Clues in the Labyrinth

The Do No Harm approach (DNH) was designed in the 1990s as a tool for designing, evaluating and re-designing aid and development cooperation programs in a conflict context. The approach has been designed on the basis of the experience of many NGOs in the field. Here I want to give a quick and practical overview on how it works and what questions to ask. For a more thorough approach be sure to check out Mary B. Anderson’s older publication, but nonetheless useful Do No Harm. How Aid can Support Peace – Or War and the wealth of information at the Collaborative of Development Action’s (CDA) website: www.cdainc.com. CDA has been the key player in getting this tool developed, published and implemented.

Society impacts are central, not project results

DNH is a tool looking at a project’s impact in society. Not by looking solely at the beneficiaries of a program but more looking at the wider societal impact of a program of project, especially in (post-)conflict regions.

Read the rest of this entry »

Can international and local businesses actively engage in peace building when they decide to establish themselves in post-conflict regions?

Several sources debate the possible role of corporations in peace building, but it is largely an unexplored field. The debate does take place within some international institutions and NGOs. Unfortunately the main actors, the businesses themselves, are mostly absent. I don’t think it’s hard to imagine possible reasons: fear for the public image or concerns for the safety of international staff amongst the first ideas that come to mind. But even these reasons are hardly known for sure.

On the other hand, a company with good practices and experience in this field, may have something to gain from involving themselves in the debate. One way would be the good image, others relate to the merging practice of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Several developments exist, e.g.

• UN Global Compact, initiated by Kofi Annan, calls for standards in business practice in conflict sensitive areas;
• The Triple Bottom Line approach ask for an assessment of projects not only on a basis of financial criteria, but also criteria related to the environment (second bottom line) and people (the third bottom line);
• The Global Reporting Initiative is developing reporting methodology and reporting practice related to so-called corporate footprints like these environmental and people criteria.

Looking at conflict and business is mostly done on the level of adhering to standards. Wether these standards are voluntarily agreed upon or set as a (semi-)legal requirement, it is the lowest level of conflict sensitivity. See the lower level of the box below.

Read the rest of this entry »