Version User Scope of changes
Aug 15 2009, 4:59 AM EDT (current) chachabooth 2 words added, 1 word deleted
Aug 14 2009, 11:49 AM EDT chachabooth 652 words added, 3 words deleted

Changes

Key:  Additions   Deletions

Purpose:To try to analyse the structural dimension for a conflict case study.
To identify challenges for conducting an analysis of the structural dimension
Participants:4 to 20 (or more)

Time: 90 min. (more if needed)

Materials:Flip charts
Marker Pens
Handouts with the case study
Process:1. The session will be structured around the two-part case study "Not just a river on a map", taking place in Lesotho. If you have not used the case study for the personal and relational dimension before, give a brief introduction to the case. If the other dimensions have been analysed for the case, you can give a short recap of the main findings.

2. Organise participants in groups of 4-5 and assign the task: The groups shall analyse the structural dimension of conflict and how the conflict has brought about change. The following questions can guide the analysis (provide them to participants on a handout):

a) Social conditions
  • What social conditions and changes in social conditions have worked as preconditions for conflict or have given rise to conflict?
  • Are there for instance consistent patterns of marginalisation and exclusion in access to power and resources? Are there historic patterns of racism, sectarianism, or ethnic marginalisation?
  • What social cleavages exist (long-standing ethnic/religious/clan/economical or other divisions)?
  • How have the relations been between majorities and minorities?
  • In what way does the conflict effect change in the existing social conditions: changes in the structure of power, in the distribution/allocation of economic resources?
b) Procedural patterns (decision-making)
  • How are decisions taken and by whom? Has this changed due to conflict?
  • Do people have equal access to information and understanding of decision-making?
  • Are there groups who are (or perceive they are) consistently left out of political and economic decisions and processes that effect their communities?
  • Do all societal groups have an equal say in processes that affect the wider community?
  • What patterns of dealing with conflict/conflict handling mechanisms can be identified?
c) Quality of governance, conception of power and institutional patterns
  • What is the quality of governance from local, to regional and national level?
  • How is power distributed in the system? What conception of power is predominant among the elites? How can the elite behaviour be described: patrimonialism/clientelism, political exploitation of identity,
  • Are the wider procedural patterns identified reflected in the function and maintenance of key social, political and economic institutions, particularly in the ones established to serve the wider public?
  • What are the capacities and performance of existing institutions on local and national level? Is there trust in primary service institutions on part of the groups that they are meant to serve? If not, why?
Note: If you have done the activity "Working into the structural dimension" use the contextualised list of question for this activity.

3) In plenary, let groups report back to plenary what the major results of their analysis are.

4) In discussion with the participants, explore:
  • What can be learnt from analysing the structural dimension for this case?
  • What challenges can be faced when tasked with analysing the structural dimension? How could they be dealt with?
  • For the case presented here, how could positive structural transformation be motivated? (Or is this not possible at all?all?)
Note:
Instead of using this case study, you can also encourage the groups to analyse a "real" conflict in their context.

The case study is relatively long and this might pose a challenge in mixed groups, or groups where English is not first or second language. You can consider translating a summary of the case or present the case to participants in another, more visual and less text-based method.

Handout(s): Moeketsi, Tello, Not Just a River on a Map, in: Centre for Conflict Resolution, Case Studies of Conflict in Africa, in: Track Two. Constructive Approaches to Community and Political Conflict, Vol. 12, Nos 3 and 4, University of Cape Town: 2003, pp. 70-74. <http://www.ccr.uct.ac.za/fileadmin/template/ccr/pdf/TT12-3_4_Sep05.pdf> (accessed 4 August 2009).

Guiding questions for analysis (see process description above)
Source(s):chachabooth@gmail.com



Add a New Page