Movement decision-making in violence prevention and peace practices

Studying parallels between movement behaviour and violent actions can help understand interdisciplinary possibilities for prevention, intervention, mediation and post-conflict healing. This article explores the role of unconscious and conscious movement decision-making in violent/peaceful interactions. Thematic analysis of interviews was conducted with trainers in dance/movement peace practices working in fourteen countries. The doctoral research sociologically analysed shared beliefs and a framework that was previously applied to work in schools, expanding its potential for new settings and peace contexts. The framework illustrates five stages of decision-making (Flow/Tension, Attention, Intention, Action and Reflection/Evaluation) based on Warren Lamb’s and Rudolph Laban’s systems of movement analysis. Flow/Tension refers to physiological responses to conflict and the regulation of tension, discomfort and breath. Attention involves the development of spatial awareness and awareness of our immediate environment. The Intention stage fosters the capacity for self-evaluation, assertively addressing needs and mitigating ethical pressure. The Action stage involves understanding impulses, commitment and non-action. Reflection/Evaluation promote reflexivity in practitioners and participants and a dynamic evaluation of peace practices. By analysing contributions of dance/movement to peacebuilding, this article introduces a much-needed focus on the body in conflict and inform interpersonal and intergroup conflict interventions by educators, therapists and peace practitioners of all fields.     

Civil Society and Peace Negotiations: Beyond the Inclusion–Exclusion Dichotomy

Civil society is generally seen as an important actor in peace processes. But when it comes to reaching an agreement during peace negotiations, much of the current debate is centered on the question of including or excluding civil society. Although most researchers argue that civil society participation makes the process more sustainable and democratic, most practitioners emphasize that enhanced civil society participation makes it more difficult to reach a peace agreement. I argue that practitioners and theorists must both move beyond this dichotomy and, instead, focus on the variety of ways in which civil society actors can be included in a given negotiation process. To this end, I present in this article a comprehensive overview of nine models of inclusion, from most to least direct involvement of civil society, supported by illustrative case studies. Analysis of these models suggests that it will be possible to broaden the participation of civil society in peace negotiations without decreasing the negotiations' effectiveness.