekeepers and local NGOs etc. that might see different things andpriorities.Themainchallengeofco-creationisthatiscancausealotofdelay.Operationalizing co-creation involvedbringingalldifferentparties together.The key benefit of co-creation is that it can create an atmosphere wherepolicy advisors will come back to meet and consult at a local level. Localauthorities,inturn,recognizetheirpowerandpotential

• Co-creation is not a ‘shop front’, but should be there at every stage. Weshould heed the poor balance between academics and practitioners. Co-creationrequiresattention,timeandmoney

• Uptakehappensondifferentlevels–uptakeonthegroundneedsadifferentstrategythanforexampleat theUN level.Localownership is important foruptake that takes place on the ground. An unresolved question that aroseafter this particular discussion was, “Should knowledge really lead tochange?”


MakingDevelopmentProgramsPVESensitiveSudiSuleiman,FiavanderKlugt&JeroenMuntinga,MFA/FulcovanDeventer,HumanSecurityCollective

LessPretension,MoreRealism:EvaluatingPrograms&PartnershipsMarriëtSchuurman,RensWillems&WilmavanEsch,MFARemcovanderVeen,Cordaid/MarijkeTwerda,NetherlandsRedCross

The Netherlands Ministry of ForeignAffairs has built a toolkit to facilitate thedesign of development programs inenvironments of violent extremism. Ithelps to enhance conflict sensitivity, toimprove risk management and analyzeroot causes of violent extremism from aconflict transformation perspective. Thetoolkit can also be seen as an innovativemodality to enable and encouragelearning. It helps policy officers andpractitionerstothinkbeyondthetraditionalpillarsofdevelopmentandsecurityandprovidesguidingsteps forPVEprogramming. During this session, the speakers explained the background of thetoolkitandexchangedexperienceswithparticipantsonitsimplementation.

The Policy and OperationsEvaluation Department (knownby its Dutch acronym, IOB)recentlypublishedanevaluationof three important programsunder the policy priority,Security and Rule of Law:Reconstruction Program, theStrategic Partnerships ChronicCrises Program and theAddressing Root Causes TenderProcess. IOB’S report containslessons and recommendationsthathaveawiderbearingon

formulating program and policies for addressing the root causes of conflictaimed at providing sustainable benefits to vulnerable people in situations ofinsecurity.Inthissession,participantsdiscussedthemaininsightsemergingfromtheevaluation,andwhateachparty involvedcando to facilitatethenecessarychanges.


Keyarguments:One of the key statements that the NetherlandsMinistry of Foreign Affairs madeclear was that it will take the outcomes of the evaluation – and the lessonsincorporated in it – toheart, focusing specifically on thequestionhow to enhancelearning.Itisevidentthatthereisaneedtodefinemorerealisticambitions–andtoapplymore focus in theprogramming,allowing formorecapacity toactually learn.Ultimately,weneedtomovetowardsM&Eforlearninginsteadofforaccountability.KPSRL plays key role in that. Fun and failure is required, and learning should beincorporatedinaniterativeprocess.The MFA underlined that contracts are based on proposals. If proposals‘overpromise’thenorganisationswillbeheldaccountabletothatasthatwillbethecentral element of the contract. However, if the proposal underlines the need forlearning, then that will be the central element of the contract – and not just theaccountabilityissue.TheMFAdoesnotshutthedoorwhensomeonecomestothemand says “it’s not working – we have to adjust the programme”. Contracts andprogrammes can be adjusted (and have been adjusted in the past) – so what isstoppingimplementingorganizationstodoso?Maingapsoutlined:One of the main gaps outlined was discussed in terms of ‘fragmentation’. It wasunderlined that there needs to be a more honest debate about fragmentation,specificallywithafocusatthecountrylevelinordertokeepthedebateconcreteandpractical.Therealityisthatatthemoment,theMFAfundstoomanydistinctprojects–notinacoordinatedmanner.Thisispartlytheresultofprojectsbeingfundedoutofdifferentbudgetlines,andpartlytheresultoftheembassiesnotbeingabletoplayacoordinatingrole indevelopingthecountryprogramming.Thekeychallenge is toget to more comprehensive country programs – and embassies have to be keypartnersinthat.AnothergapdiscussedistheneedtocreateanewframeworkthatallowsNGOs tochange theexistingcontractmodalitiesandpartnerships theyhavewithlocalpartners.ThiswillrequireaconversationwiththeMFA,inordertocreateasharedsenseof‘ownership’oversuchnewmodalities.Recommendations/findings:Overall,therewasagreementonthefactthatresultsframeworksandlogframestaketoomuchtimeandcapacity,anddon’tprovidetheflexibilityrequirednorservetheneedsofParliaments.Whatisneededishuman-intereststoriesontheonehand,andsolidresearchprovidingevidenceontheother.However,itisimportanttoacknowledgethatthecurrentpaperrealitiescomeoutofthefactthatsomefundshavebeenmisused.Howdowecreateaspacetoreallyholdpeopleaccountabletolearning?Itwasalsounderlinedthatthereisacultureunderliningtheneedtospendthebulkofthemoneyinthefieldon‘actual’activities–whichleadstoapushbackwithinorganisationstospendtoomuchmoneyonlearningasthisisseenasan‘extra’activity–notaspartandparcelinachievingtheresultsandhavinganimpact.It’sthisnotionthathastobecentralinthedebatemovingforward.


After4YearsofSDG16+:HowtoAccelerateLocalImpact?PetervanSluijs,Cordaid/WilmavanEsch,MFA/WouterDol,NIMD/PascalRichard,GPPAC/KatieDavis,HiiL

Keyarguments:During the session, participants emphasized that speaking about SDG16+ meanstaking part in a multi-level conversation that requires a holistic, yet concreteapproach. SDG16+ has to be kept on the global political agenda and, at the sametime, implemented locally through innovative strategies, effectiveuseof (financial)resourcesanddynamicpartnerships.Buthowtobestgoaboutthis?BecauseSDG16+isfundamentaltoallothergoals(forinstanceinpeacefulsocietiesiseasier to tackle climate change), it also remains intangible. Its local, contextualimplementationthereforerequiresactions fromdifferentactors,ondifferent levelsthrough different strategies. In this process, collaboration between civil societyorganizations, local NGOs, decision-makers and the private sector is needed. Theinclusion of civil society into institutionalized SDG processes (i.e. preparations ofVNRs)alsoopenspacefordialoguesbetweengovernmentanditspopulation.Maingapsoutlined:Therewerenumerousgaps identifiedduringthissession,onebeingagapbetweendatacollectionanddatadelivery.IntheprocessoftranslatingthegoalsandtrackingtheprogressofSDG16+,manydataarenotmeasuredorprovided.Areasonforthis,isthelackofpartnershipsandconcretedialoguebetweenlocalcommunitiesandcivilsociety and policy-makers. Themeaningful local implementation of SDG16+,whichshouldbea“people-goal”,issloweddownand,byimplication,peopleonthegroundarenegativelyaffected.

After four years of SustainableDevelopment Goals (SDG) the UnitedNationsSDG-reviewaimsatmobilizing'further actions to accelerateimplementation'.The2019SDGreportnotes that progress on SDG 16+ andrealizing 'peaceful, just and inclusivesocieties is still a longwayoff’.This isworrisome; delivery on SDG16+impactsprogressonallgoals,afterall.Actors working on peace, justice andinclusion must reflect on how toexpedite implementation.This sessionoffered a space for a joint civilsocietyand government rethink of actions needed to accelerate progress on SDG 16+targetswheretheymattermost:atnationalandsub-nationallevels.


Anothergapwasthe“justicegap”andthereforeagapbetweenwhatSDG16+aimstoachieve(peace,justiceandinclusion)andhowit isactuallyperforming.Researchshowsthattherearestill1.5billionpeoplewhodonothaveaccesstojustice.Whatisneededareinnovativeandstrategicsolutionssuchas“micro-justiceinitiatives”anda“friendlyjustice”:ajusticesystemthatitiseasytouseandthatputspeopleinthecenter. Everyone should have access to justice,which needs to be recognized as atransformative tool. One final gap that was discussed in this session was the“inclusiongap”inthelocalizationofSDG16+.Atlocallevel,governmentsshouldopenmorespaceforcivilsocietyorganizationstoallowthemtoinfluenceandcontributetotheSDGsagenda,amongothers.Thiscallsforgreatersupportforthoseinitiativesand systems which empower local communities through local budgeting, localeducationandcapacity-building.Recommendations/findings:Some of the recommendations and findings thatwere identified by participants inthis session aimed to accelerate the implementationof SDG16+. These include thefollowing:

• The need for innovation and inclusion also by opening spaces forparticipationfornewactorsinthediscussionaboutSDG16+.ForexamplebycollaboratingwithandestablishingmoreoverarchingSDG16+communities.In The Hague the Humanity Hub and HiiL are initiating a community ofpractitionersonSDG16+

• Developingstrongernationalcommitmentandastrongerpoliticalwillaswellasmoreefficientdatacollectionandexchange

• Settingupunusualanddynamicspartnerships forexamplewith theprivatesector

• Coming up with concrete dialogues and actions while building on alreadyexistinglocalsolutions.Andintheprocess,mapwhatdifferentstakeholdersdoincountriesandfindwaystobettercomplementeachother

• Toworkmorewithpoliticalactors,leadersinparliament,politicalpartiesandusethemtopromoteSDGsandrelatedpolicies

• DevelopingstrongerstrategiestofinanceSDG16+implementation(alsowiththeprivatesector)

• Connecting SDG16+withother goals such as climate change to showhowSDG16+isreallyfundamentaltoprogressonthosegoalstoo

• Striving for a comprehensive integrated SDG 16+ plan at national andregionallevel


PowerandPartnershipsin'CrisisConservation'EmmanuelAkampurira&EstherMarijnen,GhentUniversitySaidiKubuya,ASSODIP

Keyarguments:Thekeyargumentdiscussedinthissessionhighlightedthatnatureconservationisonthemarginsof the ruleof lawdebate.Nature conservation isoftenperceivedas anon-political issue,which this sessionunderscores– it isnot.Oneof thepresentedcaseswas thatofBwindi ImpenetrableNationalPark, located inUganda’sKanunguDistrict. It is a case of ‘too many cooks in the kitchen.’ International efforts anddonor-interests aimat haltinghuman-wildlife conflict inBwindi, yet unsuccessfully,due ineffective public-private partnerships – a significant number of internationalNGOshave,ineffectively,becomeresponsibleforthepark,becauseitcouldreinforcetheruleoflaw,yetlocalparkmanagementisneededforthis. Time,effort,andresourcesshouldbespentonpreventingandmitigatinghuman-wildlifeconflicttomitigatethelowsuccessrate.Competitionoverprojectsleadstofailure.TherearenumerousdiscoursesbetweeninternationalNGOs,governmentagencies,localNGOs,andtourismoperators.Meetingswithlocalelitesandfeworganizationsthatarethoughttobespeakingforrestofthelocalpopulation,yetnotrepresentative.Maingapsoutlined:Oneofthemaingapsthatarosefromdialogueinthissessionwasthe“researchgap”thathasbeenhighlightedbymediaattentiontotheWorldWildlifeFundforNature’s‘secretwar’,inwhichthenot-for-profitfinancedparkguardswhocommittedandareengaged in human rights violations. Despite media coverage and Buzzfeed’sinvestigativereport,theopinionsofdonorshaveremainedunaltered.

This session aimed to tackle theproblems that arise when there is arange of different actors involved innature conservation in difficultenvironments, such as in protractedconflict areas. By interrogatingdominantpowerstructures,wewilltryto identify ways to conserve naturethat will both contribute to theprotection of endangered biodiversityand respect human rights. Goingbeyond the rhetoric of gender-inclusive, and community-basedconservation,thissessionexplored

how we can implement these principles in practice, while assuring accountabilityandtransparency.


The research gap, bridged by the two presented cases, raises questions ofdecolonisationandnatureconservation inAfricaand structuresof inequalities thatremain.Forwhodecideswhichareaofnaturerequiresprotection,how,andbywho?Whohaspoweranddecides to take responsibility fornatureconservation?Who isaccountable for the lack of sustainable nature conservation and the violation ofhumanrightsinrelationtothis?Recommendations/findings:Someoftheconcludingremarksandoutcomesofthissessionincludedthefollowing:

• Time, effort, and resources should be spent on preventing and mitigatinghuman-wildlifeconflicttomitigatethelowsuccessrate

• Competitionoverprojectsleadstofailure• There are numerous discourses between international NGOs, government

agencies, localNGOs,andtourismoperators.Meetingswith localelitesandfew organizations that are thought to be speaking for rest of the localpopulation,yetnotrepresentative

• Thereisnodifferentiationbetweenthosewhoareharmingtheconservationefforts due to their livelihood-related needs and those that aim atoverexploitation(i.e.,thosewhotakewaterforusearealsosenttoprison)

• Vulnerable populations are at higher risk; one can buy himself out of theprisonandindeedthepoorareforcedoutoftheparkandthearrestsdidnotgoaccordingtoofficialrulesandtheruleoflaw

• Differentpartiesareblameeachotherforhumanrightsviolations,oftentheparkguardsaretheperpetrators

InnovatingforHumanRights:BreakingBarrierstoPartnershipCatrionaHands,FROLICstudio

The complex challenges faced by thoseoperating in SRoL and human rightscannot be solved alone. But howdoweovercome the structural and politicalimpediments that often inhibit genuinecollaboration? How can we nurturepartnerships between (non)traditionalactors and encourage genuine learningand innovation? FROLIC Studio sharedthe experiences of their KMF-fundedcollaboration in this session, with ahuman rights NGO to redesign a covertcamerausedtodocumenthumanrightsabuses around theworld. This interactive session dove into themurkierwaters ofperceived and real barriers to innovate partnerships,with participants sharing andevaluatingtheirownexperiencesandproposingviablesolutions.


Keyarguments:Oneof themainarguments thatwerepresentedanddiscussed in this sessionwasthat unconventional partnerships can work. FROLIC, a product design studio thatproduces products embedded in technology, partnered with a human rights NGOthatdocumentsandexposeshumanrightsabusesinconflictaffectedcountriesusingcamera technology. The partnership works with a network of researchers andprovides material support to local activists, such as cameras. The speakersemphasizedthatgreatdesigncanmeangreatimpact,andthatincludesredesigninganexistingdevicethatcanthenleadtoabiggerhumanitarianimpact.Maingapsoutlined:The main gap identified was simply that there is a lack of cooperation betweenorganizationsandinnovationcompanies.Gapsinthissessionweremoresodiscussedthroughtheframeworkofchallenges.Dutyofcareisoneofthemainchallengesthatpartnershipslikethepresentersface–oftenconcerningsafetyandsecurityconcerns.Humanrightsandmediaorganizationscansharefootagecaptured,butheyhavenocontrolonhowtheinformationisgoingtobereceived,howtheinformationwillbestoredandwhothe imageswillbesharedwith.Collaborationalso involvesa lotofluck,asthereisastructuralprobleminourprofessionalfields,thatislimitedaccesstoorganizationsthatarenotinthesamesectorasyou.Recommendations/findings:The main recommendation outcome from this session is to try to invest incollaborationandpartnerships,eveniftheyseemunconventionalatfirst.Together,oureffortsandachievementsaremuchstronger.CommunityApproachestoPeacebuildinginSecuritizedEnvironmentsRukiyaAbdulrahman,CDI/AliHersi&MadelineChurch,Saferworld

This session discussed evidence generatedthrough the learning agenda: Working insecuritized environments calls for supportand empowerment of community-levelstructures.Where prospects of peace seemelusive,localcommunitiesarewellplacedtoengage with parties of the conflict –including the strengthening of civil societyinitiatives. Community-based organizationsandcivil societyorganizationsare importantvehiclesforpeacebuilding,socio-economic

development, addressing the needs of victims/survivors and maintainingrelationshipsacrosspoliticaldivision.Forimpactfulchange,scalingupiskey.


HybridSecurity&JusticeinMyanmar&SouthSudanCharlotteWatson,JohnBainbridge,LucianHarriman&MaiHlaAye,Saferworld

Keyarguments:In this session, the key argument was that people in South Sudan and Myanmarprefer informal mechanisms of justice and security rather than formal ones, butdonorsandfundingprogramsfocusmoreonformalmechanisms.Participantsinthissessionwereinvitedtodiscusswhatandwheretosupport inorderto increaseandstrengthen justice and security provisions in the two countries. One of the mainpointshighlightedinthegroupdiscussionwasthatthefocusshouldbespentonthelocal level – identifying what are the realities at the local level and thenstrengtheningthealreadyexistingmechanismsthatpeopleuseandseemlegitimateindealingwithjusticeandsecurityissues.Maingapsoutlined:Themain gap identifiedby this project is that in South SudanandMyanmar,mostpeople prefer informal mechanisms of justice and security provisions rather thanformalmechanisms.However paradoxically,manydonors and fundingprograms inMyanmar and South Sudan are directed to formal mechanisms of security andjustice.Recommendations/findings:

• Villageleadersandtraditionalauthoritiesshouldbetrainedonbasicskillsonreconciliationandmediationtoenablethemtodealwellwiththerealityontheground

• Keepaneyeon long-termvisionandenhance the cooperationbetweenallactors that operate on the ground (NGOS, donors, and other projects andprogrammes)

International policy and programmingcontinues to focus on state-building,state security and justice provision,despite evidence that ignoring localrealities and the existing systemspeople use undermines these efforts.This session built on Saferworld’sresearch in Myanmar and SouthSudan, which focused on how pluraland hybrid security and justicesystems function, and assessed thelegitimacy and effectiveness ofsecurityandjusticeprovidersfromtheperspectivesoflocalpopulations.This session challenged participants to use their experience to find ways toovercomebarrierstoensureprogrammingactuallydoestakeintoaccountrealitiesontheground.


• Legal pluralist approach: Bring together formal and informalmechanismofjustice provision. Policies and projects should take in consideration thediversityofactors

• Evidence-basedprogram:whatisanevidence?Whatarethepriorities?Howdataarecollected?Whoisansweringthequestions?Westernapproach?Biasonnumbers?

• Participants suggested thatmoreaction researchwill bedesirableand thatresearchers should be aware on the narratives and stories shared duringinterviews in the research.Thedistinction researchersmakebetween stategroupsandnon-stategroupsisnotalwaysclear.

• Peoplewho takepart in interviewsand focus groupmight switchpositionsandplaymultiple roleswhichhasaconsequenceontheevidenceanddatagathered

ToCollaboratewithAuthoritiesorNot:APractitioner'sDilemmaCoritaCorbijn,ZOA/Abdel-RahmanEl-Mahdi,SUDIA/NoelinaNabwileOpiyo,Saferworld

Keyarguments:The key focus of this session addressed the relation between community-basedpeacebuilding structures and different levels of government authorities. It wasdiscussed that NGOs aim to promote Security and Rule of Law across all levels ofsociety, however they often workmainly with community-based peace structures,especially incontextswith fragilegovernments.MultipleNGOsworking ineastandcentral Africa identified a power and partnership gap between these community-based structures and government authorities, and an ARC/KMF-funded learningeventwasorganizedbyZOA,SaferworldandSUDIAinAugust2019toaddresshowtoestablishfruitfulandsustainablerelationswithgovernmentauthorities.

As NGOs, we aim to promote SRoLacross all levels of society, but inpractice the partnership betweencommunity-based peace buildingand structures and the stateauthorities is challenging.Communities trust customaryauthoritiesmorethanthestate;andthe government does not alwayswelcome influence from the civilsociety.Thissessionexploredhowtobridgethepartnershipandpower

gapbetweencommunity-basedpeacebuildingworkandgovernmentauthoritiesatall levels. It explored how organizations can effectively learn to improveprogrammingresults.


Maingapsoutlined:Gapsinthissessionweremostlydiscussedthroughtheframeworkofchallenges.Onecentral challenge is the “practitioner’sdilemma”.Participantswere invited to thinkabouthowcollaborationwithgovernmentauthoritiesaffectstheindependenceandneutralityofbothcommunity-basedpeacebuildingstructuresandNGOs.Participantsnoted the risk of government authorities seeking to assert influencewhen there isclose collaboration, which would undermine independence and neutrality. Thisargumentwasmetbytheresponsethatthisriskcanbemanagedbytakingmitigatingmeasures, as well as the comment that the level of the risk depends on howcollaborationisdefined.Apart from the lack of trust in government institutions and the risk of politicalinfluenceharmingneutrality,anotherchallengethatwas identified inthesession isthe risk of taking away state responsibility for peace and stability byworkingwithcommunity-based structures.Whilemanyparticipants saw thisasa credible risk, itwas generally thought to be amanageable risk, since community-based structuresand government structures can have a certain complementarity and can thus co-exist. Thenatureof the formal legal systemwasalso identifiedasa challenge.Thecosts, travel distance to and perceived incapacity of government institutions canformanobstacleforcommunitygroupstoengagewiththeformaljusticesector.Thepunitivenatureof formal justicecanalsoclashwithneedsof localcommunities formediationandreconciliationratherthanpunishment.Recommendations/findings:Takingtheidentificationofthesechallengesasastartingpoint,opportunitiesandgoodpracticestobridgethegapwereidentifiedanddiscussed.ThespeakersintroducedanARC-projectinSudan,wherecommunitiescollaboratewithlocalauthoritiesthroughtheCommunityCommunicationSystem.

• This project allows communities to communicate local issues and needs,generating awealth of knowledge for government authorities to act upon,andforcommunitiestolearnfromeachother

• This system brings communities and government together throughknowledgesharing

• Government authorities often are not familiar with the concept of humansecurity, and feel threatened by the involvement of civil society orcommunitygroupsinsecurityissues

When a country is in deep or complex conflict, how would collaboration withgovernmentauthoritiestakeplacewithoutpractitionersbeingperceivedascomplicitwitheitheronesideoftheconflict,oraslegitimizinggovernmentactions?

• The central recommendation brought forward on this issue is thatcollaborationshouldbecontext-driven

• Strongconflictanalysis,aswellasanunderstandingofthelocalvisionofthefuture,isneededtoavoiddoingharmandtoprotecttheindependenceandneutralityofbothcommunitystructuresandNGOs


• Bemoreopentotakingtherisksthatcomewithcollaborationandprovidingcareful explanation, rather than to assume that fruitful and sustainablerelationsmightbeimpossible

• Aslongasthereistransparencyanddialogue,therearevariouspossibilitiesfor collaboration between community-based structures and governmentauthorities

GamifyingHowCitizens&PublicServantsInteract–TheRoleofAestheticsandTechnologyNathalieDijkman&KakuruTimothy,SEMA/ArthurSteiner,Hivos

Keyarguments:Thekeyargumentsofthissessioncenteredaroundperceptionsaboutpoliceofficersandthegapsthatexistinconversationsaboutperceptionsandimagescitizenshavetowardpoliceofficers,dependingonwhichcountryandcontexttheyarein.Someparticipantsheldtheopinionthatpoliceofficersareseenasathreattotheirsafetyandcorruptlyabusetheirpower,whileothersseepoliceofficersasprotectorsofcitizens.ThemainoutcomeoftheSEMAprojectwasthatcitizenscouldengagewithpoliceofficersandnotbeafraidtoraisetheirconcernswhenofficersareabusingtheirpower.Datacollectedthroughanassessmentsurveyofpoliceofficerswasmonitoredinordertofosterdeeperinteractionbetweencitizensandpoliceofficers.Theprojectusedgamificationmethodsandrewardedpoliceofficersforgoodbehaviorbasedoffcitizenfeedback.Maingapsoutlined:OneofthemaingapsincludedinthissessionisbetweencitizensandpublicservantsinUganda,andthewaysinwhichtheprogramSEMAimplementedaimedtobridgethe gap onwhat police should do and the perception citizens have towards them.

Citizens have a voice in shaping the qualityof public services.Why don’t we ever hearthisvoice?Technologycanbeaplatformforcitizens to give their feedback. But dataalone cannot influence governments toimprove. Those who are serious aboutimprovingthe justicesectorneedto involvenewdisciplinesandnarratives to incentivizegovernments to take responsibility. Thissession was about the role of data,gamification and aesthetics in influencingthe citizen-government feedback loop,basedonapilot inUganda.Thegaphere istwofold:ontheonehand,howdoyoumakesurecitizensraisetheirvoice inshapingpublicservicesdirectly?Ontheotherhand,howdoyoubridgethegapforpublicservantstofeeltheyhaveadirecthandinimprovingtheirperformanceandcanbeproudoftheservicestheyprovide?


Another main gap identified in this session was with the gamification techniquesthroughwhichcitizensassessand judgepoliceofficers.Theconcernsraised includepoliceofficersfeelingpressurewhentheyarejudgedbycitizens,forfearoftheirroleandauthoritybeingunderminedbythesurveynegativeresponses.Anotherconcernraisedwashowcitizensmay feel reluctance to fill in surveys if their assessmentofpoliceperformancecanbeusedagainstthem.Onegapidentifiedconcernedtheuseof technology, such as gamifying and popular culture, being used as a regime totightenpoliticalspace,monitoringthethemovementsoftheopposition.Recommendations/findings:OneofthefindingsoftheSEMAprojectwasthatpoliceofficersonthebottomlevelwanttoprovideservicesandfeelacloserrelationshiptocitizens,butfeelthey lackthe resourcesandmeans todo so. TheAesthetics inPopularCulture inEastAfrica(Kenya and Uganda) project found that police often utilized technology tomanipulate the public opinion and control the movement of the opposition.Participants in the session also stressed that socialmedia and certain technologiesarenotveryaccessibleforcitizenswholiveinthecountryside,sothiscouldposeasalimitationtotheroleofchangingbehaviorthroughpopularculture.There’sanApp...forThat?MakingInnovationWorkforJusticeWayneJordash,GRC/YousefWehbe,SyrianLegalDevelopmentProgramAlexWhiting,Prosecutor'sOfficeinTheHague

Keyarguments:Oneoftherepeatingpatternsinthefieldofdocumentationandstrategiclitigationisthat professionals leading the work acquired the knowledge needed in terms ofinternational investigations, but lacked the technical aspects of the neededinvestigation standards. There is incredible need for local first responder-collectedinformationcomingfromcivilsociety,astheinternationalsystemandcourtsof laware completely dependent on this “golden hour” right after the crimes haveoccurred. One of the greatest challenges is the standards by which criminal

This session explored contemporaryinsight on how to create and useinnovative justice solutions in expandingaccesstojustice.Drawingoninsightsfromthe Basic Investigative Standards App(‘BIS’) as case study, the session panelistsshared their learning experience indeveloping and integrating technology-based justice solutions for documentinginternationalcrimessuchasthechallengesandriskstoitsfreeuse,ortheaccessibilityof funds for promoting and practicingchange. They also challenged participantstoreflectonhowthisgapexistswithintheirorganizationalcontextsandhowtobridgethisjusticeneed.


investigationsareheld to,andhowtoensurethatactivistsandreportersgatheringinformationareawareofhowtoconductinvestigationsonthegrounds.Maingapsoutlined:Therewere several gaps outlined by the different session speakers, one being theneedforactivistsinthefieldtohaveaccessible,easyandsimplifiedtools.Thetoolsmust be practical, such as accessibility in their native language, and theymust bedesigned to consider the threats activists are facing. From the perspective ofsomeonewhoworks at international tribunals, there is a gapbetween civil societyand lawenforcement that canbebridged throughmore tools suchas theBISapp.Thereisacallformoreintermediatestructuresthathelpsievetheinformationthatcomes up; to bridge the gap between the tribunals and the world of evidencecollection.Recommendations/findings:Therearemanychallengesfromthedifferentperspectivesofprofessionalsinvolvedinthefieldofdocumentationandstrategiclitigationandinternationalhumanitarianlaw.Someoftheagreeduponchallengesincludetheimmensepressureonactivistsdoingtheworkinthelocalcontext,meetingwithvictims,andcollectinginformationthat then has to be smuggled out. Another challenge from the receiving end ofcollected data is how to synthesize information without losing meaning, whilemaintainingstandardswithout losingriskstandards.TherewillbeacontinuedpushtostrategizethedisseminationoftoolsliketheBISappandanoverallaimtoutilizeinternationalhumanitarianlawmoreingeneral.InfluentialActors'Language&Violence:KenyanCaseStudyUsingAIChrisMahony,WorldBank&PeloriaInc./EduardoAlbrecht,MercyCollege/RohiniSrihari,StateUniversityofNY

This session conducted a case study onKenya that takes preliminary stepstowards identifying influential actors’language association with violence. Tothis end, an app was created thatconnected variations in sentiment inlanguage to an objective measure ofpolitical violence – daily fatalities asreported via the ACLED Project. Theresults indicate that the model canpredict both increases and decreases inaverage fatalities for lookaheadperiodsbetween 50 and 150 days, with overallaccuracyapproaching85%.Thesessionaddressed the report’s policy genesis, pointed to future directions of research,andnavigatedtheethicaldilemmasofanemergingfield.


Keyarguments:One of the key arguments outlined in this session was that AI can be used as anobjectivemetric.Itispossibletopredictwhethertherewillbeanincreaseinviolenceor not, up to 85% accuracy, thus indicating that there is both methodologicalintegrity and credibility to this approach. Working on the local level is way moreefficient but it canbequite costly. It does however allow for accurate predictions,whichinthelongrunenablescost-saving.Businessescouldgainalotofbenefitsfromusingthistechnologyandshouldinvestinitmore.Oneofthecounter-argumentsisthatsentimentdataextractedfromtextisinfactanoldtechnology,alreadyusedforinstanceinthefinancialsector.Whatiscutting-edgeaboutthisworkisthepossibilitytodothiswithradio,whichnowbringsaboutnewparametersintoplay:tone.Beingabletodetecttonehastremendouspredictivecapacities.Maingapsoutlined:Oneofthemaingapsorchallengesthatwasaddressedinthissessionisthatthereissomuchdataavailablethatitcanbecomeverydifficulttoprocessit.Thevelocityofthese data differs, thus combining and synthesizing it into one model is difficult.There is a need for a framework for AI developments before continuingdevelopment,asithasatremendouscapacityofchanginghumanityasweknowit.Recommendations/findings:Therewereanumberofrecommendationsforfuturepolicy,researchorpracticeputforward:

• Whatisnext:anappthatcanintuitivelyadapttochangesincontexttoassessviolence,butcanalsogiveexplanationsandreprogramitselfaccordingly

• Useofthistechnologytodomoreconflictprevention• Businessescouldgainalotofbenefitfromthistechnologyandshouldfurther

engageinit• Thereisaneedforapublic-privatesectorpartnership• Approachsuggestedistoutilizeverylocaldata–“hyperlocal”.Thereisacost

issue,butit ispossibletoachievestill.Thisinformationshouldbesharedtoboththepublicandprivatesectorstoattempttomitigatetheseissues

LegalEmpowerment&theCrisisinAidforDemocracy&RoLStephenGolub,InternationalDevelopmentConsultant

With democracy and the rule of law underattack across the globe, the developmentcommunity needs to take stock of whydecades of aid for democratic and legalinstitutions has proven apparentlyineffective. Legal empowerment provides alens through which to review this crisis.Focusingonempoweringpeopleratherthanthe state – it complements mainstream,government-centered development effortsinsomewaysandservesasanalternativein

others.Doesitofferawayforwardforeffortstofortifydemocracyandtheruleoflaw? Or does its potential – to the extent its potential is worth pursuing – lieelsewhere?


Keyarguments:Oneofthemainargumentsmadeinthissessionwasthatweshoulddropthewholenotionofnationbuildingandstatebuildingandbelessambitious.Inmanycountries,wecannotreformawholedemocracyorawholelegalsystem.Moremoneyingeneralshouldgotocivicempowerment,andlessshouldbespentonstatebuildinginstitutions,wherealotofmoneyhasbeenwasted.AnothersuggestionwastoletgoofResultFrameworks,whichcanbecounter-productiveandpushpeopleinnegativedirections.Rather,afoundationapproachtofundsucheffortsshouldbeadopted,startingoffbywelcomingproposals/ideas,localempowerment,controllingtheseideasonalocallevel.Maingapsoutlined:Thebiggapidentifiedinthissessionisbetweenthepromiseofwhatwewerehopingfor and the reality of the ground now. The projects aimed at building stateinstitutionsorimprovingjudicialmechanismsareoftenfailing.Developmentaidisincrisis – andwe are notmaking progress in that area. Attempts to answer this gapinclude: efforts were simply too ambitious and money was being spent on thebuildingofstateinstitutionsincorruption-affectedcountries–whichdoesnotwork.Another plausible answer is that we underestimated the challenges. Changing thejudiciarymeanschangingapoliticalandlegalculture,becauseitisaproductsocietyinwhich they are embedded. Political, cultural, economic and historical forces arehard to change. There is a sort of path dependence – meaning institutions andorganizationstendtostaythesameway.Recommendations/findings:The overall recommendation that arose from this session was to focus on otheraspectsofdevelopment:education,health.Therealimpactisinthesemanysectorsand fields – it trickles down. Spending more on civil society and media efforts isimportant,asisthegradualincreaseofworkwithjusticesystems.EconomicDevelopment&StableInclusiveGovernance:Somalia&BeyondJosMeester,ClingendaelInstitute/FiavanderKlugt,MFA

Thissessionaskedthequestion:howcanwefocus on economic development in fragileandconflict-affectedsituationsinawaythatcontributes to more stable, inclusivesocieties? In otherwords: how canwe linkSDG8 with SDG16? The session employedSomaliaasanexampleandsharedgoodandbadpracticesformutuallearning.


Keyarguments:Thissessionfocusedoneconomicgrowthoftenbeingconflictual,andthechallengesin stabilizing fragile situations, so thatpeace isnot compromised. In thecontextofSomalia,thereisabigdivide–astheprivatesectorstillworkswithinalocalizedclanculture. InSomalia,economicgrowth is influencedby twoactors: thediasporaandtheprivatesector.Forthediaspora,thevaluehasdecreasedbecauseofinflationbutalso there are less remittances being sent back.With regard to the private sector,theyare increasinglysupplyinggovernancebydeveloping thedomesticmarketandcontributingtoreopeningofports.Maingapsoutlined:ThemaingapthatwasdiscussedinthissessionwasbetweentheSDG8andSDG16.The excerpts of the Sustainable Development Goals that were focused on were,“Promotesustained, inclusiveandsustainableeconomicgrowth,fullandproductiveemploymentanddecentworkforall,”and,“Promotepeacefulandinclusivesocietiesfor sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective,accountableandinclusiveinstitutionsatalllevels.Insum,economicgrowthisoftenconflictual, but how canwe stabilize the fragile situation? How canwemake surethateconomic growth, especiallyPrivate SectorDevelopment,doesn’t compromisepeaceinSomalisociety?Recommendations/findings:The private sector also has downsides – for example, people perceive governmentjobsaspreparatorystepsforprivatejobs.Also,majorbusinessactorsarebecomingincreasingly powerful and influential, with clientelistic behavior that increases thedependencyonthemajorplayers.PrivateSectorDevelopmentshouldonlybeoneofthe tools used to improve stability through the conflict sensitive approach. Keydrivers of conflict must be identified before incorporating mitigation measures,whichthenrequirebeingmonitoredthroughoutthelengthoftheprojectinordertominimize negative impacts andmaximize the positive ones of interventions of thisconflict.IntheparticularcaseofSomalia,wemustpayattentiontothesourcesofeconomicgrowth for example, since Eastern countries, from Qatar and the United ArabEmiratestoChina, thesestates invest inamountsthatdwarfsWestern investmentswhile having less strings attached and adopting a less paternalistic approach todevelopment. However, they tend to be less concerned about ethic and humanrights,byhavingtieswithwarlordandnotworkingtowardsimprovingruleoflawintheregion.


StrengtheningCapacityofSubnationalGovernments:Burundi&RwandaLoriCajegas,CARENederland/FreddySahinguvu,TheHagueAcademy

Keyarguments:In Burundi and Rwanda, it appears that targeting sub-represented groups isinsufficient – they must actually be actively included in the dialogue, because byhavingminority status, they tend toexclude themselves fromdialogues frameworkasmuchastheyareexcludedfromthembyothergroups.Activeinclusionindialoguemustbefollowedbycapacitybuildinganddevelopmentonthe longterm,notbyone-offactionthatcould leadtoadistortionofmessagesthe furtheraway itgets fromthesources, soon-siteaccompaniment is requiredtostrengthencapacityoffragilecommunities.Therearefourmainphasesonthegroundthatwerediscussed:1)Assessmentofthesituation; 2) Training: training the trainers; 3) Implementation of actions plans; 4)DemocraticdialoguewithCivilSocietyOrganizations.Maingapsoutlined:The main gaps outlined were between the Global North and the Global South interms of capacity, and at a more concrete level there is a gap between the localcommunitiesandthecentralgovernmentthatwasdiscussedthroughoutthesession.Whendraftingtheactionplan,itisimportantforlocalauthoritiestofocusonshort-term and achievable targets rather than unrealistic commitments since this couldcause frustrations and distrust among the less represented communities. When itcomes to implementing the action plan, transparency is paramount for the samereason,andlocalpartnersmustmakesuretoholdtheseauthoritiesaccountablenottoderailfromtheactionplan.

Capacity strengthening of subnationalgovernments in fragile settings remainsa challenge for most developmentorganizations. It is either done in asimplistic manner: outdated knowledgeor skills are transferred from theGlobalNorth to the Global South, or notcontextualizedenough.What isthebestapproach to use? Who/what level ofsubnationalgovernment to target?Howto contextualize approaches? How tobuildcapacityinasustainablemanner?

These are some of the questions that many organizations engaging withsubnational governments are struggling with. This joint CARE NL/THE sessionattemptedtoanswerthesequestionsthroughaninteractivediscussion.


Recommendations/findings:Oneofthemaintakeawayswasthatitisasimportanttochangethemindsetofthetargetedaudiencesasmuchas it istodeveloptheirskills,andforthis,experiencedbilingual trainers are needed. To this effect, The Hague Academy developed theaforementioned four stepprocedure.Thisway,ata conceptual level, theyhope tobridgethegapbetweentheGlobalnorthandtheGlobalSouth in termofcapacity,and at a more concrete level, between local communities and the centralgovernment.On the Action Plan Approach, through training, the more people are taught, themorethey learnabout issuesthataffectthemandthemoretheyareabletomaketheir communities and the government aware of these issues, as well as thenecessitiestosolvethem.Itisthusimportanttoadoptanadaptiveapproachtailoredto theneeds andperceptionsof each involvedactor inorder toeffectively changetheirmindset.TheMissingPieceinSSR:Lessonsfrom10yearsintheDRCongoPatrickMugula,JulienNiankoye,AdrienneLemon&CharlineBurton,SearchForCommonGround

Keyarguments:TherearemanySSRchallenges in theDemocraticRepublicof theCongo (DRC)andways in which traditional SSR approaches have underperformed in this context.SFCG’s analysis of trust between security actors and civilians was introduced as amissingpieceofSSR,andSFCGhassoughttoaddressthisthroughcommunity-drivenapproaches to SSR. Throughout the exchanges with participants, the question ofwhether or not trust-building has helped alleviate patronage, corruption andimpunityproblemswithtraditionalSSRwasraised.DonorsoftenexpectdeliverablesonshortprojecttimelinesthatdonotmatchthechangeorganizationslikeSFCGneedto create and the time this takes. Search is developing a Sahel-wide strategyof itsown.Donorshave a lowappetite for risk: donors tendnot to engagewhen it gets

This session highlighted a crucial gap intraditional Security Sector Reform (SSR)approaches – addressing the trust deficitbetween civilians and security forces – andoffered locally-anchored, concrete avenuesto fill that gap. Panelists explored lessons-learned from 10 years of SSR interventionsbySearchforCommonGround(SFCG)intheDRCongo (DRC) and adapting these lessonsto inform interventions in Mali. Aparticipatory role-play exercise enabledparticipants to engage with challenges ofassessing trust-building. An interactivedebriefandaudienceexchangeallowedparticipantstodiscusstheimplicationsofincorporatingtrust-buildinginSSR.


difficult, for example during elections,which does not necessarily support creatingrealprogress.Maingapsoutlined:Oneof themainchallengesoutlined in thissession is the importance fordonors tohear localactors’definitionsofwhat ismostsalientforprogress inSSR.TypicalSSRapproaches, including approaches centered on training and equipping, institutionalreform,andcivilianaccountabilitystructures,aretied, indesignandassessment,tohighlevelideasofaccountabilitywhich,whilecrucial,oftendonotreachorresonatewiththesocial livedexperiencesoftheultimatebeneficiariesofSSRwork.Panelistshighlighted the crucial importance of recognizing intangible measures of SSRprogress, notably trust between security actors and civilians, in order tocomprehensivelyaddressSSR.Recommendations/findings:After a facilitated role play exercise exploring the challenges of measuringimprovements in trust between security actors and civilians, there was a debriefsession during which participants identified the challenges they encountered inmeasuringtheproject’simpact.Someofthefindingsincluded:

● Respondents can’t speak directly to the project or the goals of theintervention.Theyjustknowthecontexttheylivein;

● Somepeoplewerenotcomfortableinthefocusgroupdiscussion(FGD):FGDparticipants said they weren’t aware of the program. We need to useinformationfromdifferentsources;

● Peoplewererespondingtoourquestions,butitwashardtoknowifpeoplewerehonest,becausepeoplewantedtheprojecttocontinue;

● Therewasnottimetoreachouttoeveryoneonewantsto;● It takes time to understand the relations between different groups - for

examplethedynamicbetweenlawyersandjudges.

CivilSocietyInfluenceinSecurity,Policy&Practice:CreativeProblemSolvingMariamAbdelBaky&IlinaSlavova,InternationalAlertWith expert speakers who took theparticipants through examples from Tunisiaand Lebanon, the session focusedon the ‘hottopics’ of violent extremism and bordersecuritytoexplorewhythepolicyandpracticegap exists in these contexts, and how civilsociety has tried to overcome it. The sessioninvolved a representative of a donor state onwhat works in influencing policy makers,before the discussion was opened up to acollective, creative brainstorming sessionaimed at sharing ideas and experiences andidentifyingeffectiveapproaches.


Keyarguments:

ThespeakersrepresentingtheCivilSocietyandWesternDonorexperienceoutlinedtheexistingproblemsandofferedexplanationswhy theproblem(s) exist andwhatcanbedonetoaddresstheproblemsconstructively.ThesessionwasplacedintothegeographicalregionsofTunisiaandLebanon.Themainargumentoutlinedwasthatoftentherealityonthegroundintermsofwhatpeopleseeastheirneeds(e.g. forhealth, education, and livelihoods) differs from what the state sees as the need,whichcentersmorearoundcounter-terrorism(CT)andbordersecurity.

Maingapsoutlined:There are threemajor issues that hamperdonors’ ability to adapt interventions totherealityonthegroundandmovingbeyondsecurity-focusedapproaches:

1. Lackofknowledgeofwhatisexactlyhappeningontheground,whatworks,andwhatdoesnotwork.Althoughattemptstogatherevidenceexists,thereis still a low level of knowledge to make an informed choice and whichorganizationsandprojectsshouldbesupportedandwhichnot

2. Organizational structurewhich results inahigh turnoverof the staff at thegovernmentagencies,alsoaffectsknowledgeandskillamongststaff.

3. Politicalaspectofthedonorsituation,whenthedomesticpoliticalagendainthe donor country often dictates the intervention – such as a focus oncounter-terrorismandmigrationprevention.

Recommendations/findings:Intermsofwhatworkswell,thefollowingpointswereraised:

• TheabilityofCStorepresent localvoicesthoughtthere isa lotofroomforimprovement,especiallybetweenCSandacademia

• Local level mechanism which create space for inclusion of local voices in(local)governmentdecisionmaking

• One on one exchanges and meetings, for example with embassy staff, orconveningaclosed-doorroundtable

Whatdoweneedtobridgethegap?• Weneedtopushforinclusive,holisticSSRstrategies• We need to invest in knowledge management to ensure that policies are

evidence-based• Honest discussion and understanding of each other’s political reality,

including governments talking to governments, and learning acrossgovernmenttogainsharedunderstanding

• Civil societyneeds tobepartofpublicdiscussionon topics as security andinvestmoreinadvocacy

• Civil society needs to build relationships with the security sector, a lot ofsecurity sector sees civil society as a threat and this perception needs tochange

bridging the gap: rhetoric and practice in security & rule ... the gap... · bridging the gap...

Documents