modified from (Giroux et al, 2009) Conflict Dynamics Outcome 1 Structural Violence Outcome 2 We hold that aid can affect both the structural factors (social, political, economic systems/ institutions that are at the root of the conflict ) that set the stage and allow the dynamics of the conflict ( the interaction between the parties to the conflict) to take place and can lead to a structural violence. Aid as an agential factor, acts within certain institutions and structures thus strengthens it in the process. This agent- structure debate is at the core of the paper and is considered it backbone. Capacity Building and vulnerability reduction. This part of the theoretical framework gives a lead into our theoretical base. Mary Anderson (1999) provides a framework through which to analyze the impact of aid in conflict situation. Anderson sees that aid can have the potential of defusing the conflict, as it can be used to exasperate and prolong conflicts. (Anderson 1999, 1) To her, the impact of aid on conflict depends on how it is directed. (Anderson 1998, 141) Thus humanitarian aid can be given in a way that feeds intergroup tensions and weakens connections or it can lessen intergroup tensions and strengthen intergroup connections. (Anderson 1999, 69) According to Anderson, a good emergency program is that refrains from strengthening the war capacities in society and strengthens peace capacities instead. (Anderson 1999, 69) Aid has to be given in such a way that strengthens the capacities for peace and reduce those of conflict and tension. (Anderson 1999, 69) Anderson bases her framework on the concept of capacity building. Capacity building starts with the dispositions available in society rather than with what could be offered to help by external agents (Moore). It is a way of trying to develop the abilities of a society to enable it to face future problems. (Moore) Therefore, it does not attempt to impose any new value or institution, but uses those available in the community itself. This itself is a positive aspect as it avoids the critique that aid agencies are trying to reshape societies in the way they see fit. This framework of capacity building developed as a response to disasters of both natural ( environmental ) and the man made ( war) type starts from the proposition that aid operations that tackle the symptoms of the crisis but leave its structure intact will lead to the recurrence of the crisis again. (Anderson, 1998, 140)
modified from (Giroux et al, 2009) Conflict Dynamics Outcome 1 Structural Violence Outcome 2 We hold that aid can affect both the structural factors (social, political, economic systems/ institutions that are at the root of the conflict ) that set the stage and allow the dynamics of the conflict ( the interaction between the parties to the conflict) to take place and can lead to a structural violence. Aid as an agential factor, acts within certain institutions and structures thus strengthens it in the process. This agent- structure debate is at the core of the paper and is considered it backbone. Capacity Building and vulnerability reduction. This part of the theoretical framework gives a lead into our theoretical base. Mary Anderson (1999) provides a framework through which to analyze the impact of aid in conflict situation. Anderson sees that aid can have the potential of defusing the conflict, as it can be used to exasperate and prolong conflicts. (Anderson 1999, 1) To her, the impact of aid on conflict depends on how it is directed. (Anderson 1998, 141) Thus humanitarian aid can be given in a way that feeds intergroup tensions and weakens connections or it can lessen intergroup tensions and strengthen intergroup connections. (Anderson 1999, 69) According to Anderson, a good emergency program is that refrains from strengthening the war capacities in society and strengthens peace capacities instead. (Anderson 1999, 69) Aid has to be given in such a way that strengthens the capacities for peace and reduce those of conflict and tension. (Anderson 1999, 69) Anderson bases her framework on the concept of capacity building. Capacity building starts with the dispositions available in society rather than with what could be offered to help by external agents (Moore). It is a way of trying to develop the abilities of a society to enable it to face future problems. (Moore) Therefore, it does not attempt to impose any new value or institution, but uses those available in the community itself. This itself is a positive aspect as it avoids the critique that aid agencies are trying to reshape societies in the way they see fit. This framework of capacity building developed as a response to disasters of both natural ( environmental ) and the man made ( war) type starts from the proposition that aid operations that tackle the symptoms of the crisis but leave its structure intact will lead to the recurrence of the crisis again. (Anderson, 1998, 140)
2113233.docx