Foundations for Peace

Editorial...
Why an emphasis on social justice?

The concept of social justice can mean different things to different people when considered in various societal contexts and in different parts of the world. For the Foundations for Peace Network, a social justice approach entails striving for structural change both within, and between, societies by increasing consciousness of the implications of the existing distribution of power and resources, and identifying strategies for change. There is also an emphasis placed on working with disadvantaged or marginalised groups to augment their self-awareness and mobilisation in order to challenge the consequences of unfair political, economic, environmental and social systems. Proactive social justice work is not about alleviating or addressing the symptoms of injustice alone, but rather about highlighting and confronting the causes of such injustice. Systems and attitudes that perpetuate injustice must be transformed, and those groups of people that have been excluded, disadvantaged, oppressed and/or marginalised must be supported to define their own struggles for human rights, equality and justice.

Social justice is often conceptualised in terms of distributive justice, with an emphasis on how advantages and resources are distributed to people across a society. Within this framing of the issue, questions are asked as to ‘What do people owe one another as a matter of justice?’ The linkage between social justice and the rights of citizens has thus been linked in the preamble of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) –

“The ideal of free human beings enjoying civil and political freedom and freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his economic, social and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political rights”.

However this aspiration also requires an awareness of the need for equity of participation in decision-making and of what has been termed ‘positional injustice’. The latter results from situations where the social positioning of a group, or community, of people can mean that there are limitations on their opportunities and access to power. This can occur where there is a ‘lack of fit’, or disjuncture, between the attributes of certain groups and the dominant societal structures, attitudes and perceptions. Where social justice is lacking the potential for violent conflict is enhanced.

The interface between structural injustice, conflict and peacebuilding
Structural violence is a situation where discrimination, oppression and marginalisation are experienced by specific groupings or classes within society. Where action around issues of structural injustice moves from a position of latent conflict into overt conflict, then approaches to both social injustice and peacebuilding collide. Overt violence added to existing structural violence often creates a situation in which everyone perceives themselves as oppressed or worse off than they were before.

At the heart of the inferno- the no-go of violent conflict.
Many philanthropists feel that there is little that they can effectively contribute during the course of violent conflict, and it is true that in extremely sensitive, and often complex, situations, they have to tread with care. It is not true, however, to suggest that nothing can be done until the last bullet has been fired and the last bomb defused. Indeed it is the experience of many societies that credibility is developed when philanthropists are prepared to work with communities in crisis; such work is often quiet and supportive, rather than headline grabbing or invasive.

Where the indigenous funder is committed to peacebuilding and social justice, they can provide a mapping of the challenges, opportunities and activities in their particular society and can act as the on-the-ground partners of external philanthropists. They are then trusted hands when post-conflict work is needed.

There is a range of effective approaches that interested and concerned philanthropy might consider –

Strengthening local capacity for peacebuilding by peer learning and training; and introducing new ideas and organisational ability to pose alternatives to violent conflict.
Generate opportunities for inclusive dialogue which can seek to humanise ‘the enemy’ and enable people to hear what ‘the others’ have to say.
Support individuals, groups and local communities – often through investment in women – that have been devastated by conflict to rebuild their lives in such a way that they do not become symbolic of previous or ongoing divisions.
Seek initiatives and ways to ameliorate the direct impact of the conflict on groups within the communities affected (eg. On young people; women; victims of the violence, etc.)
Fund specific initiatives that can ameliorate the ongoing violence, such as networks of community activists to prevent the circulation of rumours and to undertake localised interface negotiation.
Look for new voices that can challenge the simplification of the societal divisions within their own communities, using – where possible – more inclusive mediums, such as the arts.
Support those groups and organisations that continue to advocate for social justice and human rights issues throughout the conflict; including offering monitor and witness provision.
Focus international attention on the nature and the impact of the conflict in order to seek to ameliorate the worst excesses of the violence.
Invest in organisations that seek to develop a clear value base with regard to their work for social justice and peacebuilding within a conflict situation.

What cannot be over-stated when working in these circumstances is the value of taking the time to listen to local people and being prepared to see progress as a winding, and often looping, road. It is usual for every intervention to be viewed through a political lens – even those funded by philanthropists. The question will always be asked – Whose side are you on? The challenge for philanthropy is to work with local organisations and local charitable funders to shift the paradigm of that question.

Emerging from violent conflict
“After a war, re-constructing buildings is the easy bit. Re-building the fabric of society is more difficult. What is most challenging to deal with, and least attended to, are the deep wounds left in the hearts and minds of those who live on. If these wounds are left untreated, they fester into further horror. That’s why serious skill and serious money must be invested in this healing, why human security is the issue of the time, and why war prevention is the coming science.” Elworthy and Rifkind 2005:Hearts and minds.

And what can we do?
Social Justice philanthropy sets itself the task of working in partnership with those people that have been disadvantaged in order to redress the inequities experienced. Social justice philanthropy, in the context of peacebuilding, understands conflict within the broader framing of social injustice and works to achieve a form of conflict transformation that will also address these injustices. However given the complexities of any particular conflict prone, or conflict ridden, society, it is important that external philanthropists – and Development Aid agencies – take the time to listen to the insights of indigenous Funds and Foundations, and where a shared value base is established, to work in partnership with them. There is invariably so much to be done that there is room for all hands to be set to the wheel of conflict transformation.

What indigenous independent Funds and Foundations can offer includes –

Acting as a knowledge hub of the local conditions and particularly being sensitive to the adverse impact of violent conflict and social injustices on specific communities and groups within their society.
Being open to a range of different approaches – both grantmaking and non grantmaking roles – in order to proactively support work around peacebuilding and social justice.
Offering a convening role which can bring together groups across sectarian, ethnic, caste and other divides, and working with partner organisations and initiatives to ensure that this can happen safely. This will include the creation of safe spaces in which conversations on sensitive and controversial topics can take place.
Networking at community level with potentially marginalised or excluded groups and testing ways to support their active participation in alliances for change.
Acting as a bridge between different levels in society (as set out in Figure 3).
Offering flexible and timely grant delivery – in situations of rapid change, as often occurs during peacebuilding, a small grant made in a timely and flexible manner can be more effective than a larger grant.
Helping to develop broad platforms/alliances to build cooperation and solidarity around issues of social justice and peacebuilding. This can entail indigenous Funds and Foundations using their position in society and their reputational capital to stand by advocates for change.
Acting as a channel for external philanthropy and/or Development Aid agencies either through a partnership approach to the delivery of funding or as a source of active consultation.
Offering a signposting service for external funders, particularly in terms of advising on how planned interventions might be interpreted (or misinterpreted) and applying a peace and conflict impact assessment with regard to proposed initiatives.

Using small sums of money to achieve a big impact on sensitive and difficult issues requires the willingness and ability to move outside the comfort zone of much philanthropic grantmaking. It is also based on the premise that the sources of ‘small money’ will be made available and that the importance of external-internal philanthropic partnership approaches is recognised. What the external philanthropic partner brings is not only money, but also a macro perspective and contacts that can be incredibly important in situations of violent conflict. What the local partner contributes is not just the added value element and the micro ‘pulse’ of the situation, but also the guarantee of living with the decisions taken. It is this combination that can deliver an effective strategic approach. Ultimately, those who are suffering as a result of violence and social injustice should expect no less.