ARMED VIOLENCE REDUCTION:

(1)

ARMED VIOLENCE

REDUCTION:

A

N

EXUS FOR

S

ECURITY

AND

D

EVELOPMENT

D

ECEMBER

2011

M

ASTER OF

A

RTS IN

I

NTERNATIONAL

H

UMANITARIAN

A

CTION

U

NIVERSITY OF

G

RONINGEN

Luis Andersen 2052792

Supervisor: Dr. Andrej Zwitter

M

ASTER

’

S

T

HESIS

©P. Sudhakaran/UN Photo

(2)

“Fundamentally, many arms reduction programs lack a conceptual framework

to disarm the minds of gun users, especially young men, by changing

com-munity attitudes towards weapons possession and use.”

(3)

Table of Figures and Tables

FIGURE 2.1: THE RESEARCH ‘ONION’ ... 7

FIGURE 3.1: PROPORTIONAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONFLICT AND NON-‐CONFLICT DEATHS... 12

FIGURE 3.2: HOMICIDAL VIOLENCE BY HDI, 1986-‐2009 ... 13

FIGURE 3.3: HOMICIDE RATES PER 100,000 POPULATION, BY SUBREGION, 2004 ... 13

FIGURE 4.1: THE ARMED VIOLENCE LENS... 22

FIGURE 5.1: WORLD ESTIMATES FOR HOMICIDE RATE PER 100,000 POPULATION BY AGE, 2004 ... 27

(5)

E

XECUTIVE

S

UMMARY

Two thirds of all homicides caused by armed violence take place in non-‐conflict situa-‐ tions. This means that the focus on ending violent conflict cannot stand alone. In order to support peace, security and development in post-‐conflict areas, more has to be done.

This paper looks at the nexus between security and development; it does so by examin-‐ ing the emerging field of Armed Violence Reduction and Prevention (AVR). In the past the two fields of conflict resolution and development have worked rather separately with-‐ out too much focus on the correlation between these two important areas. AVR, both as a concept and as a programmatic framework, has acknowledged this important link, and thus tries to find ways to bridge the gap.

Most conflict resolution theories and programmes have been challenged in recent years, due to the rapidly changing environment in the world, not least within the fields of peace building and state building. The general criticism has been that the programmes have not been good enough at tackling the new developments, and by not being based on proper analysis and evidence, some programmes have increased the risk of doing harm, while trying to support peace processes.

In this respect, AVR has tried, by applying a people-‐centred approach, to not only focus on the instruments (weapons) and the institutions, but to widen the spectra so that focus moves toward why people use weapons in non-‐conflict settings, and in turn take a holistic approach in dealing with the identified issues.

(6)

where violence is often engrained in the culture. A holistic approach is always needed, and in addition to building on the failure within contemporary conflict resolution prac-‐ tice, the necessity to base programming on evidence has become a fundamental aspect of the AVR concept and programming framework.

(7)

L

IST OF

A

BBREVIATIONS

AVR Armed Violence Reduction and Prevention BCPR UNDP Bureau for Crisis Prevention & Recovery CICS Centre for International Cooperation and Security

DDG Danish Demining Group

DDR Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration

DRC Danish Refugee Council

GDP Gross Domestic Product GDS Geneva Declaration Secretariat

GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit

HDI UNDP Human Development Index

IGOs International Governmental Organisations LRRD Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development MDGs UN Millennium Development Goals

NGOs Non-‐Governmental Organisations

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-‐operation and Development OECD-‐DAC Organisation for Economic Co-‐operation and Development –

Development Assistance Committee SALW Small Arms and Light Weapons

SAS Small Arms Survey

SSR Security Sector Reform

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

USD US Dollars

WDR World Development Report

WHO World Health Organisation

(8)

1. I

NTRODUCTION

1.1 Development and Armed Violence

At the beginning of the 21st_{century,
the
Millennium
Development
Goals
(MDGs)
were}

set up by the international community through the United Nations (UN) (UNSG 2000). Since then, there has been a great deal of criticism of the lack of results as time pro-‐ gresses towards 2015, where the MDGs according to schedule shall be obtained (see e.g. Oxfam 2008). In the 2011 World Development Report (WDR) from the World Bank (2011: 1), it is documented that no low-‐income state affected by conflict or considered as fragile has managed to achieve any of the seven MDGs. These countries are all charac-‐ terised by their dual problems of security concerns and lack of development. On the se-‐ curity issue these countries are either trying to end devastating conflicts or are using all available conflict resolution and peace building tools to avoid a relapse into armed con-‐ flicts. Concurrently on the development side, the focus is on creating a viable state and rebuilding of fundamental state functions like education and healthcare. However, in the attempt to explain why these states have failed in achieving substantial and sustainable development, an emerging field of study within security and developmental program-‐ ming has been introduced.

Several studies (see e.g. CICS 2005 and GDS 2008) have, within the last decade, doc-‐ umented the substantial and concrete consequences armed violence has on develop-‐ ment and security in post-‐conflict states. More than 740,000 people die every year as a result of armed violence, and the majority, approximately 490,000, are death from homicides in non-‐conflicti_{affected
countries
(GDS
2008:
2
&
67}ii_{).
The
documentation
of}

the consequences has led to researchers arguing for an increased focus on this area, as it is seen as the one of the key areas in creating sustainable peace and development (Mug-‐ gah & Batchelor 2002 and Muggah & Krause 2009).

(9)

programmes on the prevention of armed violence (WHO and UNDP 2005) and by the production of a report by the UN Secretary-‐General to the General Assembly on the topic (UNSG 2009). Besides this, 112 states have signed the Geneva Declaration on Armed Vio-

lence and Development from 2006, which strives to achieve a measurable reduction in

armed violence by 2015 (GDS 2006).

In addition to these, in itself substantial, reasons for engaging more extensively in reduc-‐ ing and preventing armed violence; certain developments in the nature of armed vio-‐ lence have been identified. These areas are often neglected in official policies and pro-‐ grammes. The OECD (2009: 36-‐37) has found four main trends that need further atten-‐ tion or at least renewed focus from both practitioners and donors:

• The level of armed violence does in many non-conflict countries ex-

ceed that of countries at war. This fact is still unknown to many donors

and development practitioners, with the rates of armed violence especially high in countries emerging from armed conflicts.

• There is a growing linkage between socio-political conflict and crime. Armed groups that have taken control with certain illicit markets are often aligned with transnational criminal networks and global supply chains, thus requiring a broader approach in order to tackle the issue.

• There is a pressing need to deal with youth gangs and youth at risk. Young men are the most likely to become perpetrators as well as victims of armed violence. While this fact is quite well know, states and the interna-‐ tional community need to get a renewed focus on this area, with new and innovative solutions.

• Rapidly urbanising cities are experiencing escalating levels of armed

violence. A major challenge is the lack of experience of programming in

urban areas, and especially the connected slum areas. This problem is not only occurring in low-‐income countries, but can for example also be seen in otherwise middle-‐income countries, such as Brazil and South Africa.

(10)

1.2 Armed Violence Reduction and Youth at Risk

The attention and knowledge gained about the field of armed violence has created the concept of Armed Violence Reduction and Prevention (AVR). A number of research insti-‐ tutes, NGOs and IGOs have started working on developing targeted AVR programmes, evaluating current programmes and finding lessons learned for future interventions (see for example: Small Arms Survey, BCPR, OECD and DDG). AVR is not considered as an entire new field of study, which requires completely new programming tools. Instead it “… builds on existing frameworks, approaches and lessons learned in areas such as con-

flict prevention, peace building, crime prevention and public health” (OECD 2009: 15).

One of the trends in armed violence that has not been adequately addressed, so far, is the issue of targeting the youthiii_{(OECD
2011a),
as
this
group
is
of
extreme
exposure
to}

armed violence. Many of the 1.3 billion youngsters living in developing countries, espe-‐ cially those who have grown up in countries affected by conflicts, have been accustomed to a culture where armed violence has become a normal part of live, and a natural way to settle disputes and inter-‐family conflicts (CICS 2005: 5 and OECD 2011a: 13-‐15). This, combined with the fact that a majority of the youth lack a basic foundation for their per-‐ sonal development by not having access to education, vocational skills and not least de-‐ cent employment opportunities, means that they are more likely to become perpetrators -‐ and victims -‐ of armed violence (OECD 2011a: 13-‐15). Furthermore, since a major part of the youth growing up in developing countries are living in uncontrolled slums, where organised crime and gangs are a regular phenomenon, there is also a great risk of youth getting involved in this type of (organised) criminality, when otherwise feeling excluded from the society (Jackson et al. 2005: 21-‐24).

1.3 Research Question

As there appear to be a clear link between post-‐war reconstruction, peace building and the ability of states to tackle its primary responsibility of creating security for its people, it seems surprising that the concern and spotlight only recently have turned to conse-‐ quences of armed violence and what should be done to reduce and prevent it.

(11)

AVR programmes targeting youth at risk is only one of the many challenging aspects of reducing and preventing armed violence, which is needed in order to create a sustain-‐ able peace and a foundation for substantial development. However, by looking at youth at risk, the differences that AVR programming has compared to contemporary conflict resolution theoriesiv_{in
addressing
armed
violence
become
apparent.
Moreover,
pro-‐}

gramming in youth also takes the other trends in armed violence into consideration, and thus is of particular importance for the analysis of AVR as a broader framework. Finally, a recent mapping study of past and current AVR programmes, conducted by OECD (2011b: 35), shows that ‘youth at risk’ programmes is the area within AVR, where the most organisations have become involved, thus making this a good case to evaluate and learn from.

The present paper analyses the relatively new concept of AVR, and focuses on ap-‐ proaches that target youth at risk, as well as on post-‐conflict situations. The reason for the latter is, at it will be shown, most of the current AVR youth programmes are imple-‐ mented in non-‐conflict, middle-‐income countries, like Brazil and South Africa. Thus with such an analysis, it will be possible to see what the AVR concept adds, if anything, to the existing theories and approaches available in dealing with armed violence in post-‐ conflict settings. The results of the analysis are used to assess where AVR as a concept and framework is today, and attempt to come up with possible future directions. Since concepts and theories often experience a split between the concepts and frameworks developed by scholars and the practice seen in the real world, the paper will take this distinction into consideration when dealing with AVR and contemporary conflict resolu-‐ tion. It will try to uncover whether the possible added value that AVR brings to contem-‐ porary conflict resolution is only reflected in the theories and not in practice, or vice versa. Furthermore, since youth programming in post-‐conflict situations is currently not well documented, this paper will build on best practices from youth programmes in other contexts and see how future AVR youth programming in post-‐conflict situations could look like. Thus the primary research question is:

To what extent can current AVR theory and practice be built into contemporary conflict resolution theory and practice?

(12)

However, in order to fully answer the research question and uncover the true value of the AVR (youth) programming, one sub-‐research question is needed:

To what extent can current AVR youth programmes in middle-income countries be applied in low-income, post-conflict countries?

The paper argues that AVR as a concept, and in programming, does add real value to the conflict resolution field, as it is based on the needs “on the ground” and combines a top-‐ down and bottom-‐up approach, while always keeping the people in fear of armed vio-‐ lence at the centre of attention. It furthermore seems that AVR could be an integrated part of the “next generation” in conflict resolution theories. Youth programming has a very special role to play, and while promising interventions have taken place in middle-‐ income countries, more work and studies are needed in order to see how these pro-‐ grammes can be adapted in post-‐conflict contexts.

1.4 Structure

Before embarking on the analysis, it is important to present the methodological princi-‐ pals and steps, which are decisive for guiding the direction and outcome of the paper. These principals will be presented in the following chapter.

The subsequent Chapter 3 will firstly describe the consequences that armed violence have, and in this aspect keeping a focus on what armed violence does for the opportuni-‐ ties for development in post-‐conflict countries. Secondly, the chapter will present some of the main thoughts of contemporary conflict resolution theories, including how armed violence has so far been incorporated into these theories. With the knowledge from the previous chapter in mind, Chapter 4 will present the Armed Violence Reduction and Prevention concept, which will be done by looking at how it emerged, as well as the

armed violence lens, which is the framework that guides the AVR programmes.

(13)

Chapter 6 analyses best practices within youth programming, as mentioned above, since youth programming is the preferred implementing field of AVR programming, different methods will be used to uncover the lessons learned. Furthermore, the chapter will look at how the best practices in youth programming can be transferred to low-‐income, post-‐ conflict situations.

The findings of the paper will be synthesised in Chapter 7, where the strengths and weaknesses of AVR and conflict resolution theories will be analysed, and possible added value of AVR will become visible. It will also uncover some of the challenges of AVR, which will lead to a discussion of the future direction of AVR within contemporary con-‐ flict resolution theories and practices.

As a concluding chapter, Chapter 8 provides an overview of the results of the paper, while also presenting some reflections on AVR in general.

(14)

2. M

ETHODOLOGY

Every research paper needs to be based on a certain methodology. This should show how the research will be undertaken and reflect the general philosophical views, so that it is clear what assumptions are behind the methods chosen and the concrete research performed. This chapter will briefly go through the chosen methodology and in doing so, it will be based on Saunders et al.’s “research ‘onion’” as presented in Figure 2.1.

FIGURE 2.1: THE RESEARCH ‘ONION’

Source: “Research Methods for Business Students”, Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill 2007: 102

(15)

This paper structures an analysis about AVR programmes targeting youth at risk, and put that in relation to conflict resolution theories, which should end up showing what AVR adds to the broader field, and how it can be developed further in the future. In order to do so, an inductive research approach will be used, as the aim of this paper is not to test theories (deductive), but to build on already existing theories, by examining available material and develop an understanding of AVR in relation to conflict resolution theories.

From the research questions, it is clear that this paper will take AVR programming tar-‐ geting youth at risk as the case within the overall AVR framework. More specifically, the focus will be on how youth initiatives from middle-‐income countries can be transferred to low-‐income, post-‐conflict societies. This is done through finding best practice within AVR youth programming from middle-‐income countries, and while taking the specific contexts of the post-‐conflict situation into consideration, it will present some measures that can be used in dealing with the issue of youth being involved in armed violence in post-‐conflict countries.

The term ‘best practice’ is often used as a business term, however, the definition used by the British Government: “Best practice means finding - and using - the best ways of work-

ing to achieve your business objectives. It involves keeping up to date with the ways that successful businesses operate - in your sector and others - and measuring your ways of working against those used by the market leaders” (BusinessLink), can easily be adapted

for the purpose of this paper.

(16)

When discussing research choices, the question is how research is conducted, meaning how the researcher will combine, or not combine, qualitative and quantitative tech-‐ niques (Saunders et al. 2007). This paper will be multi-‐method qualitative study, which means that more than one qualitative data collecting method. This will also become clear from the research techniques and procedures.

Even though the research took place over an extended period, of almost one year from the original idea, this paper has a time horizon, which is evident in a cross-sectional study, as the research does not look at events that have taken place in a certain period, as a longitudinal study would have done.

Finally, the sixth layer looks at the research techniques and procedures that will be applied in order to answer the research question. This section will describe the different data sources used in this paper.

As noted above, a thorough literature review is a key component of the research for this paper. The base will be existing literature, which is collected from a field as broad as possible, while still keeping the focus of the paper in mind. The reason for this broad approach is that the field of AVR is still dominated by a limited number of researchers, so in order to avoid certain biases a broad approach is needed. Furthermore, the field of AVR stretches over several sectors, from conflict prevent and peace building to crime prevention and public health.

When taking a broad approach, very few researchers dominate the field of AVR, and especially one researcher has been very active in promoting and developing the concept of AVR. This is Robert Muggah from the Small Arms Survey (SAS). In this paper, his publications have been used numerous times, both advocating for AVR and criticiz-‐ ing other conflict resolution theories and methods. Especially regarding the criticism, it has been necessary to cross check his points against other more impartial researchers, in order to circumvent any bias.

(17)

The secondary literature found has mainly been used in the descriptive chapters (3-‐5); however, in chapter 4 programming notes and policy papers are also used, as they are up until now the most thorough documents on what AVR is. After looking through different evaluation reports and websites of AVR actors, the Viva Rio case for the best practice study was chosen. This was mainly based on two evaluation reports conducted on their programmes in Brazil and Haiti.

As a mean of verification, and adding extra information to the topic, a Skype interview was held, on the 18th_{of
November
2011,
with
Karina
Lynge,
who
is
Head
of
Programme}

Development on Armed Violence Reduction for Danish Deming Group (DDG). The rea-‐ son for interviewing a representative from DDG is that this organisation is one of the leading NGOs working with AVR in post-‐conflict situations. Furthermore, Karina Lynge has been involved in the development of the first AVR intervention that DDG has imple-‐ mented, and thus she has valuable knowledge on how to implement AVR programmes in post-‐conflict contexts. At the same time she can also present her ideas of where the em-‐ erging field of AVR will head towards in the coming years.

The interview was conducted in a semi-‐structured form (Saunders et al. 2007: 133, 314). The main parts of the questions were open-‐ended, meaning they were trying to get the interviewee to respond with lengthy answers, which were then followed up with more concrete questions. Appendix A shows the main themes and questions of the interview, together with a brief summary of the replies from Lynge. During and after the interview, a natural criticism had to be taken to the statements made by Lynge, as she also has an objective of promoting AVR. It is, however, important to stress that the input provided by Lynge was very constructive and gave valuable input from a more practical side of AVR.

(18)

3. A

RMED

V

IOLENCE AND

C

ONFLICT

R

ESOLUTION

T

HEORIES

In the past, and still today, most academic literature on peace and conflicts focused on armed conflicts and how to end them (see for example Ramsbotham et al. 2011 and Glasl 2008). In post-‐conflict situations, when most of the development work begins, the focus is still on keeping the peace. This is with good reason, as post-‐conflict countries have a 20-‐40 % chance of relapse into renewed conflict within the first five post-‐conflict years, although the figures can be questioned, they do provide a valid reason for focus-‐ ing on avoiding relapse (GDS 2008: 58). However, as this chapter will show, there is a big need to also focus on armed violence in non-‐conflict situations.

The World Development Report 2011, on Conflict, Security and Development from the World Bank, stated as its main message that: “… strengthening legitimate institutions and

governance to provide citizen security, justice, and jobs is crucial to break cycles of vio- lence” (2011: 2). This is a clear signal that the international community is realising the

need for increased attention on the appalling consequences that armed violence have, especially in countries emerging from conflict.

This chapter describes the dire consequences that armed violence has on devel-‐ opment both in conflict and non-‐conflict situations. The purpose of this is to show how armed violence hampers developing countries’ ability to create sustainable peace and substantial development. Secondly, the chapter looks at how armed violence has been dealt with in contemporary conflict resolution theories.

3.1 The Consequences of Armed Violence

Armed violence is in this paper defined as: “the use or threatened use of weapons to

inflict injury, death or psychological harm, which undermines development” (OECD 2009:

(19)

3.1.1 Human Costs

More than 740,000 people die every year due to armed violence, the majority of these deaths, 490,000, are happening in countries not affected by conflicts (see Fig. 3.1). In-‐ stead, these happen due to intentional homicides, crime and interpersonal violence (GDS 2008: 2). In addition, there presumably are an even higher number of victims, who sur-‐ vives the intentional armed violence, and thus have to live with the consequences of this. Much of the violence that takes place is never reported, mainly because it happens in developing countries where the reporting mechanisms are poor (WHO 2008: 4-‐6; GDS 2008: 68). This also results in the fact that homicides are one of the only real measures of armed violence. While this is unfortunate, it is linked to the fact that many developing countries are not capable of setting up injury monitoring systems, and other types of systems that could be measured and compared around the globe.

In developing countries, and in particular in post-‐ conflict and fragile states, armed violence has a considerable role in soci-‐ ety. While it is the fourth leading cause of death among people between the ages of 15 and 44 worldwide, it has an even larger impact in develop-‐ ing countries. Both in

Africa and Latin America, armed violence is among the top ten causes of death of all ages (GDS 2008: 1). In Figure 3.2, it becomes evident that high levels of homicidal violence is predominately a phenomenon which is seen in countries that are ranked at the bottom of UNDP’s human development index (HDI). Furthermore, from Figure 3.3, it is clear that countries experiencing high levels of armed violence (here in the form of intentional homicides) are concentrated in certain areas of the world. However, it is also important to note that it is not only in low-‐income countries that high levels of armed violence take place, but also in emerging economies such as South Africa and Brazil. In these areas, the

Source: “Global Burden of Armed Violence”, Geneva Declaration Secretariat 2008: 3

FIGURE 3.1: PROPORTIONAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONFLICT

AND NON-CONFLICT DEATHS

(20)

majority of the armed violence takes place in so-‐called “ungoverned” areas, like the fav-

elas in Brazil and townships in South Africa (OECD 2009: 28-‐29).

FIGURE 3.3:HOMICIDE RATES PER 100,000 POPULATION, BY SUBREGION,2004

Source: “Global Burden of Armed Violence”, Geneva Declaration Secretariat 2008: 4

Besides the direct human costs, prolonged armed violence often happens when the pol-‐ ice and justice systems are not working effectively or is absent, as it is in some post-‐

37 26 43 9 1 15 21 12 4 11 3 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Very high human development (38

countries)

High human development (45 countries)

Medium human development (75 countries)

Low human development (24 countries)

FIGURE 3.2: HOMICIDALVIOLENCEBY HDI, 1986-2009

PERCENTAGEOFTOTALNUMBEROFHOMICIDES

Low homicide rate High homicide rate Very high homicide rate

(21)

conflict and fragile states. In these situations, the CICS study (2005: 5) shows that armed violence becomes a legitimate way to solve even minor conflicts, and thus a “gun cul-‐ ture” can become apparent, and very difficult to get rid off, as will be shown in Chapter 6.

3.1.2 Economic Costs and Developmental Consequences

In addition to the human costs there are also significant economic consequences of armed violence, which in turn also create severe obstacles for the countries ability to develop. According to a study conducted by Collier et al. (2003: 14), the economic costs on countries experiencing civil war is on average USD 65 billion dollars per civil war for an average seven-‐year conflict, and a reduction in annual growth of approximately 2 % of gross domestic product (GDP) is experienced both during and long after the conflict has ended. The economic costs in non-‐conflict situations are also significant with global costs due to homicidal violence ranging between USD 95-‐160 billion dollars per year (GDS 2008: 89), and a staggering USD 400 billion is lost if the loss of productivity due to lives cut prematurely short by armed violence is included (OECD 2009: 29)

Furthermore, in some developing countries, which are encountering a high level of armed violence, the states are spending an unusual high percentage (10-‐15 %) of their budgets on security and law enforcement measures compared to developed countries (5 %) (GDS 2008: 91). In some cases the costs for security outstrip the spending on health and education combined (UNDP 2006 and Collier et al. 2003: 20). If you take the direct and indirect costsvi_{of
armed
violence
together
in
some
of
the
most
affected
states,
then}

they are even higher. For example in the case of Guatemala in 2005, direct and indirect costs of armed violence accumulated to the equivalent of 7.3 % of GDP, and in El Salva-‐ dor some 14 % of GDP (GDS 2008: 94).

(22)

hunger and decent work for everyone) is suffering from armed violence (GDS 2010a: 9). There are multiple reasons for this fact, as armed violence often happens in situations where there are not enough decent jobs, especially for the young population. This makes them more likely to become involved in criminal activities, for example gangs, which is often associated with armed violence. Furthermore, as mentioned above, armed vio-‐ lence then leads to a significant loss in production, due to changes in family composition and displacement (CICS 2005: 8; OECD 2009: 30).

Finally, one issue that will also be dealt with later, when examining youth at risk, is how there is a correlation (see fig. 3.2) between lower levels of development being associated with increased levels of homicidal violence. In particular countries with high levels of income inequality and unemployment are comparatively more prone to high levels of homicidal violence, and vice versa (GDS 2010a: 10).

3.1.3 The Changing Nature of Armed Violence

While the consequences of armed violence are surprising in the number of deaths in non-‐conflict situations and the tremendous total costs due to armed violence, it is also worth looking at how armed violence has developed and changed over the past couple of decades. As already uncovered most victims of armed violence are found in non-‐ conflict areas, which is a relatively new development (GDS 2008: 15). In particular post-‐ conflict states are prone to higher than expected levels of armed violence, and thus also resulting in a need for different approaches to tackle the consequences (OECD 2009: 36).

(23)

Finally a change, which is linked to the fact that the world is becoming increasingly globalised, is that armed violence is no longer restricted within the borders of individual countries. Crime, in particular, has become organised in international syndicates, which means that in order to tackle, for example, drug trafficking, it is important to look at the full supply chain and not only go after the salesmen at the end destination. The reason being that this will not stop the money going into these syndicates and thus possibly resulting in armed violence (OECD 2009: 31). Furthermore, it has been seen that these criminal syndicates often operate in conflict or post-‐conflict states where the illicit mar-‐ kets are very active, and the states ability to control the activity is limited (ibid: 36). This also places an additional need for finding tools to handle this problem.

3.2 Armed Violence in Conflict Resolution Theories

As shown by the statement from the WDR 2011, one of the World Bank’s main focus areas is how repeated cycles of violence can be ended, and this the report suggest should be done by supporting the creation of strong governmental institutions, which can pro-‐ vide security, justice, and jobs for its citizens. The UN report (UNSG 2009: 5) also high-‐ lights that “[t]he state has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force and armed vio-‐ lence.” These two reports give a good representation of what is stressed in most official governmental reports up until now, on dealing with armed violence. The focus is on in-‐ stitutions and thus implying a form of top-‐down approach.

(24)

driven by the principal of good governance. While the distinction between the two theo-‐ ries are somewhat blurred, where the one is part of the other and vice versa, the focus in this paper will be on state building, as this is where the direct relation with security is usually located.

3.2.2 State building

State building is defined as: “… the attempt to (re)build self-‐sustaining institutions of governance capable of delivering the essential public goods required to underpin per-‐ ceived legitimacy and what it is hoped will eventually become an enduring peace” (Ramsbotham et al. 2011: 199). Furthermore, as already noted, it is an area that many states and organisations have emphasised in recent years.

When looking at the breakdown of phases of state building as presented by Rams-‐ botham et al. (2011), the direct attempts to reduce armed violence are located with within the first two phases out of three. Especially, in phase 1 (see ibid page 213 for el-‐ aboration of the different phases), there is a focus on reducing the influence of the for-‐ merly warring parties, and their ability to hold weapons. This is usually done through DDR and small arms and light weapons (SALW) programmes (ibid; Yeung 2008: 6). In phase 2 and 3, the general stabilisation and normalisation become the objective, and in this regard SSR is a regular instrument used to create security for the post-‐conflict af-‐ fected populations, and thus lower the level of armed violence. All of these areas both have advantages and disadvantages. In the follow two subsections the different instru-‐ ments will be analysed.

3.2.1.1 DDR and SALW Programmes

(25)

numbers of weapons are now in the possession of people who should not normally be the owners of these types of weapons (Ashour 2011).

Over the last years, DDR and general disarmament programmes have become more and more criticised from different academics (e.g. Muggah 2005, Goetschel & Hagmann 2009). The problem of this type of programmes is not that they do not achieve their short-‐term objective of collecting as many weapons as possible or to some extent reintegrate former soldiers. However, because many of these programmes have been implemented either as single initiatives or without thinking about what the long-‐term impact of these programmes is on the local population (Muggah 2005: 246), there is a great risk of failing to reach the stated objectives or worse ‘do harm’ to those that it is intended to bring peace to. This mainly happens when the local contexts that the pro-‐ grammes are implemented are not adequately analysed (Bryden & Brickhill 2010; Col-‐ leta & Muggah 2009). Finally, a more general criticism that is mentioned several times is that while peace building activities should generally be a bottom-‐up approach, these programmes often end up as a top-‐down approach, and thus do not take the concrete local context and worries into consideration (Goetschel & Hagmann 2009: 66-‐67).

3.2.1.2 Security Sector Reforms

Where the DDR and SALW programmes target the instruments of violence, security sec-‐ tor reforms (SSR) programmes target the institutions. In this regard institutions are meant as those that bring security to the citizens of the post-‐conflict state, for example the justice system, police and the intelligence service could be reformed. The method used is to strengthen the capacities and accountability of the different institutions and bodies so that they can fulfil their prime objective of protect the citizens (OECD 2011d: 15).

SSR has become widely accepted as a necessity due to its focus on bringing se-‐ curity to the populations. Especially among international organisation SSR has been promoted, and there is no doubt that a functioning security system based on rule of law is a precondition for fighting armed violence (UNSG 2009: 16), and as will be shown be-‐ low, SSR has also been included in some of the guidelines on armed violence reduction.

(26)

while not considering the state-‐society relations (Yeung 2008: 9). A second issue that has been raised is that SSR is often a donor driven project, it tends to be looking at short-‐ term output, and thus neglecting the need for long-‐term planning and investment (Mug-‐ gah & Krause 2009: 147).

3.3 Chapter Conclusion

Armed violence is not a new phenomenon; it has been present ever since firearms were introduced. However, it is not without reason that increased focus has been drawn to the problem. With more than 740,000 people dying due to armed violence every year, and the majority of these in non-‐conflict situations, the human costs cannot be neg-‐ lected. Most of the countries experiencing high levels of armed violence are low-‐income, post-‐conflict countries. The reason for this is that violence in these situations enters a vicious circle, where the lack of capacity within the states to fulfil their responsibility to protect their populations, combined with high levels of weapons, creates an increased level of acceptance of solving inter-‐personal conflicts with arms. This in turn cannot be solved without developments taking place, developments which themselves are nega-‐ tively affected by the armed violence. This leads to a situation where countries find it more and more difficult to secure peace and development as armed violence continues to increase. Finally, a number of recent developments in armed violence, such as urbani-‐ sation and international organised crime, have caused that questions have been asked about the current ways of dealing with the armed violence problems.

Within peace building and state building theories, armed violence has been addressed in several ways, for example DDR and SSR programmes. These types of programmes have, however, been subject to serious and substantial criticism on the way they are being executed and not least how well they are at addressing the new challenges that has be-‐ come apparent with regards to armed violence. The next chapter will build on this criti-‐ cism, by presenting the relatively new concept of Armed Violence Reduction and Preven-

(27)

4. A

RMED

V

IOLENCE

R

EDUCTION AND

P

REVENTION

The previous chapter presented the grim consequences of armed violence, as well as how this has been dealt with in contemporary conflict resolution theories. Armed Vio-

lence Reduction and Prevention (AVR) is an offspring to the criticism of the previous

practices. This is noted by Gonzales (2010: 10), who argues: “[In the past]… armed vio-‐ lence reduction focused on control and deterrence of violence by reducing inappropriate access to instruments of violence […] As the complexities of armed violence and its links with development, peace, and security are better understood, the concept and strategies to address armed violence are evolving to place a greater emphasis on prevention and reducing vulnerabilities to decrease the likelihood of violence in the first place.”

In this chapter the, relatively, new concept of AVR is presented. The chapter begins with a short introduction to AVR as concept and how it has evolved over the past few years. Thereafter the armed violence lens, which is the framework for AVR programming is introduced. Finally, a number of the specific programming approaches to AVR are dis-‐ cussed.

4.1 AVR as a Concept

The concept of AVR is essentially built on the understanding that a holistic approach to armed violence is needed in order to tackle the multiple and heterogeneous root causes (UNDP/WHO 2005: 3). The concept does not present an entire new form of program-‐ ming tools. Instead, it acknowledges and builds on the existing work done within conflict prevention, peace building, state building, crime prevention and public health, but more importantly it is emerging from a set of practices that are currently evolving on the ground (OECD 2009: 22). According to OECD, the direct aim of AVR is to “enhanc[e] state and civil society capacities to address insecurity as defined and perceived by the people

and communities affected by armed violence” _(ibid).

The main difference from this aim, compared to that of state building, presented in the previous chapter, is that noted in italic above. The focus is on improving the defined

and perceived security of the people affected by armed violence. This necessarily means

ARMED VIOLENCE REDUCTION:

ARMED VIOLENCE

REDUCTION:

A

N

EXUS FOR

S

ECURITY

AND

D

EVELOPMENT

D

ECEMBER

2011

M

ASTER OF

A

RTS IN

I

NTERNATIONAL

H

UMANITARIAN

A

CTION

U

G

Luis Andersen 2052792

Supervisor: Dr. Andrej Zwitter

M

ASTER

’

S

T

HESIS

“Fundamentally, many arms reduction programs lack a conceptual framework

to disarm the minds of gun users, especially young men, by changing

com-munity attitudes towards weapons possession and use.”

Table of Contents

Table of Figures and Tables

E

XECUTIVE

S

UMMARY

L

IST OF

A

BBREVIATIONS

1.

I

NTRODUCTION

1.1 Development and Armed Violence

1.2 Armed Violence Reduction and Youth at Risk

1.3 Research Question

1.4 Structure

2.

M

ETHODOLOGY

3.

A

RMED

V

IOLENCE AND

C

ONFLICT

R

ESOLUTION

T

HEORIES

3.1 The Consequences of Armed Violence

3.2 Armed Violence in Conflict Resolution Theories

3.3 Chapter Conclusion

4.

A

RMED

V

IOLENCE

R

EDUCTION AND

P

REVENTION