Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment - PCIA - Principles and General Procedures
Stages of PCIAThere are a number of different steps and processes suggested by various sources, depending on the specific purpose a PCIA is designed to serve. The following four stages are common to most PCIA processes. The four key stages of PCIA are:
|
|
Stage 1: Introduction and Sensitisation to PCIA.Clarify purpose: A PCIA is best understood as an on-project learning and steering instrument, which is best carried out by the project team. If carried out as an external assessment, involvement of the project team and gaining their support is a must. Some members of the team carrying out the assessment should be familiar with the conflict, with the project, and with PCIA methodology.Ownership of information: The project team should also clarify, at an early stage, how the results should and can be dealt with. Role of the project in conflict: The expectations of people taking part in the assessment should be clarified. The project has to develop a common understanding of the role that it is meant to play in the conflict. There must be a readiness to draw the appropriate conclusions if problematic project impacts become evident. Therefore it should be discussed what can realistically be achieved within the given time frame, resources, capacity, political mandate, etc. |
|
Stage 2: Conflict Analysis and Conflict Relevance AssessmentPCIA is only effective when based on sound conflict analysis. Conflict analysis studies its structures, actors and dynamics.Step 1: Structural Analysis:
Step 2: Actor Analysis:
Step 3: Analysis of Conflict Dynamics:
|
|
Stage 3: Project Organisation and Impact Analysis.Project or organisation appraisal involves establishing a connection between one’s own organisation and its social and political setting. The way in which a development organisation presents itself in the field, the partner(s) it co-operates with, which target groups it supports, and how staff members are recruited - all of these are political statements. The organisation must therefore regularly examine itself or be examined with regard to:
Table 1: Grouping / categorisation of impact hypotheses
|
|
The attribution of certain changes in the conflict situation to the project is problematic. Developmental cooperation usually has a relatively limited sphere of action, whereas conflicts are complex processes determined by multiple factors. Thus, scientific precision can not be achieved. The approach is at best about identifying plausible possibilities. Possible methods are:
|
|
Case Studies.Case studies do not claim to be generally applicable, but they can provide insights into the complex make-up of cause and effect at the local level and can point out new, previously unexpected impacts. In doing so, they break down barriers of perception, which are structurally inherent in conventional short-term studies. Case studies should be led by specialists on the subject area in question. They always require spending a lengthy period of time in the field. It can be useful to recruit “insiders” (Project workers) and “outsiders” (External specialists) to the survey team in order to complement the external view and the project view of events. Participatory Impact Assessment.In participatory impact assessment, the point of departure is the subjective view of the target groups. Target groups and other people affected by, or involved in, the project are asked to identify the conflict-related impacts of the project inputs that they know of and judge them according to their own criteria. The idea behind this approach is to add the target groups’ “view from below” to the “view from above” established as a result of the impact hypotheses or case studies. Participatory impact assessment emphasises the experience of individuals living in a conflict situation. It has to do with values, feelings, relationships and adjustment strategies. In addition, the method offers the opportunity to recognise unintentional and as yet unknown impacts. Conflict Monitoring.Conflict monitoring consists of observing the actual changes in the conflict situation over a certain period of time, and of examining to what extent a connection can be made between these changes and the work of the project. It focuses on actual, observable changes without claiming that the project has actually influenced the conflict. As a rule, developmental projects are not influential enough to achieve this. The question is rather to what extent the project is working in an economical, geographical, social or cultural area, which has proved to be critical for the future developments of the conflict. Figure 1: PCIA systems approach Impact Hypotheses.Impact hypotheses demonstrate why we think that a certain activity will lead to a certain change. Impact hypothesis involves examining the progress that the project has made in bringing about the changes in the conflict situation that it hoped to achieve. The objectives of the project are the point of departure for this. The idea is to establish a direct causal relationship between an individual project activity and the expected or actually observed changes. Impact chains are hypotheses; whether the impact actually materialises or not must be the subject of an empirical investigation. To help in this, indicators for each individual step are drawn up, which enable monitoring of whether certain changes have indeed been achieved. |
|
Impact Hypotheses.Impact hypotheses demonstrate why we think that a certain activity will lead to a certain change. Impact hypothesis involves examining the progress that the project has made in bringing about the changes in the conflict situation that it hoped to achieve. The objectives of the project are the point of departure for this. The idea is to establish a direct causal relationship between an individual project activity and the expected or actually observed changes. Impact chains are hypotheses; whether the impact actually materialises or not must be the subject of an empirical investigation. To help in this, indicators for each individual step are drawn up, which enable monitoring of whether certain changes have indeed been achieved. Figure 2: The process of action science
|