Peacebuilding

What is in a name?

Michael Barnett, Hun Joon Kim, Madalene O'Donnell, Laura Sitea

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

123 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article surveys and analyzes twenty-four governmental and intergovernmental bodies that are currently active in peacebuilding in order to, first, identify critical differences in how they conceptualize and operationalize their mandate, and, second, map areas of potential concern. We begin by briefly outlining the various terms used by different actors to describe their peacebuilding activities and correlate these terms with differing core mandates, networks of interaction, and interests. We then identify the divisions regarding the specific approaches and areas of priority. Thus far most programs have focused on the immediate or underlying causes of conflict - to the relative neglect of state institutions. We conclude by raising concerns about how peacebuilding is institutionalized in various settings, including at the UN's Peacebuilding Commission.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)35-58
Number of pages24
JournalGlobal Governance
Volume13
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2007 Jan 1
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

neglect
UNO
cause
interaction
mandate
programme
conflict

Keywords

  • Peacebuilding
  • Peacekeeping
  • Postconflict reconstruction
  • United Nations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Environmental Science(all)
  • Safety Research
  • Political Science and International Relations

Cite this

Barnett, M., Kim, H. J., O'Donnell, M., & Sitea, L. (2007). Peacebuilding: What is in a name? Global Governance, 13(1), 35-58.

Peacebuilding : What is in a name? / Barnett, Michael; Kim, Hun Joon; O'Donnell, Madalene; Sitea, Laura.

In: Global Governance, Vol. 13, No. 1, 01.01.2007, p. 35-58.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Barnett, M, Kim, HJ, O'Donnell, M & Sitea, L 2007, 'Peacebuilding: What is in a name?', Global Governance, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 35-58.
Barnett M, Kim HJ, O'Donnell M, Sitea L. Peacebuilding: What is in a name? Global Governance. 2007 Jan 1;13(1):35-58.
Barnett, Michael ; Kim, Hun Joon ; O'Donnell, Madalene ; Sitea, Laura. / Peacebuilding : What is in a name?. In: Global Governance. 2007 ; Vol. 13, No. 1. pp. 35-58.
@article{9fe36b75ee984bc49d29be2e191a4245,
title = "Peacebuilding: What is in a name?",
abstract = "This article surveys and analyzes twenty-four governmental and intergovernmental bodies that are currently active in peacebuilding in order to, first, identify critical differences in how they conceptualize and operationalize their mandate, and, second, map areas of potential concern. We begin by briefly outlining the various terms used by different actors to describe their peacebuilding activities and correlate these terms with differing core mandates, networks of interaction, and interests. We then identify the divisions regarding the specific approaches and areas of priority. Thus far most programs have focused on the immediate or underlying causes of conflict - to the relative neglect of state institutions. We conclude by raising concerns about how peacebuilding is institutionalized in various settings, including at the UN's Peacebuilding Commission.",
keywords = "Peacebuilding, Peacekeeping, Postconflict reconstruction, United Nations",
author = "Michael Barnett and Kim, {Hun Joon} and Madalene O'Donnell and Laura Sitea",
year = "2007",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "35--58",
journal = "Global Governance",
issn = "1075-2846",
publisher = "Lynne Rienner Publishers",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Peacebuilding

T2 - What is in a name?

AU - Barnett, Michael

AU - Kim, Hun Joon

AU - O'Donnell, Madalene

AU - Sitea, Laura

PY - 2007/1/1

Y1 - 2007/1/1

N2 - This article surveys and analyzes twenty-four governmental and intergovernmental bodies that are currently active in peacebuilding in order to, first, identify critical differences in how they conceptualize and operationalize their mandate, and, second, map areas of potential concern. We begin by briefly outlining the various terms used by different actors to describe their peacebuilding activities and correlate these terms with differing core mandates, networks of interaction, and interests. We then identify the divisions regarding the specific approaches and areas of priority. Thus far most programs have focused on the immediate or underlying causes of conflict - to the relative neglect of state institutions. We conclude by raising concerns about how peacebuilding is institutionalized in various settings, including at the UN's Peacebuilding Commission.

AB - This article surveys and analyzes twenty-four governmental and intergovernmental bodies that are currently active in peacebuilding in order to, first, identify critical differences in how they conceptualize and operationalize their mandate, and, second, map areas of potential concern. We begin by briefly outlining the various terms used by different actors to describe their peacebuilding activities and correlate these terms with differing core mandates, networks of interaction, and interests. We then identify the divisions regarding the specific approaches and areas of priority. Thus far most programs have focused on the immediate or underlying causes of conflict - to the relative neglect of state institutions. We conclude by raising concerns about how peacebuilding is institutionalized in various settings, including at the UN's Peacebuilding Commission.

KW - Peacebuilding

KW - Peacekeeping

KW - Postconflict reconstruction

KW - United Nations

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33947309405&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33947309405&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

VL - 13

SP - 35

EP - 58

JO - Global Governance

JF - Global Governance

SN - 1075-2846

IS - 1

ER -