peace-promoting education sector reform in sea and south pacific

a

UNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office

Peace-promotingEducation Reform in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific



b

Peace-promoting Education Reform in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific

© UNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office 2014 Any part of this report may be freely reproduced with the appropriate acknowledgment

Printed in Thailand

Cover photos, clockwise from top left:

© UNICEF/NYHQ1996-1029/Noorani, © UNICEF/PHIA2004-0001/Baluyut, © UNICEF/FJIA2006-00710/Pirozzi, © UNICEF/NYHQ2006-2551/Pirozzi, © UNICEF/SWIT2010-0019/Rosetti, © UNICEF/NYHQ2006-2531/Pirozzi

Design and layout: Inís Communication – www.iniscommunication.com

The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNICEF concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

The presentation of data and information as contained in this book, and the opinions expressed therein, do not necessarily reflect the position of UNICEF.

UNICEF are committed to widely disseminating information and to this end welcomes enquiries for reprints, adaptations, republishing or translating this or other publications.

c





Acknowledgements

Peace-promoting Education Reform in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific was commissioned as part of UNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office’s (EAPRO) contributions towards the 4 year global ‘Peacebuilding, Education and Advocacy (PBEA) Programme’ (2012–2015), funded by the Government of the Netherlands. The report contributes to the PBEA programme Global Outcome 5: that is, the generation and use of evidence and knowledge in policies and programming related to education, conflict and peacebuilding.

Our sincere gratitude goes to the principal author of this report, Amanda Seel, and all those in UNICEF Country Offices for their support during the research phase. Our appreciation goes particularly to Clifford Meyers, who initiated and guided the process, and also to Teija Vallandingham for their expert advice and guidance.

We sincerely thank Tani Ruiz for editing this report and Vilasa Phongsathorn for her overall support and assistance in reviewing and lay-out of this document.

The views expressed in this report represent those of the author and not necessarily those of UNICEF.

Contents

Acronyms and abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

1. Regional analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1.2 Peace, conflict and natural disaster in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1.2.1 Peace and conflict. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1.2.2 Natural disasters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

1.3 Dynamics of peace and conflict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

1.3.1 Inter-related processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

1.3.2 Economic growth, poverty and inequality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

1.3.3 Social, cultural and demographic change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

1.3.4 Environmental degradation and climate change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

1.3.5 Governance and capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

1.3.6 The geopolitical and regional contexts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

1.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

2. Concepts and themes in the literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

2.2 Statistical relationships between the development of education systems and levels of conflict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

2.3 Three sets of processes that link education to peace, conflict and natural disaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

2.3.1 Exclusion ó inclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

2.3.2 Fragmentation ó cohesion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

2.3.3 Vulnerability ó resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

2.4 The opportunity of education sector reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

2.5 Summary: Possible roles of education in peace, conflict and natural disaster in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

3. Working model and outline methodology for exploring ‘peace-promoting’ education sector reform at the country level . . . . 43

3.1 A working model of a ‘peace-promoting’ education system . . . . . . . . . . . 43

3.2 A framework for unpacking education sector reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

3.3 Outline methodology and stages of research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Annexes Annex A: Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Annex B: References for chapter 1 – Regional analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Annex C: References for chapter 2 – Concepts and themes in the literature . . . . . 54

List of Figures Figure 1: Dynamics of peace, conflict and natural disaster in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Figure 2: Potential positive influences of general education expansion/universalization on processes that link to peace, conflict and natural disaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Figure 3. Education’s roles in the dynamics of peace, conflict and natural disaster. 41

Figure 4: A working model of ‘peace-promoting education’ for Southeast Asia and the South Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Figure 5: Applying the ‘peace-promoting’ model to education sector reform . . . . 45

1

Acronyms and abbreviations

ARMM Autonomous Region in Muslim MindanaoASEAN Association of Southeast Asian NationsAEC ASEAN Economic CommunityAusAID Australian Agency for International Development CREATE Consortium for Research on Education Access, Transitions and EquityCSO Civil Society OrganizationDAC Development Assistance Committee DFID Department for International Development (UK)DRR Disaster Risk ReductionEAPRO East Asia and Pacific Regional Office ECD/E Early Childhood Development/Education EFA Education For AllEiE Education in Emergencies ESCAP Economic and Social Commission for East Asia and the Pacific EU European UnionFBO Faith-Based OrganizationGCPEA Global Coalition to Protect Education from AttackGMR Global Monitoring Report (on Education For All)GPE Global Partnership for Education (formerly the Fast Track Initiative on EFA)IDP Internally Displaced Person IIEP International Institute for Educational PlanningINEE Inter-Agency Network for Education in EmergenciesINGO International Non-governmental Organization LESC Language, Education and Social CohesionLTLT Learning to Live TogetherM&E Monitoring and Evaluation MDG Millennium Development GoalMoE Ministry of EducationMIC Middle-Income CountryMTB-MLE Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual EducationNAT National Achievement TestNFE Non-formal Education NGO Non-governmental Organization OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development PBEA Peacebuilding, Education and Advocacy Programme PDR People’s Democratic RepublicPNG Papua New GuineaRAMSI Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon IslandsSEAMEO Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization SEL Social and Emotional Learning SWAp Sector-Wide ApproachUNDP United Nations Development Programme UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural OrganizationUNGEI United Nations Girls’ Education Initiative UNICEF United Nations Children’s FundUSAID United States Agency for International Development VAC Violence Against Children

2

Children participate in class at the Bang Nieng Learning Centre for Burmese children in the southern Pang Nga Province, Thailand.© UNICEF/NYHQ2005-1660/Mohan

Introduction 3

Introduction

This three-part Concept Paper has been written by independent consultant Amanda Seel to inform the research project ‘Peace-Promoting Education Sector Reform in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific’, commissioned by UNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office (EAPRO).1 The research project forms part of EAPRO’s participation in UNICEF’s global Peacebuilding, Education and Advocacy (PBEA) Programme, funded by the Netherlands Government. Under EAPRO, a range of regional studies will contribute mainly to Objectives Two and Five of the global PBEA initiative, which are:

• Objective Two: increase institutional capacities to supply conflict sensitive education.

• Objective Five: contribute to the generation and use of evidence and knowledge in policies and programming related to education, conflict and peacebuilding.

Other regional studies are exploring varying aspects of peace and conflict in relation to early childhood development, child protection and youth development. This study has particular synergies with a cross-country study of ‘Language, Education and Social Cohesion’ (LESC).2

This study explores issues, policies and plans in selected countries3 that are undergoing major education reform, while at the same time facing significant challenges of peace building, reducing conflict and/or addressing natural hazards and the effects of climate change. It aims to directly support what countries (primarily governments but also the wider range of education stakeholders and partners) are already doing in education, while assisting in deeper analysis to make more explicit the relationship between education and a range of wider processes linked to conflict and peace. The research is also intended to help inform the work and approaches of UNICEF in the participating countries, contribute to UNICEF EAPRO’s strategies for country support and regional engagement and fulfil the objectives of the UNICEF Global Education Strategy, 2010.4 Additionally, the research supports wider knowledge development in the fields of education in emergencies (EiE), disaster risk reduction (DRR) in education and the role of education in peacebuilding.

The study focuses on two regions: Southeast Asia and the South Pacific. Each of these constitutes a political and geographic region that is sufficiently well defined to make a degree of regional analysis and comparison feasible and meaningful. Under UNICEF’s organizational structure, EAPRO covers the larger – and less coherent – area referred to as East Asia and the Pacific.

The label ‘peace-promoting’ has been adopted as an umbrella term, to allow for a flexible response to the different expectations and priorities of the participating countries and UNICEF Country Offices. It covers notions of building peaceful, cohesive and inclusive societies and communities, maintaining and consolidating peace, reducing risk, responding to conflict or environment-related crisis and mitigating the impacts of the same. Attention is drawn here to the fact that this study, unusually, integrates considerations of conflict and natural disaster within a single analysis. This approach was elected for a number of reasons. Firstly, natural disasters (which always have a human-made element) are significant and increasing concerns across the two regions. Secondly,

1 Southeast Asia and the South Pacific sit within the larger geographical area covered by UNICEF EAPRO.

2 The LESC study is led by Professor Joseph Lo Bianco of the University of Melbourne.

3 At the time of preparing this background paper, the Philippines and Vanuatu were confirmed case study countries for the regional study. Myanmar was originally to join the regional study but has now assumed a country-level participation in the PBEA, under which a similar study might be undertaken. Others might join in the future.

4 UNICEF’s Global Education Strategy objectives are: (1) To help countries achieve the goal of universal primary education by 2015, making their education systems inclusive and focused on quality; (2) To help countries achieve the target of eliminating gender disparity at all educational levels, address other disparities in education and promote gender equality in society through education; and (3) To help countries restore normalcy to children and adolescents affected by conflict and natural disasters (emergencies) as part of the process of rebuilding communities, institutions and systems.

Introduction4

there is often an overlap of conflict with natural disaster, in that each can exacerbate the other and both impact most strongly upon the poorest and most vulnerable people. Thirdly, while educational approaches to reducing the risks of conflict and the impacts of natural disasters are quite distinct, responses to these events have many features in common. It is, however, noted that integrating the two has presented some conceptual challenges in achieving a coherent analysis.

The term ‘education sector reform’ is used to denote a focus on comprehensive policy reform and programmes of educational development, which are taking place over a number of years, as opposed to discrete projects or single policies. Developing countries that have not yet attained universal completion of quality basic education (on which UNICEF and hence the research is most focused), are often supported through harmonized development assistance in the form of ‘sector-wide approaches’ (SWAps).5 These various terms are defined and further explored at relevant points in this paper and fuller definitions are given in Annex A.

The 2011 Education For All Global Monitoring Report, dedicated to the theme of education and armed conflict, states that “during the post-conflict period, there is a window of opportunity to address education sector reform in areas related to the conflict, including root causes, and post conflict needs.” The report also suggests that “SWAps provide donors and government with an opportunity to initiate a conflict sensitive planning process to address areas such as policy reforms, new legislation, information systems to monitor equity, educational budgeting and financing.”

At the same time, the report identifies a “gap in the literature about education sector reform in post conflict societies from a peace-building perspective.” This study intends to assist in filling that gap and supporting countries to recognize their ‘windows of opportunity’. The research might also deepen understanding of what kind of ‘peace-promoting education’ is relevant to countries that are currently free of violent conflict, but face significant threats, tensions or insecurities in the context of rapid socio-cultural, economic, geopolitical, environmental and demographic change.

The initial identification of the topic of this study has rested on a number of assumptions, which are:

• Countries of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific face particular challenges in relation to preventing or mitigating conflict or emergencies and/or building and sustaining peace;

• Education processes, institutions and systems are part of the dynamics of peace and conflict and can also play an important role in promoting peace and preventing, reducing or mitigating conflict; and

• Better understanding of these challenges, linkages and processes is required to inform education sector reform and planning, in order to maximize the potential contribution to peace promotion of ‘education’ in its various meanings (a basic service, a process of development of various human intelligences and abilities and an asset linked to economic, social and political opportunity).

5 The term ‘SWAp’ is now generally used in a broad sense to describe an approach based on national leadership of a comprehensive sector or sub-sector development programme, supported by harmonized – but not necessarily pooled – development partner assistance.

Introduction 5

This Concept Paper explores, critiques and expands upon these assumptions in order to set the context of the country studies and to identify an appropriate methodology for the country-level investigations. Specifically, chapter 1, Regional analysis, expands upon the first assumption, identifying and exploring the main dynamics of peace and conflict at play in the countries of the two regions and the key regional and national challenges in preventing and mitigating conflict and emergencies and building and sustaining peace. This sets the context for chapter 2, Concepts and themes in the literature, which expands on the second assumption through a review and critique of the relevant literature regarding (i) the linkages between education, peace and conflict/insecurity and (ii) the potential role of education in reducing, preventing, mitigating and responding to conflict, insecurity and ‘natural’ events. On the basis of these two analyses, chapter 3, Methodology, will outline an appropriate methodological approach for the country case studies.

(Left-right) Arnold, 9, and Viana, 8, read a book together during class at St. John Primary School in Honiara, the capital of Solomon Islands.

© UNICEF/NYHQ2006-2547/Pirozzi

Regional analysis6

Regional analysis

1.1 Introduction

This analysis seeks to examine the main dynamics of peace and conflict at play in the countries of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific regions, looking in particular at what the key regional and national challenges are in preventing and mitigating conflict and emergencies and in building and sustaining peace. Because the issues are very complex, there has been no attempt to give an exhaustive description but rather to highlight the main trends and issues that seem most salient to the subsequent exploration of the roles of education. Sources include two books fully dedicated to exploring conflict in the East Asia, Southeast Asia and Pacific regions;6 a range of academic treatises on the causes and dynamics of conflict in general; United Nations documents concerned with conflict resolution and peacebuilding; studies of specific conflicts and natural disasters affecting countries within the two focus regions; and reports documenting ‘lessons learned’ from programming in Education in Emergencies and Disaster Risk Reduction in the context of peacebuilding through education. The full list of references is given in Annex B.

1.2 Peace, conflict and natural disaster in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific

1.2.1 Peace and conflictAt first glance, neither Southeast Asia nor the South Pacific seems to be an obvious candidate for a study on conflict mitigation or peacebuilding through education. For three decades, both regions have had no significant inter-state conflict and, according to Wainwright (2010), are enjoying their “most peaceful period in modern history”. This period of relative peace and stability has supported considerable economic growth and human development, including substantial expansion of education systems.

Closer examination, however, reveals that a majority of countries in the two regions are currently experiencing – or are recovering from – some form of intra-state conflict or serious inter-communal violence. It is not necessary for the purposes of the study to present a detailed typology of these conflicts; however, it is useful to make a distinction between three general categories that, although overlapping, are different in character and hence probably have different linkages with – and implications for – education.

Insurgencies: These are conflicts in which distinct regions seek to assert, through violent means, their own identity and greater autonomy within, or independence from, the nation state. The main conflicts of this type have occurred (or are still occurring) in:

• Indonesia: A 29-year, religious-based separatist conflict in Aceh came to an end in 2007 in a settlement that grants the region greater autonomy. Since 1965 a war of secession has been underway in the ethnic Melanesian region of Papua, with attacks sometimes launched from militants based within refugee communities on the border with Papua New Guinea.

6 (1) ‘Heijmans, A., N. Simmonds and H. Van de Veen, Searching for Peace in Asia Pacific: An Overview of Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding Activities, European Centre for Conflict Prevention, 2004; and (2) Wainwright, E., Conflict Prevention in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific, New York University, April 2010.

1.

Regional analysis 7

• Myanmar: The country is slowly emerging from four decades of ethnic insurgencies that have generated the largest number of international refugees (within the two regions) in the recent past. Peace agreements – or key understandings – have recently been achieved with nine insurgency armies.7 The settlements are nevertheless fragile, and violence continues in Kachin State. The agreement with the Karen National Union marks the end of one of the world’s longest-running civil conflicts and the start of a process of repatriation of thousands of refugees from camps in Thailand.

• Papua New Guinea (PNG): A separatist conflict waged for nine years on the island of Bougainville claimed at least 15,000 lives8 – a significant percentage of the total population – and displaced many more. The island has had an autonomous government within the State of PNG since 2005.

• Philippines: Starting in the late 1960s, two complex insurgencies have killed more than 190,000 people and displaced many thousands more. The first conflict revolves around the degree of autonomy and self-government for the Muslim Moro areas of the southern Island of Mindanao. An agreement between the government and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) in 1989 paved the way for the establishment of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM). A Peace Framework Agreement (PFA) between the current government of President Benigno Aquino and the now-dominant Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) was signed in 2012 and will support the development of an expanded autonomous area, ‘Bangsamoro’, to come into being by 2016. The second, equally protracted, conflict has been the class-based guerrilla warfare waged by the communist New People’s Army (NPA). Since a peace agreement in 2011, ongoing skirmishes are largely confined to a few core strongholds.

• Thailand: A separatist insurgency, begun four decades ago, continues in four predominantly ethnic Malay Muslim provinces of the ‘Patani’ region in the deep south. After easing in the 1980s and 1990s, the conflict re-ignited in 2004 and has since claimed over 5,000 lives. The past year has seen progress in peace talks, but a lasting solution is yet to be found.

• Timor-Leste: Over 100,000 people died during Indonesia’s 25-year occupation, mostly during the brutal years preceding independence in 2002.

Inter-communal conflict: There are many examples of conflict and violence that are more locally focused, which occur either between groups (defined by geography or one or more identity factors such as religion, ethnicity or social class), or where one particular group is singled out for persecution and attack. Major examples of this type of conflict in the two regions are:

• Fiji: Ongoing tensions between indigenous and ethnic Indian Fijians erupted into violent attacks on the ethnic Indian population during political coups in 1987 and 2000.

• Indonesia: In the early 2000s, inter-communal violence (generally between Muslim migrants relocated under the transmigration policy of successive governments and local Christian or indigenous communities) broke out in a range of locations, including Maluku, Sulawesi and Kalimantan. There have also been attacks on large Chinese communities in major cities.

• Myanmar: Exacerbating already complex political tensions, Myanmar has recently experienced an upsurge of violence against Rohinga Muslims in Rakhine State and other Muslim communities across the country.

7 These are the New Mon State Party, the Karenni National Progressive Party, the Shan State Army-South, Shan State Army-North, the Karen National Liberation Front, the Chin, the Mongla, the United Wa State Army and the Karen National Union (KNU).

8 Estimates vary considerably. The Australian DFAT website reports 15,000–20,000 deaths while the Australian Army website suggests 10,000–15,000.

Regional analysis8

• South Pacific Island States: Civil conflict erupted in Solomon Islands in 1998, when the Istabu Freedom Movement sought to drive out Guadalcanal migrants from the neighbouring island of Malatia, which eventually led to a Malatian-led military coup. The Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI) has been in place over the past decade and is only now in the process of withdrawal. Papua New Guinea is affected by frequent inter-community conflicts in multiple locations. Other Pacific islands, including Vanuatu, have also experienced similar conflict to a greater or lesser extent.

Other Forms of Political Violence: This can be defined as the “unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property, with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.”9 This kind of violence is often closely associated with the other two forms, and includes:

• Radical Islamist terrorist attacks: Bombings and terror attacks have been perpetrated in Indonesia (Bali, Jakarta and Aceh) by Jemaah Islamia and other Jihadist groups. In the southern Philippines the continued actions of Abu Sayyaf and other terrorist groups with links to Al Qaeda have been responsible for numerous kidnappings and bombings, deliberately targeting foreigners, aid workers, journalists, teachers and government officials. A number of attacks in Thailand’s deep south have also been identified as externally agitated (Melvin, 2007).

• Violence associated with political coups, mass demonstrations and elections: Politically motivated violence has affected Thailand, most recently in 2010 and again in late 2013 and early 2014. Election-related violence has occurred in Solomon Islands (2006), Indonesia (Aceh and Maluku) and in Timor-Leste. Hensengerth (2012) notes that in Cambodia “the end of the civil war in 1991 did not end the political conflict. Instead, the major civil war parties struggled for predominance in the post-war political system. Assassinations became a routine means of dealing with political opponents, including opposition parties, trade unions, journalists, and social activists.”

• Clan feuding for political advantage: In Mindanao, Philippines, entrenched practices of inter-clan conflicts known locally as ‘Rido’10 often trigger incidents that are played out as a part of insurgent group confrontations.

• Political repression: Hensengerth (2012) notes that many countries in Southeast Asia “have been governed by authoritarian and semi-authoritarian regimes that applied political violence for the purpose of staying in power.” He identifies Myanmar, Malaysia, Philippines, Indonesia, Lao PDR and Cambodia as all having aspects of ‘predatory politics’. Other examples concern government repression of specific population groups, often those with precarious residency status. The Hmong have faced persecution in Lao PDR since the end of the ‘hidden war’ of the 1970s and since 2011 have been forcibly repatriated from Thailand, despite international expressions of concern at the human rights implications.

As these attempts at classification show, different kinds of conflict overlap and interact. Indeed the nature of inter-state and identity-related conflicts that now dominate in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific, as they do globally, make it harder than ever to classify a conflict. Each situation is complex and context-specific. It is often difficult to define where ‘community violence’ ends and ‘conflict’ begins, or identify clear phases of ‘conflict’ and ‘post-conflict’. Modern conflicts tend to stop and start and what begins as ‘resolution’ can turn out to be only ‘mitigation’. Conflicts mutate and change in nature as a result of local factors, a natural disaster (see below), or changes in the wider national or international context.

9 Farlex Free Legal Dictionary Online.

10 The Asia Foundation (2007) defines Rido as “a state of recurring hostilities between families and kinship groups, characterised by a series of retaliatory acts of violence, carried out to avenge a perceived affront or injustice.”

Regional analysis 9

1.2.2 Natural disastersIn addition to the challenges of conflict, Southeast Asia and the South Pacific experience frequent crises and emergencies that result from natural hazards or extreme weather events. Most countries in these two regions sit on the ‘Pacific Ring of Fire’, while northern Myanmar, Lao PDR and Thailand are at the southeastern boundary of the Himalayan tectonic plate; thus their susceptibility to earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and – for coastal or insular states – associated tsunamis. The 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami was a particularly dramatic tectonic-related event, causing the loss of an estimated 225,000 lives, over half of these in Aceh, Indonesia.

More recently, Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda) killed more than 6,000 people in the Philippines, with over one million losing their homes and/or livelihoods. Cyclone Nargis that struck Myanmar in 2008 is another example of an especially destructive natural event, claiming over 138,000 lives. Numerous other extreme weather events have occurred in recent years in both regions, which are vulnerable to natural hazards, including tropical cyclones (typhoons) and heavy rains, with associated flooding, mudflows and landsides.

In many of the countries, ‘natural’ disasters that threaten human life, health, livelihoods and security are as much a cause for concern as ‘man-made’ conflicts and violence. Indeed there are often linkages between the two. As is discussed further in section 1.3, some of the causes are the same and both tend to hit the poorest and most vulnerable the hardest. There is also considerable evidence that natural disasters tend to further exacerbate – or increase the risk of – conflict and inter-communal violence. Bird (2011) identified displacement, looting, price hikes, the creation of ‘money-mongers’, the politicization of blame for disasters, tensions over land and resources as being elements of ‘natural’ disasters in Somalia that exacerbated violent conflict; elements which are quite probably present in other contexts. Waizenegger (2008) observes that, although the Indian Ocean Tsunami resulted in a political settlement of the secessionist conflict in Aceh, “the few studies of the political impact of natural disasters suggest this rarely happens. In fact, rather than reconciliation, studies suggest that disasters tend to foster conflict.”

A girl draws in a classroom at Huraa School on Huraa Island, 15 kilometres from Male in the Maldives. She is attending a weekly class in which specially trained teachers supervise art and play activities to help children traumatized by their experience during the tsunami.


Regional analysis10

1.3 Dynamics of peace and conflict

1.3.1 Inter-related processesThe conflicts and natural disasters explored above do not, of course, take place in a vacuum. Rather, they need to be seen as a part of a complex and dynamic inter-relationship of processes, which have come together to create the conditions in which conflict becomes more likely, or natural hazards less easy to manage. These processes are summarized diagrammatically (see Figure 1 below). In the following sections, each of these processes is unpacked further.

Figure 1: Dynamics of peace, conflict and natural disaster in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific11

1.3.2 Economic growth, poverty and inequality As noted above, the two regions, and in particular Southeast Asia, are generally associated with economic success. Many countries are endowed with rich and diverse natural and human resources, which have been effectively tapped to support economic development. Globalization has benefited many and supported the rapid spread of ideas and technology (Wainwright, 2010). The UNDP 2013 Human Development Report states that East Asia and the Pacific now account for over half of the world’s middle-class population.

While not equalling the pace of growth of the Asian Tigers12 in the preceding decades, many Southeast Asian countries have seen considerable economic development, with some graduating from low to middle-income status. The ASEAN13 Southeast Asian Economic Outlook 2012 notes that while not immune from global economic uncertainty, in contrast to most OECD14 economies the region will enjoy solid growth

11 The classification developed for the purposes of this study shares similarities both with the model employed in the INEE ‘Guidance Note on Conflict Sensitive Education’ (2012), which identifies the five contextual domains in which education takes place as ‘Governance’, ‘Social’, ‘Security’, ‘Economic’ and ‘Environmental’; and with the framework used in the IIEP ‘Guidance Notes for Integrating Conflict and Disaster Risk Reduction into Education Sector Planning’, which explores the ‘environmental, economic, social and political vulnerabilities’ that impact upon and interact with education.

12 Hong Kong (SAR, China), Singapore, Taiwan and Republic of Korea.

13 Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

14 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Economic growth, poverty

and inequality

Environmentaldegradation and climate change

Social,cultureal and demographic change

Governanceand capacity

Geopolitical and regional influences

$

PEACE, STABILITY,MANAGEMENT OFNATURAL HAZARD

CONFLICT,FRAGILITY AND

“NATURAL DIASTER”

Economic growth,poverty and inequality

Environmentaldegradation and climate change

Social, cultural and demographic change

Governanceand capacity

$

PEACE, STABILITY,MANAGEMENT OFNATURAL HAZARD

CONFLICT,FRAGILITY AND

“NATURAL DISASTER”

Geopolitical and regional influences

Regional analysis 11

until 2016. The UN ESCAP15 Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific 2012 cites examples of growth in many (although not all) South Pacific countries and identifies East Asia and the Pacific as a “bedrock of global economic stability”.

Human development has accompanied economic growth. The UNDP Human Development Report 2013 lists Thailand, Indonesia, Lao PDR16 and Viet Nam as countries that have experienced significantly greater human development gains since 1990 than might have been predicted on the basis of previous performance. Many (though not all) countries have invested heavily in their educational systems as a foundation for national socio-economic development. Almost all of the low and middle-income countries of the two regions have committed themselves to reaching the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), as well as the broader set of the Education For All (EFA) goals. To achieve these, many governments have embarked on ambitious reform programmes, often supported with substantial international assistance programmes.

Despite notable progress and great benefits for many, it is well documented that the impacts of economic development – in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific as elsewhere – have been uneven both across and within countries (Wainwright, 2010). With the number of rural-to-urban migrants far exceeding the growth of sustainable employment and livelihood opportunities, peri-urban areas have joined stagnating rural communities as major loci of poverty and exclusion. In some cases, disparities have grown not only because of the rapid rise in prosperity for some, but in actual reversals in progress for others, as livelihood insecurity has increased. Wainwright (2010) cites evidence of increased poverty in Lao PDR, Cambodia, Thailand, Timor-Leste and Malaysia.

Very often, poverty impacts differently on women and men, and on different social or geographically located groups. Poverty in terms of income and assets is closely related to indicators of human development, including health and education. A number of recent studies suggest that poverty remains the most important variable determining educational participation.17 This is the case even where it is free of direct fees because of poverty-associated factors including lack of cash for indirect costs (e.g. transport, stationery), demands for youth labour contributions to the household economy, health challenges and the inter-generational effects of illiteracy. In Cambodia, for example, 28 per cent of 23–27 year olds from the wealthiest 20 per cent of households have completed secondary school. Whereas among the poorest households only 0.2 per cent have (Chronic Poverty Report 2010).

Poverty itself has a link with fragility and conflict. The World Bank (2011) explores the ways in which poverty both creates fragility and is a result of it, noting that almost 40 per cent of the world’s poorest live in fragile states. Duffield (2001, quoted in Smith and Vaux, 2003) is one of many who argue that the prevalence of conflict today is related more to the rate of change than to the persistence of poverty. The juxtaposition of wealth and poverty, especially stark in the urban areas of countries with rapid but uneven growth, not only heightens the sense of grievance and exclusion on the part of the poor, but also the adoption of exclusionary and self-protective measures on the part of the newly monied, for whom former poverty remains vivid in the collective memory. Kanbur and Sumners (2010) shed light on a “new geography of global poverty”, pointing out that because of the rapid but very uneven growth of a number of large-population countries (including the

15 United Nations Economic and Social Commission for East Asia and the Pacific.

16 While growth and human development in Lao PDR have exceeded expectations, the country remains poor and donor-dependent.

17 Socio-economic status appears to remain the most important variable in access to basic education in many developing countries, even when it is free of direct fees (Lewin et al.). However, that is not to say that how education is delivered has no effect, as is discussed further in section 1.3.5.

Regional analysis12

Philippines and Indonesia),18 72 per cent of the world’s poor now live in middle-income countries, a reality which is not yet reflected in aid allocation mechanisms and assistance modalities. If theories about the risks of sharp inequality being a driver of conflict are correct, then the risks of grievance-related conflicts in these countries would seem to be high.

The economically excluded, residing in areas where grievances tend to ferment, are most likely to live in sub-standard housing, depend on precarious livelihoods and lack skills and resources for self-protection and adaptation. They are also often the most vulnerable to the impacts of both conflict and natural disaster. When these occur, exclusion and vulnerability are often further intensified.

1.3.3 Social, cultural and demographic change Southeast Asia and the South Pacific are regions of extraordinary human diversity: ethnic, linguistic, cultural and religious, reflecting long and complex histories of migration, settlement and inter-group cooperation and conflict. Ethnic and linguistic diversity is particularly rich in the ‘indigenous belt’19 of the Mekong Basin area, spanning northern and eastern Myanmar, northern Thailand, most of Lao PDR, northern and western Viet Nam and northeast Cambodia; as well as across the Philippines, Indonesia, insular Malaysia and Melanesia.20 Southeast Asia was home to a number of ancient civilizations: the Khmer, Vietnamese, Thai and Burmese, the achievements (both cultural and on the battle fields) of which continue to inspire patriotic nationalism and territorial claims to this day. Within these civilizations, and more recently in the South Pacific, various forms of the world’s major religions of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Islam have displaced, overlaid or merged with traditional cultures in complex ways. Many societies have also developed complicated and intricate social hierarchies and structures, for example Cambodia (see Ngarm, 2004), and Java and Bali in Indonesia. From historic times, therefore, relationships within and across ethnic, linguistic, social and religious groupings and communities have been complex and in flux, including elements of reciprocity and cooperation as well as of prejudice, discrimination and conflict.

Colonialism brought further – and more rapid – social and cultural change. ‘Eastern’, ‘Western’, ‘modern’ and ‘traditional’ cultures came into closer contact, but often on a far from equal footing. In many instances, colonial ‘divide and rule’ policies exploited existing tensions between groups. In colonial Burma, for example, military personnel from the peripheral ethnic regions were used to control the predominantly Burman heartlands. Practices of indentured labour in the Pacific resulted in large-scale migrations of Melanesians to Queensland, eventually returning with new languages and adapted cultures. Similar imperial production policies resulted in the migration of large numbers of Indian workers to Malaysia and Fiji. In Indonesia, the Dutch colonists introduced a system of ‘transmigrasi’, the movement of Muslim residents of densely populated islands (mainly Java) to the indigenous outer islands, a policy that was continued long into the post-colonial period. While such processes facilitated some beneficial cultural exchange and transfer, they undoubtedly also brought profound disruption and fermented resentments to which many present-day conflicts can be traced.

18 Indonesia is identified as one of five ‘PICNIC’ middle-income countries (the others are Pakistan, India, Nigeria and China), which together are home to 854 million poor people.

19 See Nettle, D. and S. Romaine, Vanishing Voices: the Extinction of the World’s Languages, Oxford University Press, 2000.

20 To give some examples, Myanmar has around 135 officially recognized groups speaking approximately 111 languages. Viet Nam has 106 languages and Lao PDR (at a fraction of the population) at least 84. Indonesia is thought to have as many as 711 languages, while Papua New Guinea has 830 (Muturzikin.com). Tiny Vanuatu has around the same number of languages as Myanmar amongst a population of 250,000, making it the most language-dense nation on earth.


Wars of independence and post-independence conflicts resulted in delineation of nation states that did not necessarily reflect culturally homogenous – or even cohesive – units. Reilly and Graham in Heijmans et al. (2004) emphasize the historic evolution of conflicts in East Asia and the Pacific, suggesting that “the bloodiest and most persistent conflicts in the region over the past decade have all been internal, intrastate wars that stem, in many cases, from the heterogeneous nature of the post colonial state.”

More recent globalization, economic migration, the expansion of education and the creation of the ‘middle class’ and the spread of ideas through modern communications technology has continued the process of change. While bringing benefits to many, these changes have also sparked further tensions and contradictions around issues of ‘traditional’ and ‘modern’ culture and identity. ‘Becoming more alike’ has in many ways catalyzed the reassertion of difference. As Hesengerth (2012) points out, such assertion might not only centre on real differences of belief, or even resentments around economic disparities between groups, but also more symbolic associations, for example the myth of ‘the Angkor period’ for the modern Cambodian.

Changes in gender constructions and relations have often been a particularly difficult part of the processes of socio-cultural change. On the one hand, these have brought greater freedoms and rights for women. On the other, paradoxically, there is a reassertion of traditional restrictions and even an escalation of gender-based violence in many countries as traditional male ‘breadwinner’ roles become increasingly obsolete. Young people often face a particularly difficult challenge of reconciling a traditional and modern identity, especially where there has been an erosion of supportive family and community structures.

Most analyses of conflict agree that – rather than diversity itself – it is the factors described above (memory of historic discrimination, population and boundary movements, rapid social change and insecurity around established beliefs and traditional identities), which underpin the conflicts in the two regions that manifest as ‘inter-ethnic’ or ‘inter-religious’. As Lake and Rothchild (1999) summarize: “Where ethnicity is linked to acute social uncertainty, a history of conflict and fear of what the future might bring, it emerges as one of the major fault lines along which societies fracture.”

1.3.4 Environmental degradation and climate change Human-influenced environmental change in Southeast Asia has taken place over millennia, with the development of wet rice agriculture supporting large and settled populations – including towns of significant size and sophistication – from early times. As an inevitable accompaniment to economic development and population growth, however, the past 50 years have seen much intensified use of land, water, forests and other natural resources. In the islands of the South Pacific, smaller and sparser populations have for centuries lived in harmony with the natural environment and significant changes wrought by human activity have occurred only relatively recently. These countries too, however, have experienced very rapid population growth, urbanization and exploitation, threatening their fragile ecosystems, biodiversity and habitats; as well as traditional practices of land and natural resource stewardship. UNICEF (2011) identified for both regions serious problems resulting from the decreased availability of fresh water and the reduction of crop yields, with evidence of associated increases in diarrhoeal and nutrition-related illnesses in children.

Added to these pressing problems, human-induced climate change has now taken centre stage on the global environmental agenda. The ‘Germanwatch’ Climate Risk Index (2012) identifies Myanmar, Viet Nam and Thailand as being amongst the top 10 countries globally to be affected by climate change between 1992 and 2011.

Regional analysis14

Thailand, Cambodia, the Philippines and Lao PDR were amongst the 10 most affected countries in 2011. Sea level change and associated flooding are major and increasing threats in low-lying areas, especially for the Pacific Islands. Some islands are at risk of complete submergence; Kiribati, for example, is already planning population relocations (Wainwright, 2010). UNICEF (2011) identifies many examples where sea level change is already affecting water supply, agricultural land and human settlements.

In the context of global climate change, there is evidence that extreme weather events – to which the regions were already prone – are increasing in frequency and intensity. Wainwright (2010) reports that the frequency of cyclones in the Philippines has doubled over a decade. Human-induced climate change, in the context of a massive growth in the human population, has greatly increased the probability of natural hazards becoming ‘natural disasters’. Meanwhile the degree of health or degradation of natural habitats such as coastal mangroves, forested hillsides and coral reefs, as well as the quality of the built environment, are important factors in determining the severity of the impact of such events.

Environmental and climate change factors are also clearly implicated in conflict. While disputes over land and natural resource ownership, use and access are primarily political in nature and linked to economic growth and social justice (and are therefore discussed in more detail in 1.3.5), it is nevertheless the case that such disputes are intensified by the increasing overall demands of the human species on the earth’s habitats and biodiversity.

Children make their way through the ruins of levelled homes, in Tacloban City – the area worst affected by Super Typhoon Haiyan – on the central island of Leyte, the Philippines. At least 2,500 people have been killed in the Category-5 storm. Some 11.3 million people, including an estimated 4.7 million children, in nine regions across the country have been affected, and more than 673,000 people have been displaced.

© UNICEF/NYHQ2013-1009/Maitem


1.3.5 Governance and capacity While all countries within the two regions are affected by the transnational and global trends described above, the extent to which they are impacted is determined by their natural endowment, level of development and history (indigenous, colonial and more recent). It nevertheless seems clear that political and governance factors have also been key determinants of the degree to which negative processes of social exclusion, fragmentation, conflict and natural disaster have been able to take hold. There are differences in the ability and willingness of states to perform a number of functions that are critical to the maintenance of stability, security and prosperity. These are discussed in the following paragraphs.

Transparency, participation, accountability and the rule of law: States that are perceived as broadly even-handed, accountable, responsive to citizens’ concerns and able to protect them through effective maintenance of law and order are in a stronger position to maintain peace and cohesion than those where these factors are absent. As Lukham et al. (2004) observe: “Violent conflict arises when its costs are reduced and benefits are increased in relation to other forms of collective action, especially where there are no legitimate channels for peaceful mobilisation or redress.” Lake and Rothchild (1999) similarly note that “the context for conflict is set when the state has been unable to maintain the trust and confidence of all of the major groups of the society” and/or “lost control of significant parts of its territory”.

Some countries have made progress in throwing off extreme forms of oppressive and authoritarian rule and embracing various forms of democracy and decentralization, supported by increased media and press freedoms and the development of civic institutions. Indonesia, whose former practices of central control, neglect of the periphery and forced transmigration were key triggers of ethnic conflict, has undergone dramatic changes in governance, with a rapid decentralization process aiming to bring decision-making closer to the people. This has been accompanied by a significant decrease in inter-community conflicts. The Philippines, under the current administration of President Benigno Aquino, has also made progress in transparency and devolution of powers. Myanmar, up until the present probably the most oppressive regime of the two regions, is in the early stages of reforms that have the potential to bring transformative changes.

Nevertheless, there continue to be significant challenges in promoting participation and transparency and tackling the corruption and crime that encourage violent conflict. The 2012 Corruption Perceptions Index ranks Papua New Guinea, Cambodia, Lao PDR and Myanmar 150 or higher in a lowest-to-highest ranking of 176 countries based on citizens’ perceptions of the level of common forms of corruption. Corruption, nepotism and non-transparency in government are directly related to the recent political violence in Thailand. Clan violence known as ‘Rido’ in Mindanao, Philippines, significantly exacerbates conflict and complicates the current peace process. Cambodia’s protracted decentralization process has to date achieved neither a notable shift in its rigid, hierarchical and corrupt power dynamics, nor genuine grassroots participation, as has recently been underscored by the shooting and violent dispersal of demonstrators in Phnom Penh. Myanmar’s nebulous and precarious reform process has been considerably challenged by new outbreaks of criminal violence against Muslim communities, which has its roots in years of neglect and repression of all communities.

Le Billon (2003) notes that in Southeast Asia a prolific small arms trade has opened the way for large-scale criminality in which “the rewards of immediate corrupt gains become more certain than long term benefits of rule of law.” As discussed by Wainwright (2010), Myanmar, Lao PDR and Cambodia all face challenges in controlling their border areas, which have become major locations of trafficking,

Regional analysis16

including human trafficking.21 The South Pacific countries have traditionally been relatively free of organized and transnational crime. However, the region’s traditional systems of patronage and client relations have proved difficult to replace with more open, democratic ones and continue to heavily influence political decision-making, while at the same time greater exposure to the political systems of other countries has tended to increase corruption (Heijmans et al., 2004). Vanuatu has had recent warnings from the OECD regarding the criminal exploitation of its lax taxation regimes for money laundering purposes.

State responses to diversity and indigenous rights: Fearful of social fragmentation and the emergence of groups that might be hostile to the state, many Southeast Asian governments, including those of Thailand, Myanmar, Lao PDR and the Philippines, have over a long time period taken the view that national unity requires homogeneity. All aspects of national life, including education, have promoted a single ideal of what it means to be a good and loyal citizen; an ideal that links very closely to the culture, language and religion of the dominant population group. This focus on repression of differences and forced assimilation has proved both risky and costly, directly contributing to insurgencies around the region. Recognizing this problem, some countries (e.g. the Philippines) are now reassessing their approach, responding better to diversity and supporting local divergence from national norms. This is not without its challenges, however, particularly where cultural practices within a particular community clash with human rights, for example the increased restrictions placed on Muslim women as a result of the extension of Sharia law in Aceh (Hensengerth, 2011).

It has been discussed that many countries across Southeast Asia are home to large numbers of indigenous and tribal groups. UNDP (2012) identifies factors that often exclude indigenous and tribal groups as: discriminatory legislation, lack of participation in decision-making, the weakening of traditional forms of dispute resolution, violations of indigenous rights (especially in extractive industries), denial of self-determination and the inferior status of minority languages. In Myanmar, Viet Nam, Cambodia, Lao PDR,22 Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia, there are large populations of tribal and indigenous groups that are not only distinct from each other, but are also collectively marginalized in relation to the majority group or groups in many of the ways identified by UNDP. In the South Pacific countries, by contrast, the majority of the population consists of numerous distinct tribal and indigenous groups that have tended both to alternatively compete and cooperate with each other on more equal terms. The challenge that this creates for governments in developing a sense of national citizenship is somewhat facilitated by the existence of considerable commonalities across cultures and, in some cases, the existence of a lingua franca.

Just and sustainable management of the economy, urbanization and the environment: Countries differ not only in their natural resource endowment but also in their success in just and sustainable management of, access to, use of, and benefit from those resources. Ensuring that there is at least reasonable parity across population groups and that the natural resource base is sustained, often implies a complex range of measures, including taxation control, land reform, assiduous environmental management, infrastructure investment and housing and facilities to respond to urban influx. Some countries, perhaps most notably Viet Nam, have implemented policies and actions to lift people out of extreme poverty

21 Wainwright (2010) further observes that the Wa-controlled areas of Shan and Kachin States in Myanmar are major world centres of heroin production. Piracy in the Straits of Malacca and South China and Sulu Seas has been successfully reduced over the past decade, but remains a threat. Cyber crime and the illegal production and trafficking of counterfeit synthetic drugs are emerging as major problems across Southeast Asia.

22 In Lao PDR, it is not strictly accurate to refer to all non-Lao (Tai Kadai) groups as ‘minorities’ as these in fact collectively constitute more than half the total population.


and support a reasonable distribution of resources and economic opportunity. By contrast, Myanmar, while equally well-endowed with natural and human resources, has been held back by poor governance and mismanagement. Rights of land ownership, use and access are integral to the Mindanao conflict in the Philippines, were the central cause of the lawless violence in Solomon Islands in 2002, and have become major foci of social unrest in Cambodia and Vanuatu. Disputes over rights to the water and hydroelectric potential of the Mekong river, palm oil plantations in Borneo, and logging operations in Sarawak, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea are just a few examples of conflicts that have arisen as a result of aggressive and insensitive economic policy taking precedence over considerations of ecology and indigenous rights.

Equitable delivery of basic services: Closely linked to management of economic development are questions of how far states have helped to share the benefits of that development by increasing access to basic services, firstly through a reasonable national reach and secondly, with any degree of equity across population groups and by gender. The Chronic Poverty Report 2009 notes about Indonesia that “the mean distance to a health clinic is 4 kilometres in Java, whilst in Papua it is over 32 kilometres; and while 66% of households in Java and Bali have access to improved drinking water, only 9% do so in Papua. Such disparities are also reflected in the incidence of chronic poverty.” South Pacific island nations in particular have struggled to reach significant areas of their territories with even basic services, which has led to an increasing sense of alienation among residents of the neglected regions. While the UN ESCAP Economic Survey of Asia and the Pacific 2012 identifies PNG as dominating the South Pacific’s relatively high economic growth, it warns that unemployment, especially among youth, could lead to social and political instability. The Chronic Poverty Report 2009 likewise attributes high levels of inter-communal violence in PNG to youth unemployment and the “failure to transfer the profits of resource exploitation into sustainable and equitable development.”

Elenita and nine people in her extended family, who are indigenous Badajo, began living beneath a bridge in Urdaneta City, in the province of Pangasinan on the island of Luzon, the Philippines. She and her family had fled the conflict in their hometown of Jolo, capital of the island of Sulu. Only two of her family members understand Tagalog, the region’s primary language, making it very difficult for them to make a living and further compounding their already perilous situation.


Regional analysis18

Management of conflict and hazard risk: Countries differ in their capacity (military, logistical and managerial) to prepare for, mitigate and respond effectively to outbreaks of conflict or natural disaster. Indonesia provides an example of a country that has made considerable progress in putting response systems in place. The World Risk Index ranks eight Southeast Asian and Pacific countries (Vanuatu, Tonga, Philippines, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Papua New Guinea and Brunei Darussalam) in its top 15 countries for ‘risk of natural disaster’. These are ranked not solely on the basis of the absolute numbers, intensity or frequency of natural hazards but also by the gap between these risks and the level of capacity to deal with them. Political will is also a factor; Myanmar’s response to Cyclone Nargis in 2008 is a stark example of an unnecessarily high loss of life and level of destruction given the military regime’s fair level of logistical capacity. The seemingly slow response to Typhoon Haiyan has raised questions regarding whether political factors, not only questions of gaps in systems and capacity, might have played a role.

Prohibition and containment of violence: Domestic violence (including gender-based violence23 and violence against children) is common in the countries of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific, However, the nature and frequency of such violence varies across and within countries and changes over time. The reasons for these variations are many and include, for example, traditional cultural and religious attitudes towards women and perspectives on child rearing and the status of youth and adolescents. However, there are also governance-related influences on whether violence is ignored, condoned, or actively disapproved of and discouraged. These include, for example, the adoption and use of rights frameworks, public awareness raising and debate around violence issues, systems of identification and punishment of perpetrators and protection of the vulnerable.

While the promotion of non-violent behaviours in domestic life might not, of itself, prevent conflicts from arising (when there are other provocative factors), there does appear to be evidence that it can reduce the propensity of tensions or protests to spill over into violence. Even more importantly, the acceptability of violence during peacetime is an important determinant of the degree of violence that is meted out to vulnerable people (women, children, persons with disabilities) in the event of a breakdown in the rule of law. The Human Security Report (Vancouver, 2012) presents evidence to suggest that high levels of abuse by the military in times of conflict almost always reflects existing high levels of domestic violence, tolerance of which has created an enabling environment for both combatants and civilians to take advantage of chaotic situations to act with impunity. Luckham et al. (2006) explore how masculine identities are often framed in terms that “facilitate the use of violence in spaces of power”, thus creating highly dangerous situations when large numbers of teenage and young adult urban males lack education, employment or opportunity and become alienated from the wider society.

1.3.6 The geopolitical and regional contextsFinally, there are a number of dynamics in the global and regional contexts that either support or frustrate countries in the exercise of good governance and maintenance of security.

New and old powers: Growing wealth and state power in the larger countries of East Asia have in recent years seen a parallel growth in their ability to project force and influence further afield. As these new powers (most significantly China but

23 A recent United Nations study on the prevalence of non-partner rape in East Asia and the Pacific, which included case studies in Cambodia, Indonesia and Bougainville (PNG), found a high incidence of three forms of rape in all countries, in particular in Bougainville, with associated factors including poverty, personal history of victimization (especially in childhood), low empathy, alcohol misuse, masculinity emphasizing dominance over women, and participation in gangs and related activities.


also India) emerge, the former ‘great power’ influences in the region have been in decline. As Jones (2013) states:

“In August 2013 India launched her first home-built aircraft carrier, China flew aircraft off the carrier she had fitted-out in 2012 and other countries in the region began to feel the absence of the former European colonial powers, as they send fewer military missions to the region and reduce their assistance budgets. Even the United States, about to base troops in Australia for the first time, is no longer seen as able or willing to act alone, causing every state in the region to think of partnerships and alliances in more complex forms. The old truism that ‘wealth brings warships’ has been underlined by tension between China, Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam and many other countries in the region over small island groups claimed by several parties. While not affecting the daily lives of many, the sparring raises expectations that inter-state violence might again occur and normalises the idea of conflict by its constant repetition in patriotic news media, sometimes reiterated in classrooms even where not in the official curriculum. In many Southeast Asian countries from Thailand to the Philippines, defence budgets are on the rise and the complexity of the defence equipment they acquire increases even more. In front of everyone is the example of North Korea, a paranoid dictatorship convinced of the imminence of attack, both heavily-armed and politically unstable.”

Further developments at the time of finalizing this report (late 2013) include the United States of America’s ‘pivot to Asia’ entailing a shift towards India in a counter-balancing of China, and an acceleration to potentially dangerous levels of Chinese rhetoric against Japan.

Radical Islamism: More insidiously, extremist versions of radical Islamism encouraging violence and ‘martyrdom’ have spread through Southeast Asia (including Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines). As well as bringing murder and bombings in their wake, these have considerably exacerbated and complicated existing insurgencies. Modern communications and social media have been revealed as quite neutral in their political effect, just as able to amplify such extremist propaganda as to promote progressive and peaceful ideas. States have been slow to encourage traditional, non-radicalized Muslim clergy and institutions to counter this new and growing influence through encouragement of debate, discussion and toleration. At the same time, some analysts have criticized authoritarian governments of the region for using the United States-led ‘War on Terror’ as a justification to delay progress on democratic reform and clamp down on legitimate activities and peaceful protest in ways that can increase the grievances felt by minority Muslim populations (Wright-Neville, 2004).

Frameworks for transnational and regional cooperation: To some extent countering trends towards instability and conflict, frameworks for cross-country cooperation and elements of regional governance have emerged in recent years. For the South Pacific Island States, the Pacific Islands Forum has long supported inter-state dialogue and cooperation and some have predicted that communications technologies will support greater economic integration. Putzel and Di John (2012) suggest that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is important as a “significant expression of the collective desire for the stability required for economic growth.” Lo Bianco (2013)24 postulates that the interdependence of ASEAN Member States will increase with the formation of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) from 2015, through the setting of shared benchmarks and standards of performance in education, economic affairs and human rights. Lo Bianco also identifies the ‘Statement of Indigenous Peoples and Ethnic Minorities

24 Lo Bianco, J., ‘Language, Education and Social Cohesion: Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand’, Final Desk Review, Conceptual Framework and Workplan, January 2013.

Regional analysis20

of ASEAN’ as a hopeful indication that the risk of increased homogenization (as a result of greater integration) can be countered by the opening-up of democratic spaces for bottom-up and transnational participation.

Transnational initiatives also take the form of diplomacy and development assistance. Competing for votes at the United Nations, and an improvement in their image regionally, many powerful states within Asia and the Pacific (especially China and India) and beyond (including the United States and Australia) have increased their engagement in both in recent years. This brings the potential for additional resources and capacity development that can support development and stabilization. However, international assistance can also be a factor in instability. Jones (2013) suggests that, when conceived of as ‘charm offensives’, “the competitive nature of these activities may increase rather than decrease unease for the national governments that are at the centre of these attentions.”

Cooperation over conflict and national hazard management: Early warning systems in the Pacific for tsunamis and cyclones have been in existence for some time. However, inaccurate forecasts over Typhoon Haiyan’s timing have served as a reminder that there can be no complacency on seeking to further improve these systems, while avoiding over-reliance on them as a substitute for local responsibility. For the Indian Ocean, early warning alerts have been much improved since the devastating December 2004 tsunami, but the same caution applies. Meanwhile, Wainwright (2010) notes that mechanisms for conflict management in East Asia and the Pacific are less well developed than in other regions, opining that this is due in part to the fragmented and localized nature of many of the conflicts, to which the existing international architecture is not well suited. Wainwright also suggests that ASEAN’s limited regional coherence and default position of ‘non-interference’ have also thus far limited its role in peacekeeping and peacebuilding in Southeast Asia.

1.4 Conclusion

In conclusion, Southeast Asia and the South Pacific face a range of critical challenges that justify their inclusion in a study of ‘peace-promoting’ education reform. Many countries are currently (or recently) affected by significant intra-state violent conflict, inter-community violence or environment-related disasters. These not only seriously impact on the lives and livelihoods of those directly affected and have grave implications for children, they also create considerable challenges in sustaining and consolidating development gains, including making further progress in education.

These conflicts and natural disasters have been shown to have complex causes and dynamics, being influenced by historical factors, natural resource endowment and the current interplay of geopolitical, economic, environmental, cultural and social change that will also bring new threats and challenges in the future. It can be postulated that ‘education’ (as both a human right, a service and a scarce and rationed resource at higher levels) is very likely to be integral to at least some of these dynamics. At the same time, examples from across both regions of success in managing and responding to these changes while continuing to make human development gains, suggests that states and citizens are in the position to make a positive contribution to the promotion of peace and the reduction and mitigation of conflict. Again, it seems reasonable to hypothesize that both the institutions and the process of education might have a positive role to play in these peace-promoting processes. This leads to the topic of the next chapter, which presents, discusses and critiques the findings of the growing body of literature that sheds more light on the ways in which education can be integral to the dynamics of conflict and what its potential roles in peace promotion might be.


A girl smiles during English class at St. John Primary School in Honiara, the Solomon Islands. © UNICEF/NYHQ2006-2551/Pirozzi

Regional analysis22

Colette, 5, sits on a stool and cracks coconuts in her family’s dirt-floor kitchen in Erakor Bridge, a suburb of Port Vila, the capital of Vanuatu. Vanuatu is one of 14 Pacific Island Countries, which form a group of atolls dispersed over 30 million square kilometres of the Pacific Ocean. Because populations are scattered across multiple islands, efficient delivery of health care, education and other social services is difficult. The region is also vulnerable to natural disasters like floods, typhoons and volcanic eruptions.


Concepts and themes in the literature 23

Concepts and themes in the literature

2.1 Introduction

The previous chapter identified a range of complex and inter-related social, political, environmental and economic dynamics at work in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific that seem to be drivers of violence and conflict. It has been observed that education would seem to be integral to a number of these processes and over the past decade, there has been increasing interest in this relationship. The founding of the Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE) and the subsequent dedication of the 2011 Education For All Global Monitoring Report to issues of education and armed conflict25 have sharpened international attention, in particular, to the provision of education in emergencies and conflict-affected contexts. More recently, there have also been mounting calls from the INEE, NGOs and United Nations agencies for stronger inclusion of education in the architecture of peacebuilding, conflict sensitive approaches to programming, and the mainstreaming of DRR and climate change adaptation into education sector planning.

As a part of this trend, a body of literature has developed – and continues to expand – that explores the ways in which education might mediate the relationship between peace and conflict. This literature includes a few attempts at identifying quantitative relationships or correlations between education indicators and measures of conflict or fragility, treatises exploring the process linkages of education to peace and conflict, documentation of ‘lessons learned’ from programmes on the ground and, increasingly, a range of advocacy or practical ‘guidance’ documents containing more generalized exhortations of what ‘needs to be done’. This chapter seeks to review, summarize and critique the findings and perspectives from these various writings. The literature review is undertaken both as a useful exercise in its own right (few critical reviews of this body of literature have been undertaken to date) and in order to inform a research methodology for unpacking ‘peace-promoting sector reform’ at the country level. The full list of references is given in Annex C.

2.2 Statistical relationships between the development of education systems and levels of conflict

In the previous chapter it was noted that many countries in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific are making strong headway to achieve universal primary or basic education, but that these goals are not yet fully attained. Some studies have sought to identify correlations and relationships between macro education indicators and quantitative measures of conflict or fragility. The most comprehensive was probably that of Thyne (2006), who undertook a statistical regression analysis of 160 countries from 1980 to 1999. He found significant negative correlation between the incidence of civil war and high levels of intra-state and anti-government violence and the four factors of investment in education, secondary enrolment rates, male secondary enrolment rates, and adult literacy rates. Thyne takes care, however, not to claim any direct causal effect of education upon the levels of conflict in a society.26 He hypothesizes that the correlations might imply that the educational process directly reduces motivations for conflict (through a range of mechanisms that are discussed further in the subsequent sections of this report). However, the correlations probably reflect the important, but indirect role of education in a complex dynamic of

25 The Education For All Global Monitoring Report 2011: The Hidden crisis: Armed conflict and education, UNESCO, 2011.

26 Thyne’s findings are quoted in some advocacy documents in a way that suggests a clear preventative effect of education has been established.

2.


socio-economic development processes27 (i.e. successfully developing countries can invest more in education, which in turn promotes further – and more equitable – growth, which supports further educational expansion in a ‘virtuous cycle’ which reduces the risks of conflict and fragility). Both of these mechanisms assume that ‘education’ implies more than just enrolment; that, for example, skills and a certain knowledge are acquired and that education is of a minimum quality.

Alternatively, the correlations might indicate that conflict negatively impacts on national educational development rather than the reverse. However, the Human Security Report Project (Vancouver, 2012) presents evidence to dispute this second assumption, while somewhat reinforcing the first. Although not denying the devastating impacts of violent conflict on the regions, the communities and individuals directly affected,28 the Human Security Report questions the assumption that modern types of conflict have generally reversed national trends in education indicators. It presents data illustrating that over the past decade most conflict-affected countries have continued to experience an increase in their national education indicators, albeit at a somewhat slowed rate of progress. In just a few of the countries with very severe and widespread conflict did national education indicators further decline during the conflict period. However, in these cases the indicators were already low or declining before the conflict occurred. The report therefore cautions against necessarily viewing conflict as ‘development in reverse’.

Figure 2 (below) summarizes what might be the positive influences of expanding education systems (that at least deliver basic literacy, numeracy and thinking skills) on processes that were identified in chapter one as mediators of the relationship between peace and stability, and conflict, fragility and natural disaster in the Southeast Asia and Pacific regions.

Figure 2: Potential positive influences of general education expansion/universalization on processes that link to peace, conflict and natural disaster

Underpinned by GOOD GOVERNANCE: • Education services delivered efficiently, transparently and fairly;• Effective mechanisms for broad participation in education;• Education sector linked with wider poverty reduction, social development and rights frameworks;• Education part of national frameworks for disaster risk reduction and management and climate change.

1. Reform Design, Goals and Wider Linkages

• Linkages of education sector reform to wider frameworks linked to inclusion, cohesion and resilience themes, e.g. language, inclusion, human rights, poverty reduction, social development, DRR, climate change etc.• Exploration of inclusion, cohesion and resilience themes in the analyses that inform the education reform programme• Goals and policies for universalization of quality basic education• Policies and objectives for equity and inclusion (e.g. free education, gender equality, reaching disadvantaged groups)• Policies and objectives related to cohesion themes (e.g. violence in schools, curriculum, responses to linguistic and cultural diversity)• Goals, objectives and policies related to DRR, education in emergencies or climate change (resilience)• Goals and objectives to improve the management of education in areas related to inclusion, cohesion and resilience themes• Mechanisms for transparency, accountability, consultation and participation (good governance)• Mechanisms for equitable and pro-poor targeting of resources and teacher allocation (good governance)

2.Access Policies and Strategies • Equitable access and inclusion for poor and disadvantaged communities (availability, accessibility, affordability), with gender equality • Equitable access and inclusion of different social, linguistic and religious groups• Equitable access and inclusion for girls and boys affected by conflict and emergency• Inclusion in learning of youth at risk of alienation

3. Quality Policies and Strategies• Approaches to addressing violence (inclusion, cohesion, resilience)• Approaches to language and culture (inclusion, cohesion)• Critical thinking skills (cohesion)• Accurate information, non-bias, non-discrimination (cohesion)• Environmental and livelihoods education and skills (resilience)

4. Management and Governance • Child protection as a part of school management (inclusion, resilience)• Community participation in education (inclusion, cohesion, resilience)• Strategies for DRR and EiE (resilience)• Mechanisms for transparency, equity and accountability (inclusion, cohesion, good governance)

5. Partnerships for Education Reform• Mechanisms for broad stakeholder consultation and participation at different stages of reform: policy-making, design, implementation, monitoring (inclusion, good governance)• Mechanisms for policy dialogue and harmonized development partners support to sector reform (good governance)

INCLUSION e.g.:• Mainstreaming educational equity and gender equality; • Measures to serve poor and vulnerable individuals and groups, including those affected by current conflicts or natural disasters;• Measures to ensure equity of access, duration and opportunity across different ethnic, religious or other identity groups;• Strategies to reach those who have never entered or dropped out of formal education.

COHESION e.g.:• Reason, critical thinking,accurate information, diverse perspectives;• Access to heritage languages and cultures and to languages of power/opportunity;• Respectful inter-relationships, shared values of common citizenship;• Promotion and practice of non-violence.

RESILIENCE e.g.:• Sector and school-level DRR, emergency preparedness and response systems;• Child protection and appropriate social-emotional support;• Relevant environmental and livelihoods education and skills.

UNIVERSALIZATION: Basic education system is being expanded and universalized, with a minimum level of

quality that leads to measurable basic skills outcomes

+ PEACE PROMOTION:Analysis of the economic, social, environmental and governance/geopolitical factors that might

drive conflict or promote peace, andAttention to education’s role in peace-promoting processes:

Possible long-term effects of development of national education systemsProcesses

Environmental degradation and climate change


Governance, capacity and geopolitical influences


• Education and literacy support empowerment, political participation and development of ‘civil society’, increasing confidence in the state and reducing motivations for conflict.• Basic education might make young people less vulnerable to the influence of violent and irrational ideologies. • Expansion of education increases, at least in theory, the available pool of talent for effective national leadership.

• Achieving universal basic education tends to support social capital and social mobility, thus reducing social exclusion that can create conflict.

• Attainment of basic skills through formal education might increase capacities to mitigate or respond to environmental change, protect assets and reduce risk.• The education of girls through to at least lower secondary education is shown to have an impact on family size and thus population growth, potentially reducing conflicts related to local pressures on natural habitats and resources.

• Early childhood development, primary education, lower secondary education and girls’ education are widely demonstrated to support socio-economic development and poverty reduction, which in turn might reduce motivations for conflict.

Poor education governance

Education governance displays corruption,

nepotism, inefficiency and lack of popular participation

ExclusionEducational exclusion and

inequity by gender, economic status, ethnicity, language or other factor –

in terms of access, relevance, duration and

opportunity

FragmentationEducational processes re-enforce prejudice,

passive acceptance, bigotry or violence; or promote a

single culture and language while downgrading others

VulnerabilityEducation fails to protect

vulnerable children, schools do not develop coping skills

or relevant knowledge, schools and education

systems unable to reduce risks or respond to

emergencies

Effective education governance

Education services delivered efficiently and

fairly, corruption curtailed, effective mechanisms for

broad participation, education sector linked with

wider poverty reduction, social development and disaster management

frameworks

InclusionEducational inclusion and equity, with measures to

ensure gender equality and serve poor, vulnerable and

marginalized individuals and groups, including those

affected by current conflicts or natural disasters

CohesionEducational processes

promote critical thinking, accurate information,

respectful inter-relationships, a sense of citizenship and

non-violent behaviours; language policy and

planning supports access both to the mother

language and culture and to languages of power and

opportunity

ResilienceChild protection,

social-emotional support, DRR, emergency

preparedness and response systems and

environmental education

Governance processesSignificant

weaknesses in governance and

capacity

Environmental processes

Environmental degradation,

climate change and increasing natural

disaster risks

Economic processesPoverty and economic exclusion


Environmental protection, sustainable

resource use, management of natural hazards

Governance processesGovernance to maintain

rule of law, protect vulnerable citizens,

manage conflict and natural hazards, support

participation and deliver basic services

Socio-cultural processes

Strong social cohesion, rights to enjoy one’s own

language, culture and traditions enjoyed in a

context of shared values of national citizenship,

violence discouraged and contained

Economic processes

Broad-based, equitable and sustainable

economic development

Fragility, Conflict and Natural Disaster Peace, Security and Hazard Management

Society SocietyEducation Education


Poor relationships between identity groups, tensions

between traditional and modern

identities, gender discrimination;

violence as a norm

27 These are well documented (e.g. see The World Bank website) and include impacts on economic growth, health, family size, the status of women, democratic participation and social capital.

28 These local impacts of conflict are discussed in more detail in 2.3.3.


It can be seen that there are many ways in which the provision of education in itself (irrespective of any attempts to be ‘conflict sensitive’) might have important effects on reducing the level of conflict in a society. It should be noted, however, that many of these impacts of improving and expanding education on national indicators of peace and security are likely to be realized only over the long term and are part of a network of complex, interacting processes. No direct, linear causation can be claimed. As Davies (2013) expressed it: “input-output models do not work in social terms, as too many messy contextual factors and power interests intervene. The attribution gap is too huge. Even if conflict were to decrease, it is almost impossible to trace this back to something that happened in education.”

2.3 Three sets of processes that link education to peace, conflict and natural disaster

Recognizing the limitations of identifying statistical relationships, a range of studies have sought to understand in more detail the various processes and mechanisms through which education might mediate the relationship between peace and stability on the one hand, and conflict and natural disaster on the other. Despite their diversity, these studies would seem to a great extent to repeat, expand on and elaborate three main sets of associated concepts. For the purposes of this study these have been given the abbreviated labels of ‘exclusionóinclusion’, ‘fragmentationócohesion’ and ‘vulnerabilityóresilience’. While all three have relevance to both conflict and natural disaster, the first two in particular are emphasized in discussions on ‘human-made’ conflict, while discussions on resilience focus on mitigation, risk-reduction, preparedness and response to all kinds of crises, including natural disasters. Each of these is further explained and explored below.

2.3.1 Exclusion ó inclusion The Regional analysis explored how stark economic disparities and social exclusion29 can be drivers of fragility and conflict. There has been considerable exploration of the idea that education can be an integral part of these processes of exclusion, yet on the other hand can reduce overt conflict and support peaceful relations through attention to inclusion, equity and participation. In education, ‘equity’ is understood to mean that all children, regardless of gender, ethnicity, language, geographic location, residency status or other identity factor have an equal chance to fulfil their individual potential through equity of access to education of comparable quality and duration, resulting in equity of opportunity to avail oneself of the outcomes and benefits of education. ‘Inclusion’ is a similar concept, but focuses on ensuring that mainstream educational provision supports full participation in education by being responsive to those at risk of exclusion, for example working children, migrants or children with disabilities. In the literature that links exclusion-inclusion in education to ‘peace promotion’, two main mechanisms are identified:

Inclusion and participation in education reduces the opportunity and motivation for engagement in conflict on the part of the learners themselves: Thyne (2006), in the study introduced above, hypothesizes that education might have a ‘stability’ effect. He postulates that formal education, by constructively engaging children and young people and giving hope for the future, might reduce the motivation for armed conflict. In so doing, Thyne is implying an assumption

29 The Australian Government publication ‘The Origins, Meaning, Definition and Economic Implications of the Concept of Social Inclusion/Exclusion’ (2009) gives a useful definition of social exclusion (from Pierson, 2001) as “a process that deprives individuals and families, groups and neighbourhoods of the resources required for the participation in the social, economic and political activities of the society as a whole. It is primarily a consequence of poverty and low income, but other factors such as discrimination, low educational attainment and depleted living environments underpin it.” In this definition, access to education is one of the ‘resources required for participation’ while education outcomes (literacy levels) are seen as underpinning the poverty that lies at the heart of exclusion.


that formal education is of sufficient quality and relevance to be able to offer some kind of reward for perseverance. Thyne, however, cautions against simplistic interpretations, recognizing that the leaders, agitators and manipulators in most conflicts are themselves often highly educated.30 Dupuy (2008) cites evidence that expanding access to secondary education in post-conflict situations is directly linked to reducing motivations for armed conflict by raising both the social cost and psychological constraints. The stability link would seem to be strongest for post-primary education (whether formal secondary schooling or non-formal or alternative learning programmes) in current conflict-affected countries, where it presents a tangible and immediate alternative to violence for vulnerable youth and adolescents (especially males). A number of advocacy documents (e.g. INEE, 2010 and Save the Children, 2011) therefore encourage a greater priority on these programmes, with some calling for a particular targeting of boys and young men.

Some studies have extended the argument ‘backwards’, emphasizing attention to targeted early childhood interventions to support more equitable progress through to post-primary levels of education. This, it has been suggested, will reduce the probability of conflict by keeping the most vulnerable children in school for longer (Vargos Baron, 2006). While this adds to the already strong arguments31 for reaching the most disadvantaged children with ECD support, it should be emphasized that the causal chain here is very long. In other words, the impact of ECD can be more easily linked to the achievement of gradual systemic expansion with equity and a minimum quality of education than to any direct impact on conflict reduction.

Equitable inclusion, transparent and fair resource distribution and structures for participation in decision-making about education prevent, or reduce, tensions and grievances over unequal access to resources, opportunities and power (that education provides), which are common drivers of ethnic and inter-community conflict: Many studies suggest that inequitable provision of education at different levels, for instance in teacher distribution and resourcing that result in inequality of opportunity and/or outcomes of education, might all contribute to grievances that fuel tensions or actual conflict. This is particularly the case where these issues are not merely logistical (e.g. difficulties in encouraging good teachers to work in remote areas), but relate to a lack of commitment to equal opportunities, weak structures to enable a fair ‘voice’ in educational decision-making, and even active corruption, for example in school admissions policies or assessment practices. The grievance argument is essentially about ‘good governance’ in education, based on the understanding that it is the stark inequalities and injustices (or perceptions of these) – rather than the size of the ‘overall pot’– that create resentments which fuel tensions across groups.

Novelli and Smith (for UNICEF, 2011) found that inequitable education systems were key drivers of conflict in Lebanon, Nepal and Sierra Leone. In a subsequent UNICEF Conflict Analysis32 undertaken in Sierra Leone it was found that “resentment on the part of those who can only access sub-standard state education when others can afford better opportunities in the private sector” is a major grievance. Similar linkages have been found in Guatemala and Liberia (Save the Children, 2008) and in Sri Lanka (Lo Bianco, 2011). A 2005 report on Nepal by Human Rights for Global Justice cited denial of education as integral to caste discrimination in Nepal, which has made Dalits33 a “ready support base for the insurgency”. Dalit children have

30 The Paris-educated progenitors of the Cambodia genocide provide a particularly stark example of how educational privilege is not always used for the social good.

31 Walker in The Lancet (2011) describes in detail how inadequate support in early childhood sets the stage for inequality, noting that ‘with cumulative exposure to developmental risks, disparities widen and trajectories become more firmly established’.

32 For PBEA.

33 Dalits: the group at the bottom of the Hindu caste system, historically known as ‘untouchables’.


been denied access to schools and discriminated against within schools in terms of where they sit in the classroom, the expectations of teachers, attitudes of classmates and denial of access to school wells and other facilities and resources. Bush and Salterelli (2011) conclude that there is such a strong relationship between educational access and inter-communal tensions that they propose that “unequal access to education should be viewed as an indicator of deteriorating relationships between groups.”

Given the fundamental role of language in defining identity, the use – or exclusion – of languages in education is often cited as a factor in social tension and discord. Lo Bianco (2013) explains that there is a “close but complex relationship between language and literacy diversity and education with the opportunities for social, citizenship and economic advancement that societies make available….as a result, language questions are often implicated in conflict, tension and struggle within societies, and so a cause of tension is often related to ethnicity differences when these are represented by language differences.”34 Smith, A. (2011) identifies language in education as a key dimension of inter-communal conflicts in China (Xinjiang), India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Kyrgyzstan.

Aware of the grievance factor, advocacy documents for conflict sensitive or peacebuilding education strongly emphasize measures to support inclusion and equity. Save the Children International, in its Rewrite the Future (2011) campaign, states that “commitment to universal access to education sends a signal to the population that the State is committed to addressing the root causes of conflict through broadening education opportunity” The document goes on to assert that inclusion can be achieved through a range of measures, including quantitative

34 Lo Bianco, J., ‘Language, Education and Social Cohesion: Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand’, Final Desk Review, Conceptual Framework and Workplan, January 2013.

Children hold up placards bearing their wishes for peace as they greet the arrival of the Special Representative of the Secretary General for Children and Armed Conflict, Radhika Coomaraswamy, in the community of Datu Piang, Mindanao region, southern Philippines in 2008.

© UNICEF/PHIA2008-0004/Alquinto


criteria for resource allocation, collection and use of data on enrolment and transition disaggregated by geographic area and ethnicity and “measures to prevent local discrimination” in matters of access, scholarship provision or fee waivers.

Addressing linguistic diversity through provision of education in children’s mother tongues (e.g. through mother tongue-based bilingual education) is also promoted as an important means by which education can reduce inequality, by attracting children of minority language groups to school and supporting their improved learning. For example, IIEP guidance on integrating conflict and DRR into education sector planning (2012) recommends ‘inclusive language policies’, while Save the Children (2011) argues for “good practice in multilingual education to support more equitable inclusion in fragile or conflict affected situations.” Issues of language, education and peacebuilding are discussed further in the next section on fragmentation-cohesion.

Other studies focus on the role of participatory education governance. Smith, A. (2010) emphasizes the importance of “governance structures for representation and participation at national or local levels” to ensure inclusion and support the resolution of grievances, and identifies transparency in funding and the balance of central and local authority as being of critical importance in post-conflict situations. Some writers point out that resolution often requires more than ensuring ‘objective’ fairness since (as was discussed in Chapter 1) many conflicts are also linked to more subjective identity and symbolic associations. West (2013), for example, advises that measures to reduce conflict through education should take account of “perceptions, beliefs and community stories about education and its delivery”.

It is noted that the arguments for attention to inclusion and equity in education as a means of ‘peace promotion’ focus in particular on equity across groups (ethnic, linguistic, social), since it is the divisions (psychological, social and geographical) between these identity-based groupings that often form the fissures along which societies fracture. These understandings serve as a useful reinforcement of the recent broadening of concern beyond the individual and household disparities related to gender and poverty,35 to embrace other forms of social exclusion. Unfortunately, however, some of the ‘guidance’ on what needs to be done to achieve equitable inclusion appears simplistic. For example, it is often advocated to focus on categorization and disaggregation in order to get a better measure of how different groups are faring in educational terms and to target those that are disadvantaged, but without reflection on the problems associated with categorization based on social or ethnic grouping (compared, for example, with socio-economic status, gender or geographic location). Such groupings often have a subjective element and in situations of conflict are often politically manipulated and in rapid flux.36 In such situations, an over-emphasis on achieving an exact and measurable parity between social groups might serve to inflame tensions rather than to calm them, as well as lead to an escalation of new identities and claims.37

35 See Faul, 2013.

36 In Nepal, the identity of ‘Madhesi’ has assumed greater significance in recent decades. In the conflicts in Mindanao and South Thailand, religion (as opposed to culture and ethnicity) has become more strongly emphasized as a factor of difference. During the break up of former Yugoslavia, many people of mixed descent were forced to align with selected identities according to what seemed to promise the greatest chance of survival and protection. In the last two decades of segregation, Serbs and Croats have sought to move their respective dialects of what was formerly ‘Serbo-Croat’ down divergent paths.

37 In Nepal, for example, while some of the resentment against the introduction of a policy of stipends for all children of Dalit or marginalized indigenous backgrounds might be dismissed as simply an expression of caste discrimination, there are also genuine grievances on the part of those that are ineligible but face similar levels of poverty. The search for an acceptable allocation formula continues. Rwanda’s experience provides a stark reminder that ethnic identities can be both overwhelmingly negative and to a large extent spurious. In these cases, to be inclusive, education needs to be ‘blind’ to these identities rather than to reinforce them (Rwanda has banned the use of the former Hutu/ Tutsi classification).


A further limitation of some of the papers discussing inclusion as a conflict-prevention measure is that, having identified either general or context-specific groups in need of attention (e.g. adolescent boys, particular ethnic groups), they then propose discrete strategies that are specific to these groups, without reference to how these need to fit into more holistic and rights-based inclusive education frameworks. In other words, the claims of those who pose a ‘conflict risk’ are not considered in balance with the equal claims of those facing other kinds of exclusion and discrimination in education but do not pose such a risk (for example children with disabilities). Although, as Lynn Davies (2013) points out, there are well-developed ‘rights’ frameworks and concepts that could help to work through such dilemmas and balance different claims, these are surprisingly rarely used in the considerations of equity/inclusion in relation to peace and conflict, even by agencies that have developed and used such frameworks in other aspects of their work.

2.3.2 Fragmentation ó cohesion The Regional analysis discussed how many conflicts in the two regions, while rooted in complex historic, economic and social processes, often manifest along ethno-linguistic or religious fault lines. Once such conflicts have taken hold, they tend to self-perpetuate as each group’s view of ‘the other’ becomes more distorted. A second recurrent theme of the literature is how the organization, processes and content of education reinforce the wider societal dynamics of either fragmentation, discrimination and violence on the one hand, or social cohesion38 and peacebuilding39 on the other. As with the exclusion-inclusion dimension, these processes would seem to operate directly and indirectly, over a range of time-scales. Some of the main linkages and mechanisms are highlighted below.

Schools have an important role in either normalizing or challenging violence in a society: A number of studies focus on the negative role of education in the acceptance and reinforcement of violent patterns of behaviour. A multi-country UNICEF40 study, Reducing Violence Against Children in Schools, found that violence against children was widespread in the case study countries, often including sexual violence against girls and victimization of children of low social status. It stated that the frequent use of physical punishment in schools “tends to result in violence between children and the assumption that violence may be used to coerce a smaller or weaker person” and that it is often meted out arbitrarily to children based on identity characteristics rather than actual behaviour. There is strong evidence that children exposed to violence, especially from a very young age, are at greater risk of perpetuating violence than those who were not exposed, and that high levels of pre-existing societal violence increase the vulnerability of civilians in a situation where law and order, along with normal protective systems, have broken down.41 These linkages further reinforce human rights-based arguments as well as

38 A simple definition of ‘social cohesion’ is a term to describe the bonds or ‘glue’ that bring people together in society, particularly in the context of cultural diversity. Forrest and Kearns in Social Cohesion, Social Capital and the Neighbourhood associate social cohesion with a number of factors: common values and civic culture, social order and social control, social solidarity and reductions in wealth disparities, social networks and social capital, place attachment and identity. Social cohesion can be an attribute of communities or of a society as a whole.

39 The United Nations Peacebuilding Support Office website ascribes the concept of peacebuilding to Johan Galtung (1976), who called for the creation of “peacebuilding structures to promote sustainable peace by addressing the ‘root causes’ of violent conflict and supporting indigenous capacities for peace management and conflict resolution.” Galtung espoused ‘positive peace’, which actively addresses the “social injustices that may be a cause of violence.” His ideas were later expanded by Lederach (2009), who advocated for “adaptive processes that address deeper long term relational and systemic processes that produce violently destructive expressions of conflict”

40 Garner, P., and C. Gittins, Northampton Centre for Learning Behaviour, University of Northampton, UK, Reducing Violence against Children in Schools, United Nations Children’s Fund

41 See section 1.3.5.


educational arguments (related to the affective basis of learning) for implementation of overall policies and practices that ban all forms of violence in schools and learning institutions and encourage non-violent ways of instilling discipline and resolving differences. For these strategies, the need to ‘start young’ through quality ECD and ‘child-friendly’ primary education is often emphasized.

There is also some evidence of a more short-term potential for reducing violent behaviour through overt teaching of non-violent conflict resolution skills as part of targeted ‘peace education’ programmes in conflict-affected contexts. Dupuy (2008) finds that “approaches in education that support gender equality and discourage use of physical violence (including gender–based violence) in cooperative learning environments, teach children critical lessons about non-violent conflict resolution.” Of course, these alone are unlikely to be successful without actions to change other factors that provoke conflict; nevertheless, they have a role to play.

The ways in which education systems cater for different ethnic, linguistic and social groups can promote or reduce cohesion, depending on the context: State education systems respond to heterogeneous populations in different ways. Some public school systems operate in different languages, some are segregated to reflect the geographic distribution of different ethnic or linguistic groups, and some allow a diversity of education providers, including religious schools. By contrast, others have favoured a more uniform approach in which all children access more or less the same ‘package’. It would seem that all of these systems could support either cohesion or fragmentation, depending on the specifics of the context.

Smith, A. (2011) suggests that segregated schooling “can be instrumental in weakening bonds and understandings between groups and fragmenting the society as a whole” in situations where these reflect the “ghettoization” of different groups. He states that “the prevalence of separate schools based on identity factors in conflict areas such as Bosnia-Herzegovina, Guatemala, Lebanon, Mozambique, Northern Ireland, Rwanda and Sri Lanka suggests that the linkage is not just a coincidence.” He observes that segregated schooling is generally not the initial cause of conflict, but that if conflict takes hold, such schooling systems are vulnerable to polarization and propaganda. Schools might actively reinforce, or simply be unable to influence or contain, social processes in which differences are increasingly exaggerated and distorted, each group’s particular set of values and beliefs promoted as ‘superior’ to those of others and the opportunity for social mixing curtailed. Sri Lanka provides an example of where a formerly segregated system (initially seen as a sensible way to serve the needs of distinct communities)42 became deeply embroiled in the dynamics of conflict and is now being urgently reformed.

The role of segregated religious or ‘faith-based’ schools is often a focus of controversy. Such schools have been perceived as creating divisions in cases where they espouse extremist or violent ideology, or resist the promotion of objective, critical or scientific thought. Institutions in the North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan, southern Somalia and elsewhere have been categorized as such. However, in so far as such ‘schools’ target the very vulnerable in chaotic situations, do very little in terms of education, fall outside the purview of state education systems and are often foreign-funded, it is probably more accurate to view them not as illustrations of how faith-based schooling can go wrong but rather of the risks incurred by states who fail to provide poor and vulnerable areas with acceptable basic education services.

42 Lo Bianco (2013) reported findings that the long-standing practice of mother tongue instruction in Sri Lanka is a major reason for higher rates of literacy and better results for girls than in Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh and India. The reformed system in Sri Lanka will therefore maintain mother tongue-based multilingual education practices within integrated school settings.


By contrast, Smith, A. (while recommending integrated schooling as “generally most likely to support cohesion”) concurs that many faith-based schools (of different religions) ‘go the extra mile’ to be inclusive, support poor families and promote inter-faith understanding. One example of this could be the strong role that Buddhist monastic schools in Myanmar have played for many years in enabling poor children of different backgrounds to access affordable basic education. Madrasahs in moderate Islamic states, including Indonesia and Turkey, have had considerable success in improving access to an all-round education and reducing threats of extremist distortion. Van Bruinessen (2009) describes the long-standing achievements of Indonesian madrasahs (Pesantrens) in both moderating religious self-segregation and improving educational standards, through a 70:30 curriculum ratio of secular subjects and religious instruction, discouragement of rote learning, and carefully planned integration of modern teaching methods combined with a clear government role in oversight. The argument, therefore, seems to be more for a state role in regulation and oversight of faith-based schools43 rather than necessarily taking a path of secularization or uniformity.

Approaches to ethnic and linguistic plurality and diversity in the classroom can promote cohesion or exacerbate tensions and conflict: Distinct from, but linked to, questions of different kinds of education provision are how curriculum, pedagogical and language policy and practice respond to the linguistic and cultural diversity of the population. Many countries, in the name of social cohesion or national unity, very strongly promote a single national identity, culture, language and interpretation of history. Joseph and Matthews (2013) note how this is the

43 Interestingly, Van Bruinessen finds that states that have successfully integrated madrasahs as a form of state-supported education have not left these schools entirely under the purview of the ministry of education but given a prominent role to ministries of religion, whose capacities to scrutinize and supervise in this area are often better developed.

Students from an indigenous community read in the library in Ban Pho Primary School in Bac Han District in the remote Lao Cai Province in Viet Nam. This UNICEF-supported school provides education in a safe, child-friendly learning environment and includes classes taught in the children’s indigenous language.

© UNICEF/NYHQ2009-0224/Estey


case for the majority of Southeast Asian states, many of which remain strongly authoritarian. Bush and Salterelli (2000) suggest that this approach to education can exacerbate tensions or conflict as a “weapon in dominance of minorities through the suppression of language, traditions, art forms, religious practices and cultural values” as well as “manipulate history and textbook content for political purposes or inculcate attitudes of superiority/inferiority.” Wright (2010) finds that education in Tibetan areas of China supports “modernization and assimilation, giving clear messages regarding the inferiority of traditional ways of life.”

In other cases, a single language in education is used because it is assumed this is necessary to complete a fragile process of ‘nation-building’ or because of fears that using many languages might lead to “uncontrollable empowerment of minorities” (Kosonen and Young, 2010). Sometimes, also, ideas of a national identity are manipulated to promote a sense of superiority over neighbouring and foreign countries to serve geopolitical agendas.

Papers that focus on questions of language in education in relation to social cohesion and conflict tend to favour bilingual and multilingual approaches. Smith, A. (2010) argues that, in such contexts, “multilingual policies may provide protections against conflict resulting from the exclusion of minorities from education or the use of language to reinforce unequal power relationships between groups.” However, there is sometimes over-simplification of what is a complex area, since rights to the mother language and culture need to be balanced with rights to languages for equal social, economic and political participation and opportunity, within an overall planned approach that is appropriate and feasible to a particular context. The commissioning of the UNICEF EAPRO study under the PBEA initiative on Language, Education and Social Cohesion (Lo Bianco, 2013–2015) was in response to the realization that current frameworks are not sufficiently nuanced and that more sophisticated understandings are required.

Similarly, regarding cultural difference and diversity, works concerned with ‘peace promotion’ tend to favour inter-cultural or multi-cultural approaches. Two closely linked aspects of these are emphasized: the development of knowledge, understanding and appreciation of different cultures, beliefs, practices and perspectives and the development of tolerance and respectful relationships across groups. As was noted with regards to violence reduction, these approaches are seen as having relevance over both the short and long term. Over a longer period, the whole educational process, beginning in the early years and including both the overt and ‘hidden’ curriculum, can support the inculcation of certain attitudes and values, develop understanding of a range of perspectives and challenge stereotypes, prejudices or bias that might be commonplace in the world outside the school gate. UNESCO is currently undertaking a multi-country study on Learning to Live Together, based on the assumption that specific curriculum content and approaches can make a long-term contribution to peace.

Smith and Vaux advocate that development of inter-cultural understanding and relational skills can be more easily achieved through an integrated and ‘outcome-based’ curriculum that incorporates special ‘topics’ that overtly address these areas (e.g. peace education, civics). Clearly, where the mainstream curriculum remains inflexible and rote-based, the best option might be to introduce these themes as co-curricular areas that can be taught more appropriately through learner-centred approaches. There certainly seems to be a case in some circumstances for implementing contextualized programmes that address urgent needs to create, restore or consolidate peaceful relationships, often as a wider part of peacebuilding efforts. Some evidence of the positive effects of peace education programmes on young people’s attitudes to ‘enemy’ groups have been found in Afghanistan (Sadheed, 2012), Israel-Palestine (Salomon, 2004), Bosnia (Sinclair, 2008) and Nepal (M. Smith, 2010).


Some voices, however, while strongly supporting the need to develop critical thinking, question the requirement for ‘additional’ content as well as the wisdom of approaches that overly emphasize issues of difference. Ledda (2010), writing about the United Kingdom (where there is a reappraisal of approaches to multi-cultural education that seem to have weakened social cohesion),44 argues that the ‘basics’ of education might be more powerful than curricular ‘add-ons’ in developing skills most fundamental to the creation of a tolerant and cohesive society. These, he argues, include the ability to differentiate fact from opinion, understand narrative and perspective, engage in debate and operate in the public sphere with a degree of objective detachment from one’s own emotions and beliefs. “Through education, children begin to access the world that is common to all human beings, regardless of whether we see it from different standpoints. Learning to read and the study of grammar and maths are the first steps towards providing us with the abstract thought necessary for our minds to move across time and space and look at the world from others’ points of view.” Related to this argument are questions of whether shifting too far in favour of approaches that emphasize ‘soft’ skills and attitudes might backfire in terms of building cohesion, if the recipients perceive that these are reducing time or resources for rigorous academic learning, viewed as a means of escaping poverty and discrimination.

Values and attitudes are not, of course, only inculcated through direct teaching of overt curriculum content. Children also pick these up from the ways in which language and illustrations are used in textbooks and other educational materials. These might be blatantly biased in favour of a particular group or version of events, reinforce negative stereotyping or go beyond the promotion of patriotism to that of aggressive nationalism. Cole and Barsalou (2006) assert that “approaches that expose children to multiple historical narratives can reinforce democratic and peaceful tendencies in transitional societies emerging from violent conflict.” Nicolai (2010) stresses the importance of early attention to the revision of curriculum, including textbooks and educational materials, as part of the process of peacebuilding in situations where biases have been identified as contributing to tensions.

In summary, the literature that discusses the relationship between education and social cohesion identifies some important concerns. In particular, the need to really understand what is implied by the aphorism ‘do no harm’ is underscored. The more obvious forms of ‘harm’ to be eliminated in all learning institutions include all forms of violence, hostility and discrimination against specific groups, as well as ideological indoctrination or manipulation. Such measures are already human rights imperatives and indeed recognized as essential for real education and learning to take place.45 The analysis makes it clear, however, that it is not enough just to prevent the worst abuses. There is also the potential for education to intervene in some of the social processes that create fragmentation and conflict and to actively support peacebuilding. While it is not clear how far a country’s various educational institutions can be maintained as beacons of peace and tolerance when the wider community or society is hostile and fragmenting (it might be argued that ‘peace-promoting’ education can be most easily implemented in contexts that are already peaceful), there are sufficient grounds for trying as hard as possible to support education to play this role.

Determining what to do, however, is more challenging than identifying what to avoid. Contrary to what some of the literature seems to suggest, multilingual and multicultural education, non-violence and development of critical thinking do

44 In the UK, long-established approaches to multicultural education that have in many ways been successful in promoting inclusion have also been implicated in increasing segregation in many urban areas and the suppression of critical debate and analysis (that should be at the heart of the educational process) through exaggerated fears of ‘offence’.

45 A minimum level of safety, security and trust is required for children to be able to take the risks (play, exploration, questioning, making mistakes) that are essential for effective learning.


not necessarily fit easily and seamlessly together. Instead, each context is likely to throw up complexities and contradictions that require careful analysis and a sensitive, negotiated response. Davies (2013) draws attention to the role that rights frameworks can play: “The nice thing about rights is that (unlike sacred texts) they are not a blueprint, they are themselves revisable and discussable, with constant tensions between, say, minority rights to cultural expression and rights relating to gender equality, or between rights to freedom of expression and rights to dignity and freedom from abuse.”

One further observation on the advocacy of strategies for social cohesion is the lack of reflection on the actual, desirable and feasible role of the state versus schools and teachers in determining the details of the education process. The Education Above All guidance, in particular, ascribes solely to ‘ministries of education’ a very strong hands-on role (going far beyond responsibilities implied in upholding the principle of ‘do no harm’). The guidance espouses a fair degree of screening, proscription and regulation in order to ensure that schools act in certain ways and seems to have unrealistic expectations of the feasibility of complete ‘elimination of bias’, as well as of the efficacy of top-down legalistic controls and bureaucratic measures. This approach seems to deny the centrality of authentic inter-personal relationships to an effective learning process. The document also places more faith than the evidence seems to support in the efficacy of discrete modules of teacher training in changing teacher behaviours and abilities to address sensitive topics. ‘Political economy’ issues of choice, decentralization and school autonomy are barely touched upon.

2.3.3 Vulnerability ó resilience While the inclusion and cohesion discussions above focused on links between education and conflict, the third dimension, resilience, re-introduces the second concern of this paper, that of natural disaster. The Regional analysis discussed how countries in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific are vulnerable to natural disasters and often have insufficient capacity or systems in place to effectively reduce risk or to respond to varied emergencies. Our third set of concepts relates to children, schools and education systems as ‘victims’ of conflict or natural disaster, contrasted with their capacity to develop ‘resilience’ to prevent or reduce risks, mitigate impacts and/or recover from the effects of such events.

At the individual level, ‘resilience’ is a psychological attribute and has been defined as the ability to ‘bounce back’. It involves doing well against the odds, coping, and recovering. Masten et al. (1990) define resilience as “the process of, capacity for, or outcome of, successful adaptation despite challenging or threatening circumstances.” Resilience has also been explored in relation to groups, communities, institutions or ecological systems. In the context of development and conflict it has been defined by the Department for International Development (DFID, 2011) as “the ability of countries, communities and households to manage change, by maintaining or transforming living standards in the face of shocks or stresses – such as earthquakes, drought or violent conflict – without compromising their long-term prospects.”

Children and education are victims of conflict and natural disaster, especially when they are already poor and vulnerable: Novelli and Smith (2011) identify school children, teachers and education systems as all being ‘victims’ of conflict in which “teachers and students are targeted, schools are politicised, children recruited to join armed groups and families displaced.” The Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies reports that the impacts of conflict on children and their communities include loss of life, physical injury, emotional trauma, loss (for children) of parents, relatives or other carers, reduced access to food, higher work responsibilities of women and children (owing to loss of family livelihoods, labour or incomes), separation, displacement, loss of home or shelter, increased vulnerability to abuse or neglect, or even direct engagement as child combatants


(INEE, UNICEF). In such situations, existing disparities are often exacerbated and the most vulnerable children further marginalized.

Girls are often unable to continue their education owing to security issues or increased domestic responsibilities, and adolescent girls are a particularly vulnerable and invisible group (Plan International, 2013). Children with disabilities are often at greatest risk of fatality in times of conflict and face even greater obstacles in accessing or continuing education (sic). Walker et al. (in The Lancet, 2011) cite evidence that high levels of societal violence lead to insecure attachments that severely mar the healthy psychological and emotional development of young children, often made worse when violent conflict and displacement disrupt normal family protection and the quality of parenting.

Schools and education institutions are also vulnerable in times of conflict or disaster. By the very nature of these institutions as locations in which large numbers of children of similar age gather together, there is a high risk of significant injury and loss of young life if the institution is affected by a natural event, or caught in the crossfire of conflict. Schools in affected areas might become unusable or inaccessible, especially for girls. Population displacement owing either to conflict or natural emergency can result in schools in host areas becoming overcrowded and overstretched, creating or exacerbating tensions between the incoming and host communities. The 2011 EFA Global Monitoring Report states that the percentage of children aged 7–16 years in conflict–affected areas of Mindanao who do not attend school is more than four times the national average for the Philippines. It reports that of 28 million children out of school globally, 42 per cent are in conflict-affected countries.

Education is increasingly coming under deliberate attack: Disturbingly, education is also increasingly a target of attack. Often, this is for military purposes, the dispersed and widespread distribution of schools making them attractive as base locations. A report by the Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack (2012) states that between January 2005 and October 2012, armed groups made

2008, Volunteers teach in a child friendly learning space set up by UNICEF for children affected by the conflict in the community of Datu Piang, Mindanao region in southern Philippines.

© UNICEF/PHIA2008-0003/Alquinto


use of schools and other educational institutions in at least 24 countries worldwide and in more than half of the countries affected by armed conflict. In all cases this included government military use, while in a third of cases it also included the use of schools by non-state armed groups. Children have been injured and killed and schools damaged or destroyed as belligerent forces have attacked schools because military forces were using them. Frequently, the consequences of military use of schools include high student dropout rates, reduced enrolments and lower rates of transition to higher education levels, especially for girls. The Mindanao conflict in the Philippines is an example from Southeast Asia of how schools have been used quite extensively for military action.

Even more disturbing are violent attacks directly and deliberately targeting schools, children and teachers, for ideological and political motives. This is the case in Thailand’s deep south where many schools have been bombed and teachers murdered. The shooting last year of Malala Yousafzai by the Taliban in Pakistan, as well as increased attacks on education by Boko Haram46 in Nigeria, have focused international attention on extremist ideologies that violently oppose modern education in general, and in particular for girls.

The literature around ‘resilience’ focuses on how education can develop resilient and knowledgeable children and communities and how education systems can protect children, reduce risk and prepare for, respond to and bounce back from emergencies. The main messages are:

The continuity of education during conflict and emergencies can significantly reduce the negative impacts on children and whole communities and build resilience and coping skills: The last decade has seen substantial progress in the understanding and practice of education in emergencies and the importance of including education (and early childhood development) in the earliest stages of an emergency response. O’Malley and Smith (2010) and Novelli and Smith (2011) explore how communities and schools that are conflict-affected can be developed as centres of protection, normalization and support:

“These interventions protect education institutions, provide continuity between conflict and peace, help children overcome the psychosocial and traumatic effects of conflict and help to ensure a protective environment within which children can develop coping systems” (Novelli and Smith, 2011).

There have been creative developments regarding the establishment of learning institutions as ‘zones of peace’, which involve negotiations on the part of all stakeholders for schools to be protected and not utilized for military purposes, as well as ‘child-friendly’ or ‘safe learning’ spaces where children (of all age groups) can experience stability, continuity of learning and psychosocial support. Smith, M. (2010) found that programmes in both Nepal and the Philippines to develop learning institutions as zones of peace “actively contributed to conflict transformation in that they improved relationships amongst stakeholders, introduced good governance into local education decision-making and reduced violence at the local level.”

There has also been learning around how the rapid establishment of targeted programmes combining ‘catch-up’ with livelihoods-related skills for youth and adolescents affected by conflict (including those involved as combatants) can help to consolidate peace and reduce risks of lapse back into conflict.47 However, the evidence on the long-term impact of such programmes remains unclear, probably in part because of the difficult conditions in which they are undertaken. Smith, A. (2010)

46 The very name meaning ‘Western education is forbidden’.

47 Interestingly, although this point is emphasized in the 2011 GMR on armed conflict and education, it is minimally explored in the subsequent 2012 GMR on youth and skills.


cautions that in post-conflict situations, “because aid agencies are under pressure to deliver education services for a quick impact, it is very difficult to demonstrate either correlations or causality between programming and peacebuilding.”

Conflict and emergency mitigation and response depend on risk reduction, preparedness and child protection strategies: Finally, it is increasingly recognized that the education sector has a critical role to play in risk reduction, mitigation and response. This is both because of the national reach48 of educational institutions (especially primary schools) and also their obvious potential as centres for community outreach, coordination and communication. There is also increased understanding that a full range of strategies, resources and capacities are required in order to support both humanitarian response and continuity of education, including planning for teachers, locations, modalities of educational delivery and systems for rapid dispatch of emergency resources and materials.

The Education Cluster Thematic Group on DRR is now promoting a Global Framework for Comprehensive School Safety. The framework aims to “protect children in schools, plan for educational continuity, safeguard investments and strengthen a disaster resilient citizenry through education.” It is based on the three pillars of: 1) Safe School Facilities (including sites, building standards, safe access, water and sanitation, climate-smart features and maintenance); 2) School Disaster Management (policies, operating procedures, evacuation, reunification strategies, contingency plans for education continuity); and 3) Risk Reduction Education (culture of safety, resilient communities and problem solving for risk reduction).

Overall, the evidence of vulnerability-resilience linkages is strong, both for the negative impacts of conflict or environment-related emergency on children, their communities and schools, and for the positive effects of mitigating such impacts and seeking to maintain educational continuity at all stages of a conflict or crisis. As has been shown to be the case for the inclusion and cohesion linkages, the long-term effects on levels of peace and stability of conscious efforts to make children and education resilient are impossible to prove, but the logic is convincing.

A few gaps can be identified in the discourse on resilience in education as it has developed to date. Firstly, although ‘resilience’ was originally a psychological term applied at the individual level and is often considered in relation to psychosocial support for conflict-affected children, there is less said about how all children’s individual resilience and coping skills might be developed more comprehensively throughout the ‘mainstream’ educational process. Such a discussion might throw up some interesting paradoxes around creating appropriate learning environments for children (of different ages) that are protective and child-friendly, while also avoiding over-protection of children in a way that denies them agency or responsibility and reduces their capacity to operate in the very ‘child-unfriendly’ environments that they encounter daily beyond the school gate.

Secondly, given the role of environmental degradation in many conflicts, it is surprising that education’s role in supporting environmental knowledge and practical conservation skills is given only scant mention in much of the conflict-focused literature.49 While there is a strong international movement to promote ‘ecological literacy’, for the moment debates about the forms and content of environmental education seem to be taking place in parallel to discussions on educational responses to conflict.

48 Although not all children are yet attending primary school, the goal of universal primary education, sometimes supported by legislation making it compulsory, has catalyzed progress towards achieving a nationwide reach of schools in many countries, often with the assistance of GPS mapping and other technologies.

49 Bird (2010) identifies neglect of environmental education as a possible contributory factor to a number of conflicts in Sub-Saharan Africa, but evidence of positive impacts of such education is harder to pin down.


2.4 The opportunity of education sector reform

A number of studies on education, fragility and conflict have highlighted the opportunity of education sector reform and planning, especially at a transitional phase (e.g. post-conflict reform or following a significant change of government), to address problems in education that exacerbate tensions and conflict, harness education to promote peace and create a ‘peace dividend’. Smith, A. (2010) stresses the importance of “a systemic conflict analysis, resulting in a set of inter-related initiatives through sector planning, governance reform, curriculum reform and increased funding to broaden access.” Winthrop et al. (2011) encourage governments and development partners to aim for national-level and sector-wide plans as soon as possible, through flexible modalities, to balance the urgency of service delivery with long-term capacity building. Nicolai et al. (UNESCO, 2009) identify from 11 country case studies a range of common priority areas, including urgent expansion of access (Cambodia), addressing peace through the curriculum (Rwanda, Sri Lanka) and reintegration of children and youth directly involved in the perpetration of violence (Angola).

In recognition of the need to go beyond project-level or piecemeal interventions towards a holistic conflict sensitive or peace-promoting approach to education sector planning and reform, there have been a number of attempts to develop guidance to support the stakeholders in these processes:

IIEP (UNESCO), UNICEF and the Global Education Cluster: Integrating conflict and disaster risk reduction into education sector planning: This was developed primarily for use in conflict-affected countries in West and Central Africa and it therefore has a strong focus on education in emergencies and risk reduction. It aims to support education sector planning processes (i.e. three-five year cycles). The four core actions that are advocated reflect the ‘inclusion-cohesion-resilience’ themes: (a) ensure equitable distribution of resources; (b) reverse biased curriculum; (c) train school committees in conflict prevention; and (d) develop mitigation policies. There is a strong focus on how to use analytical tools in order to fully understand the context and therefore identify locally appropriate strategies. The need for conflict sensitive approaches to be tailored and prioritized according to a country’s most urgent needs, developmental stage and available resources, as well as for alignment with other agendas and commitments in a context of coordinated external assistance, is also recognized.

Education Above All, Conflict Sensitive Education Policy: A Preliminary Review: This document seeks to give more generic policy advice. Like the IIEP guidance, it broadly follows the inclusion-cohesion-resilience model, being focused around the four main themes of: 1) mobilizing political will; 2) promoting equitable access to all levels of education; 3) making curriculum, teaching and language conflict sensitive; and 4) strengthening emergency preparedness, including protecting education from attack. In comparison with the IIEP guidance, however, this review seems to offer little in the way of analytical tools and in a number of places the attempts to be relevant to all situations and cover all bases seems to have resulted in statements that are rather vague. As noted previously, there appears to be a strong preference for top-down control of education, and such a heavy emphasis on the political and social goals of schooling that its primary learning goals seem downplayed.

Guidance or toolkits on gender/equity mainstreaming in education sector planning and sector-wide approaches: A number of guidance documents that do not focus primarily or exclusively on conflict nevertheless offer some relevant insights. UNICEF’s publication, Developing Rights-Based Education SWAps in South Asia, focuses on the mainstreaming of gender, equity and social inclusion in education sector plans and SWAp processes. The report recognizes that children who are in any way conflict-affected often constitute an excluded group in their own right. It explores how conflict exacerbates existing processes of inequality and social exclusion and highlights the gap in knowledge regarding how children with disabilities are affected by conflict. A chapter on ‘education in emergencies’ examines how preparedness can be integrated into sector planning and budgeting processes. The


FTI/UNGEI50 guidelines for plan preparation and appraisal, Equity and Inclusion in Education, also give some coverage of planning to ensure inclusion of children affected by conflict or natural disaster.

Programming guidelines: The INEE and agencies that do substantial work in the area of education in emergencies or education and peacebuilding have also developed a range of guidelines and checklists on conflict sensitivity which, although they focus on discrete programming, have some relevance to sector-wide planning and policy. The INEE Tools for Conflict Sensitive Education (guidance note, programme tool and donor principles) support programming in conflict-affected contexts. The education section of UNICEF’s Technical Note on Conflict Sensitive Programming supports analysis, inclusion, curriculum, diversity, language policy, alternative learning and post-primary NFE, governance and community involvement.

2.5 Summary: Possible roles of education in peace, conflict and natural disaster in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific

The review of the literature revealed that there are multifold ways in which education might reinforce conflict, or have the potential to promote peace and reduce the risks and impacts of natural disaster, as summarized below.

General expansion and universalization of education: Even without special measures to make education conflict sensitive, education would seem to have a peace-promoting effect in its own right because of its centrality to socio-economic development and the correlations between this and the level of conflict. However, while the more general effects of the whole process of education probably have a profound impact on the level of

50 UNGEI stands for United Nations Girls’ Education Initiative; FTI stands for Fast Track Initiative on EFA, now known as the Global Partnership for Education (GPE).

Sarisha Pai, 12, points at equations on a blackboard during a mathematics class at St. John Primary School in Honiara, the Solomon Islands.



peace and conflict in a society, these effects emerge as part of a complex, dynamic and non-linear network of factors operating over a long time period. For our consideration of education sector reform in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific, awareness of these long-term impacts serves to reinforce the urgency of MDG 2,51 both in its own right and as a necessary pre-cursor of secondary expansion and universal literacy. Also reinforced is the recognition in recent discussions on the post-2015 international agenda of the need for a greater priority on expansion towards a universal nine years of basic education and for continuing to focus on equity, inclusion and gender equality (in all its complexity).

Inclusion, cohesion and resilience: The literature review has shed light on a range of processes that link to peace, conflict and natural disaster. Regarding conflict, education can reinforce, or sometimes even be a key driver of, the processes of economic or social exclusion or inequality and social fragmentation along ethnic or religious lines that were shown in the Regional analysis to be key instigators of conflict across the Southeast Asia and South Pacific regions. However, there is encouraging evidence that education can also play a role in turning these around and supporting social cohesion and peacebuilding. These findings emphasize the importance of identifying and addressing where education is actually doing ‘harm’ and exacerbating tensions and conflict, and also show the need to identify and support actions that actively promote inclusion and cohesion based on a clear contextualized understanding of the local dynamics and drivers of conflict.

Regarding natural disasters – of equal concern in the two regions – the processes and roles of education are a little different. Education cannot be accurately termed a ‘driver’ of natural disasters or of associated climate change or environmental degradation. However, there is significant potential for education to make a positive contribution to reducing environment-related hazards, risks and vulnerabilities, which in some instances are also linked to conflict. Education, moreover, has a critical role to play in response and recovery. A failure to harness education to play these potential roles is certainly a grave missed opportunity.

Good governance: A further link that has emerged from the literature is how the overall management and governance of education can also contribute to conflict, especially when these are part of wider political processes that are weak and ineffective, or actively corrupt, inequitable, repressive or exclusionary. These challenges, present in different forms across many countries of the two regions, cannot be fully addressed through education. However, in some circumstances, measures to reduce stark inequalities in educational provision and resourcing, fight corruption or enable the marginalized to have a greater ‘voice’ in education, have had a marked effect on reducing grievances that have underpinned conflict. Effective education management at different levels is also critical to how far education can play its role in disaster risk reduction and in responding to conflicts and emergencies when they do arise. Again, the detailed dynamics and priorities are very context-specific.

The roles of education in the processes of peace, conflict and natural disaster identified in the Regional analysis are summarized diagrammatically overleaf (see Figure 3). It is again emphasized that conceptualizing ‘peace versus conflict’ as a polarity is a considerable over-simplification. In reality there can be simultaneous processes that pull in opposing directions. Also, in highlighting the roles of education it is neither being implied that education is the only – or even usually the primary – driver of conflict, nor that education alone can achieve peace and stability.

51 Ensure that by 2015 all children will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling.


Figure 3. Education’s roles in the dynamics of peace, conflict and natural disaster






























opportunity








emergencies






frameworks











opportunity







capacity




disaster risks














Economic processes









violence as a norm


Chloe, 7, a primary student at Imanaka primary school in Tanna Island of Vanuatu’s Lenakel Area. Imanaka primary school is a child friendly school supported by UNICEF.

© UNICEF/FJIA2006-00710/Pirozzi

Working model and outline methodology for exploring ‘peace-promoting’ education sector reform at the country level 43

Working model and outline methodology for exploring ‘peace-promoting’ education sector reform at the country level

3.1 A working model of a ‘peace-promoting’ education system

Chapter one presented a situational analysis of the main dynamics of peace, conflict and natural disaster in the Southeast Asian and South Pacific regions. Chapter two reviewed the findings from the literature that shed light on education’s possible roles in these dynamics, both positive and negative. It was concluded that education (in its many meanings) might support peace promotion in a number of direct and indirect ways and over different timescales. There are macro-level correlations between education and peace indicators, probably because of education’s complex and dynamic relationships with poverty reduction, economic growth, human development, the advancement of women and good governance. There are also ‘process linkages’: education promotes peace through the mechanism of its support for social inclusion and equity, social cohesion and resilience-building. This is most effective when measures are also taken to ensure that education management and governance are effective, transparent, responsive and participatory.

From the two analyses, it has been possible to develop a generalized ‘working model’ of such a system (see Figure 4 overleaf). Given that the findings of the literature review revealed that the various linkages of education to peace, conflict and natural disaster are both complex and highly contextualized, it is re-emphasized here that the model is not intended to be rigidly applied but used as a tool to frame analysis and stimulate questioning and discussion.

3.

December 2013. 5 year old Diane Claire Daga, inside a school building partly damaged by typhoon Haiyan in coastal village of Cogon, Palo, Leyte, the Philippines.

© UNICEF/UKLA2013-04478/Lane

Working model and outline methodology for exploring ‘peace-promoting’ education sector reform at the country level44

Figure 4: A working model of ‘peace-promoting education’ for Southeast Asia and the South Pacific

(Note that this model relates to the third column of the diagram in Figure 3).

3.2 A framework for unpacking education sector reform

Reform programmes do not, of course, organize around the abstract concepts of inclusion, cohesion, resilience or good governance but around more concrete policy areas that can be a basis for planning and investment. Very often, these are centred around the three main pillars of ‘equitable access’, ‘quality’ and ‘management’ (or variations of these). There is an additional challenge in that the research needs to look not only at the content of reform programmes (policies, strategies and their implementation) but also at the processes through which education reform programmes are designed, monitored and supported. One further approach, therefore, in identifying a framework for exploring education sector reform programmes is a marrying of our peace-promoting concepts (universalization, inclusion, cohesion, resilience and good governance) with the key elements and stages of education sector reform and planning (see Figure 5 overleaf).






























opportunity








emergencies






frameworks











opportunity







capacity




disaster risks














Economic processes









violence as a norm


Figure 5: Applying the ‘peace-promoting’ model to education sector reform

3.3 Outline methodology and stages of research

In order to ‘unpack’ a country’s programme of education reform guided by the frameworks outlined above and taking account of the available time and resources, two key methodologies are identified, namely:

• Document review and analysis using a systematic approach to identify different kinds of documentation (including virtual documentation) that supports the different elements of the case study and analysis, triangulation and synthesis of information.

• In-country qualitative research taking an ‘appreciative enquiry’ approach, which assumes that the participants in the research are holders of valuable knowledge and experience, have reasons for electing certain courses of action and strengths on which to






























opportunity








emergencies






frameworks











opportunity







capacity




disaster risks














Economic processes









violence as a norm

Working model and outline methodology for exploring ‘peace-promoting’ education sector reform at the country level46

build. Research explores why certain issues (and perhaps not others) have been prioritized and framed in certain ways, what the different perspectives on key issues are, what the processes of change have been and what the facilitative or constraining factors were.

For each case study, the two approaches are mutually reinforcing across four overlapping stages of the research, which are explained below.

Desk analysis of the country context. The analysis in each country case study should begin with an identification of the level and incidence of conflict and natural hazard risk. This needs to be followed by an examination of the major dynamics of peace, tensions and natural hazard risk, using as a basis the themes identified in the Regional analysis (economic, social, environmental, governance and geopolitical). While it may not be possible to undertake a first-hand conflict analysis, the aim is to achieve a sufficient understanding of the context to be able to make an assessment as to how far the programme of education sector reform is interacting with these contextual factors. Such analysis will make use of existing reports, databases and analyses undertaken by government, development partners and academics. From the country analysis, the particular ‘inclusion-cohesion-resilience’ themes most pertinent to the country context – and therefore to be prioritized as questions for qualitative research investigation – can be identified.

Desk analysis of documents pertinent to the reform context, design, strategies and partnerships. This will comprise a systematic perusal of education policy, programme, evaluative and partnership documents, reports and databases. The analysis might include (but not be limited to):

• National policy and rights frameworks that set the context for education sector reform (e.g. rights commitments, policies on language, frameworks for poverty reduction, national risk management and emergency preparedness strategies).

• The core ‘definitive’ documents of the education sector reform programme. These might include policy frameworks and more time-bound education sector development plans.

Reports and reviews of specific strategies or programmes. These are anticipated to be clustered around the themes of access, quality and management:

• Access: Strategies to reduce educational costs; target ECD opportunities; measure, monitor and reduce disparities at different levels; universalize education to a specified level; or target hard-to-reach groups including those currently affected by conflict or other crises.

• Quality: Strategies for languages in education; curriculum reform and teacher training related to critical thinking, resilience-building, inter-cultural understanding, peace education and environmental education; child-friendly/non-violent learning environments.

• Management: Strategies to build institutional systems and capacity at different levels for enabling wide and fair participation in educational decision-making and accountability; analysing and addressing equity and cross-cutting issues and for risk reduction, emergency preparedness, mitigation and response. Strategies to build school and community systems for dialogue and accountability, inclusion, child protection, risk reduction and response.

It is not expected that every strategy will be relevant in every case. It is recognized that strategies might be framed in different ways and that in practice comprehensive approaches (for example inclusive education, child-friendly schools or school-based management) might address a range of issues and strategies under a single umbrella. It is also noted that many of these areas of education (e.g. language, curriculum development, school management) are topics in their own right, some of which have their own associated concepts, literature and shared (or contended) international understandings, review of which was beyond the scope of this Concept Paper. This wider body of knowledge would be drawn upon and expounded further as necessary in the individual case studies.


• Documents defining partnership agreements or mechanisms. This analysis will be concerned with underlying assumptions, perceptions, priorities of key stakeholders and the processes and dynamics of partnership and participation in the reform programme. This includes questions of what concepts and priorities different partners ‘bring to the table’, the degree to which stakeholder dialogue mechanisms are themselves inclusive and participatory, how far the themes prioritized are locally owned and the involvement of civil society. The analysis will also provide information on how ‘inclusion-cohesion-resilience’ themes are addressed, overtly or indirectly, in education policy and what strategies are being implemented in practice. It will also provide a basis for identifying the key study informants for interviews and for sharpening key research questions that can be used to identify relevant questions and appropriate tools of enquiry for these various informants.

Qualitative research with study informants. Qualitative research will likely utilize the tools of semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions, using tailored question prompts designed to encourage a relaxed but structured discussion on key themes. Key informants will likely include – but not be limited to – government officials, headteachers, teachers, students, school management committee representatives, parents, academics, civil society representatives and development partners. Questions around the national and sector contexts, reform design issues, the details of specific strategies and programmes and the mechanisms and processes of partnership will be explored with the relevant stakeholders as appropriate.

Further analysis and identification of issues, conclusions and recommendations. Analysis of findings will take place throughout the research. If possible, there will be opportunities for feedback to stakeholders on the initial findings for their further inputs. From the analysis, conclusions and recommendations will be drawn. Indicatively, country reports will begin with the country-level analysis of the incidence and dynamics of peace and conflict and be followed by chapters broadly corresponding to the headings in Figure 5 (reform design, access strategies, quality strategies, management strategies and partnership arrangements).

A Filipino boy sits in a window looking at a performance about a loss of a family member through AIDS. In the Philippines, among the various factors impeding the health systems are the twin issues of natural disaster and conflict. On Mindanao Island, a decades-long conflict between Christians and Muslims has killed, injured or displaced thousands of children, and left others vulnerable to abduction, trafficking and abuse.


48

Students wait for their teacher’s arrival, in a classroom at No.3 Basic Education Primary School in Pantanaw Township in Ayeyarwaddy Region in Myanmar. Despite ongoing policy reforms, including in education, children and women in poor, rural and remote households, especially in ethnic minority areas, continue to have limited access to basic social services.

© UNICEF/NYHQ2012-2058/Dean

49

Annex A: Definitions

The conceptual terms used in this study are defined below. Given that such concepts may not translate well into different languages and will be re-interpreted in different contexts, the definitions were selected on the basis of their helpfulness and usability, and are not necessarily the most precise or ‘scientific’ available.

Conflict analysis: The “systematic study of the profile, causes, actors and dynamics of a conflict” (UNICEF, 2013).

Equity in education: “Children, regardless of economic status, gender, ethnicity, geographical location, residency status, disability or other factor have an equal chance to reach their potential” (UNICEF, 2008). This implies equity of access at all levels of education, with different kinds of provision being of comparable quality and duration, leading to equity in opportunity and benefits of education. Achieving equity does not necessarily imply equal treatment for all, but might imply differential treatment in terms of resource allocation in order to redress injustice and achieve equality of opportunity. For example, it might cost more per capita to deliver quality education in a small, remote multi-grade school serving a poor, minority-language community than in a school located in a prosperous urban area. Indicators of equity might include parity in enrolment, completion and transition rates by gender, socio-economic status, ethnicity, district, etc. However, equity implies more than numerical parity in access, thus other important measures are learning outcomes by gender and across different groups and how education translates into socio-economic benefits later in life.

Fragile states: OECD-DAC (2008) characterizes fragile states as “unable to meet their population’s expectations or manage changes in expectations and capacity through the political process.”

Gender mainstreaming: “Gender mainstreaming means the consistent use of a gender perspective at all stages of the development and implementation of policies, plans, programmes and projects. In the education sector, this would include not only the activities of governments, but also those of schools, colleges, education institutions and, where appropriate, of NGOs and the private sectors as well. Rather than adding on a women’s component to existing policies, plans, programmes and projects, a gender perspective informs these at all stages, and in every aspect of the decision-making process.” This definition is taken from The Commonwealth Secretariat publication Gender Mainstreaming in Education: A Reference Manual for Governments and Other Stakeholders (Leo-Rhynie, E., 1999).

Inclusion in education: The concept of ‘inclusive education’ focused originally on inclusion of children with disability and special needs but has now broadened to describe educational processes and management strategies that, in recognition of the inter-linkages and reinforcements between different dynamics of inequality and social exclusion, respond to the diversity of backgrounds and needs among all learners in an integrated way. The focus shifts from a categorization based on gender, ethnicity, etc. to addressing the needs of children according to where they stand in relation to the education system (e.g. disadvantaged pre-school-aged children not reached by early childhood education services, never enrolled, in school but not learning, etc.).52

Peacebuilding: The Report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflict (2009) describes peacebuilding as a “multi-dimensional range of interventions that aim to solidify peace and prevent the lapse or relapse into conflict.” The UN Peacebuilding Support Office website ascribes the concept of peacebuilding to Johan Galtung (1976), who called for the creation of “peacebuilding structures to promote sustainable peace by addressing the ‘root causes’ of violent conflict and supporting indigenous capacities for peace management and conflict resolution.” Galtung espoused ‘positive peace’, which actively addresses the “social injustices that may be a cause of violence”. His ideas were later expanded by Lederach (2009), who advocated for “adaptive processes that address deeper long term relational and systemic processes that produce violently destructive expressions of conflict.”

52 E.g. see CREATE Consortium for Access and Equity in Education.

50

Peace dividends: The Report of the Secretary-General on peacebuilding in the immediate after-math of conflict identifies peace dividends as “the tangible results of peace, which help create incentives for non-violent behaviours, reduce fear and begin to instil confidence of affected pop-ulations in their communities and in the legitimacy of their institutions.”

Resilience: Resilience at the individual, psychological level is defined by Masten et al. (1990) as “the process of, capacity for, or outcome of successful adaptation despite challenging or threat-ening circumstances.” In the context of development and conflict it has been defined by DFID (2011) as “the ability of countries, communities and households to manage change, by main-taining or transforming living standards in the face of shocks or stresses – such as earthquakes, drought or violent conflict – without compromising their long-term prospects.” UNICEF (2013) has adopted a similar definition of resilience as: “The ability of countries, communities and house-holds to anticipate, adapt to and recover from the effects of potentially hazardous occurrences (natural disasters, economic instability, conflict) in a manner that reduces vulnerability, protects livelihoods, accelerates and sustains recovery and supports economic and social development.”

Sector-wide approach: Although SWAps were originally conceptualized as ‘sector investment programmes’ that entailed pooled funding, the term is now applied to a wide range of programme-based approaches at the sector or sub-sector levels. One helpful description of the characteristics of a SWAp is from the Overseas Development Institute (UK), 2007:

“A SWAp includes support that:

• Is sector wide in scope;

• Is based on a clear sector and strategy framework;

• Is based on long-term plans;

• Includes host country ownership and strong coordinated partnership with external agencies;

• Is developed and implemented with the involvement of, and partnership with, all local stakeholders;

• Includes the involvement of all main external agencies;

• Is based on common implementation arrangements and effective donor coordination;

• Relies on local capacity; and

• Includes provision for results-based monitoring.”

Social cohesion: A simple definition of social cohesion is “the bonds or ‘glue’ that bring people together in society, particularly in the context of cultural diversity” (Forrest and Kearns in Social Cohesion, Social Capital and the Neighbourhood). Forrest and Kearns associate social cohesion with a number of factors: common values and civic culture, social order and social control, social solidarity and reductions in wealth disparities, social networks and social capital, place attachment and identity. Social cohesion can be an attribute of communities or of a society as a whole.

Social exclusion: “A process that deprives individuals and families, groups and neighbourhoods of the resources required for the participation in the social, economic and political activities of the society as a whole. It is primarily a consequence of poverty and low income, but other factors such as discrimination, low educational attainment and depleted living environments underpin it,” Pierson, 2001, quoted in the Australian Government publication The Origins, Meaning, Definition and Economic Implications of the Concept of Social Inclusion/Exclusion (2009). In this definition, access to education is one of the ‘resources required for participation’ while education outcomes (literacy levels) are seen as underpinning the poverty that is at the heart of exclusion.

51

Annex B: References for chapter 1 – Regional analysis

Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, ‘Social Inclusion: The Origins, Meaning, Definition and Economic Implications of the Concept of Social Inclusion/Exclusion’, January 2009.

BBC, Country Profiles for Timor-Leste, Fiji, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Solomon Islands, Thailand, Vanuatu and Viet Nam.

Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, The Missing Piece of the Puzzle: Caste Discrimination and the Conflict in Nepal, CHRGJ, New York University School of Law, August 2005.

The Chronic Poverty Research Centre, ‘Ending Violent Conflict and Building a Social Compact’, ch. 6 in The Chronic Poverty Report 2008–2009: Escaping poverty traps, CPRC, UK, 2008.

Department for International Development, ‘Emerging Policy Paper: Building the State and Securing the Peace’, DFID, June 2009.

Department for International Development, ‘Reducing Poverty by Tackling Social Exclusion’, DFID Policy Paper, 2005.

Department for International Development and The World Bank, Unequal Citizens: Gender, Caste and Ethnic Exclusion in Nepal, DFID and The World Bank, 2006.

Heijmans, A., N. Simmonds and H. Van de Veen, Searching for Peace in Asia Pacific, An Overview of Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding Activities, European Centre for Conflict Prevention, The Hague, 2004.

Human Security Report Project, ‘War Is Not “Development in Reverse”: The Impact of Conflict on Children’s Education’, ch. 4 in Sexual Violence, Education, and War: Beyond the Mainstream Narrative, Human Security Press, Vancouver, 2012.

Jensen, Jane, Defining and Measuring Social Cohesion, United Nations Research Institution for Social Development and Commonwealth Secretariat, 2010.

Jewkes, R., et al., ‘Prevalence of and factors associated with non-partner rape perpetration: findings from the UN Multi-country Cross-sectional Study on Men and Violence in Asia and the Pacific’, Summary in The Lancet (Online), September 2013.

Kanbur, R., and A. Sumner, ‘Working Paper: Poor Countries or Poor People? Development Assistance and the New Geography of Global Poverty’, Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 2011.

Lake, D.A., and D. Rothchild, ‘Containing Fear: The Origins and Management of Ethnic Conflict’, in International Security, vol. 21, no. 2, 1996.

Le Billon, P., ‘Buying Peace or Fuelling War: The Role of Corruption in Armed Conflicts’, in Journal of International Development, vol. 15, 2003, pp. 413–426.

Lederach, J., Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies, United States Institute of Peace Press, Washington D.C., 1997.

Lederach, J., and M. Maiese, ‘Conflict Transformation: A Circular Journey with a Purpose’, in New Routes, vol. 16, 2009.

52

Lo Bianco, J., ‘Language, Education and Social Cohesion: Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand’, Final Desk Review, Conceptual Framework, 2013–2014 Workplan, January 2013.

Luckham R., J. Moncrieffe and C. Harris (Institute of Development Studies) with Phillips, S., and J. Crabtree (University of Oxford), Understanding the Routes In and Out of Political Violence: An Assessment of the Linkages Between Identity Politics, Exclusion, Inequality and Political Violence in EMAD Countries, report prepared for DFID by the Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK, September 2006.

MacEwan L., S. Choudhuri and L. Bird, ‘Education Sector Planning: Working to Mitigate the Risk of Violent Conflict’, International Institute for Educational Planning, Paris, 2010.

Melvin, N. J., ‘Conflict in Southern Thailand: Islamism, Violence and the State in the Patani Insurgency’, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) Policy Paper No. 20, September 2007.

Nettle, D., and S. Romaine, Vanishing Voices: the Extinction of the World’s Languages, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2000.

Ngarm, S. P., ‘Cambodia: Peacebuilding Amid Unresolved Issues’, ch. 9.3 in Searching for Peace in Asia Pacific, An Overview of Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding Activities, edited by A. Heijmans, N. Simmonds and H. Van de Veen, European Centre for Conflict Prevention, The Hague, 2004.

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Southeast Asian Economic Outlook 2011–2012, OECD, November 2011.

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Development Assistance Committee, Evaluating Peacebuilding Activities in Conflict and Fragility: Improving Learning for Results, OECD-DAC, Paris, 2012.

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Development Assistance Committee, ‘Think Global, Act Local: Confronting the Global Factors that Influence Conflict and Fragility’, Consultation Paper, OECD-DAC, Paris, 2012.

Putzel, J., and J. Di John, Meeting the Challenges of Crisis States, Crisis States Research Centre, London School of Economics and Political Science, 2012.

Reilly, B., and K. Graham, ‘Conflict Through Asia and the Pacific: Causes and Trends’, ch. 1 in Searching for Peace in Asia Pacific, An Overview of Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding Activities, edited by A. Heijmans, N. Simmonds and H. Van de Veen, European Centre for Conflict Prevention, The Hague, 2004.

Smith, D., Trends and Causes of Armed Conflict, Berghof Research Centre for Constructive Conflict Management, Berlin, 2004.

Sumners, A., The New Bottom Billion: What if Most of the World’s Poor Live in Middle-Income Countries? Centre for Global Development, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK, 2011.

Torres, Wilfredo Magno III, ed., Rido: Clan Feuding and Conflict Management in Mindanao, United States Agency for International Development and The Asia Foundation, 2007.

Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index, 2012, Transparency International, 2012.

United Nations, Report of the UN Secretary-General on Peacebuilding in the Immediate Aftermath of Conflict, United Nations Peace Building Support Office, New York, 2010.

53

United Nations Children’s Fund, Children and Climate Change: Children’s Vulnerability to Climate Change and Disaster Impacts in East Asia and the Pacific, UNICEF, 2011.

United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2013, The Rise of the South: Human Progress in a Diverse World, UNDP, 2013.

United Nations Development Programme, Marginalised Minorities in Development Programmes: A UNDP Resource Guide and Toolkit, UNDP, New York, May 2010.

United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific, UNESCAP, Bangkok, 2012.

United Nations Girls’ Education Initiative/Fast Track Initiative, Equity and Inclusion in Education: A guide to support education sector plan preparation, review and appraisal, UNGEI, April 2010.

Vargas-Baron, E., and H. B. Alarcon, From Bullets to Blackboards: Education For Peace in Latin America and East Asia, Inter-American Development Bank, New York, 2005.

Wainwright, E., Conflict Prevention in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific, New York University, April 2010.

Waizenegger, Arno, ‘Settlement of the Secessionist Conflict in Aceh Following 2004 Tsunami a Rare Success, Says New Report by APFC’, press release, Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada (website), 2008.

Walker, S. P., et al., ‘Inequality in Early Childhood: Risk and Protective Factors in Early Child Development’, in The Lancet, vol. 378, 8 October 2011.

Woodrow, Peter and Diana Chigas, ‘A Distinction with a Difference: Conflict Sensitivity and Peacebuilding’, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, 2009.

The World Bank, World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security and Development, The World Bank, Washington D.C., 2011.

Wright-Neville, D., ‘East Asia and the War on Terror: Why Human Rights Matter’, ch. 4 in Searching for Peace in Asia Pacific, An Overview of Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding Activities, edited by A. Heijmans, N. Simmonds and H. Van de Veen, European Centre for Conflict Prevention, The Hague, 2004.

54

Annex C: References for chapter 2 – Concepts and themes in the literature

Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education, A Slow-Down in Progress: Missing the Education For All Targets by 2015, ASPBAE, 2013.

Bajaj, M., and E. J. Brantmeier, ‘The Politics, Praxis, and Possibilities of Critical Peace Education’, in Journal of Peace Education, vol. 8, no. 3, 2011.

Barakat, Bilai and Henrik Urdal, Breaking the Waves: Does Education Mediate the Relationship Between Youth Bulges and Political Violence? Policy Research Working Papers, November 2009.

Barakat, Sultan and Frank Hardman, Programme Review and Evaluability Study, UNICEF’s Education in Emergencies and Post-Crisis Transition Programme, Post-War Reconstruction and Evaluation Unit, University of York, UK, May 2010.

Bird, L., ‘Promoting Resilience: Developing Capacity in Education Systems Affected by Conflict’, Paper commissioned by the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2011.

Bird, L., S. Choudhuri and L. MacEwan, ‘Education Sector Planning: Working to Mitigate the Risk of Violent Conflict’, Paper commissioned by the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2011.

Bush, K., and D. Salterelli, eds, The Two Faces of Education in Ethnic Conflict, UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, Florence, 2000.

Cole, E., and J. Barsalou, Unite or Divide? The Challenges of Teaching History in Societies Emerging From Violent Conflict, Report 163, US Institute of Peace, Washington D.C., 2006.

Columbia Group for Children in Adversity, Progress Evaluation of UNICEF’s Education in Emergencies and Post-Crisis Transition Programme, UNICEF, New York, 2010.

Davies, Lynn, ‘Education, Change and Peacebuilding’, Working Group on Peace and Development, FriEnt Publication, Bonn, 2013.

Davies, Lynn, ‘Teaching About Violent Extremism and Religion’, Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies Website discussion, 2013.

Department for International Development, ‘Defining Disaster Resilience’, a DFID Approach Paper, 2011.

Dupuy, K. E., ‘Education in Peace Agreements, 1989–2005’, in Conflict Resolution Quarterly, vol. 26, no. 2, 2008, pp. 149–166.

Dupuy, K. E., Education for Peace: Building Peace and Transforming Armed Conflict Through Education Systems, International Peace Research Institute, Oslo, 2008.

Durston, S., et al., Developing Rights-Based Education SWAps in South Asia: From Evidence to Action, UNICEF Regional Office for South Asia, 2007.

Education Above All, Education For Global Citizenship, Doha, July 2012.

Faul, Moira, ‘Future-perfect/Present-imperfect: Contemporary Global Constraints on the Implementation of a Post-2015 Education Agenda’, Oxford Conference, 2013.

Fountain, S., ‘Peace Education in UNICEF’, Working Paper, United Nations Children’s Fund, 1999.

55

Galtung, Johan, ‘Cultural Violence’, in Journal of Peace Research, vol. 27, no. 3, 1990, pp. 291–305.

Galtung, Johan, ‘Three Approaches to Peace: Peacekeeping, Peace-making and Peacebuilding’ in Peace, War and Defence: Essays in Peace Research, edited by Johan Galtung and Christian Ejlers, vol. 2, Copenhagen, 1976, pp. 282–304.

Galtung, Johan, ‘Violence, Peace, and Peace Research’, in Journal of Peace Research, vol. 6, no. 3, 1969, pp. 167–191.

Garner, P., and C. Gittins, Research Project: Reducing Violence against Children in Schools, Northampton Centre for Learning Behaviour, University of Northampton, UK:

• Dimensions and Trends in School-based Violence: An overview of recent research and other international literature to inform the UNICEF review of programmes to reduce violence against children in schools, April 2012.

• Reducing Violence Against Children in Schools: Report and commentary on the analysis of a sample of UNICEF Country Programmes, April 2012.

• ‘Reducing Violence against Children in Schools’: Technical Note for UNICEF Country Offices: An outline of key features of programmes that have been effective in reducing violence against children in schools, April 2011.

Global Coalition to Protect Education From Attack, Lessons in War: Military Use of Schools and Education Institutions During Conflict, GCPEA, November 2012.

Global Coalition to Protect Education From Attack, Draft Lucens Guidelines for Protecting Schools and Universities from Military Use During Armed Conflict, GCPEA, 2013.

Global Education Cluster, ‘Booklet 1: Overview,’ Protecting Education in Countries Affected by Conflict series, 2012.

Hayden, J., R. Dunn and K. Cologon, Early Childhood Care and Development in Emergency Situations- Annotated Bibliography, Children and Families Research Centre, Macquarie University, Australia, for Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies, 2010.

Heijmans, A., N. Simmonds, and H. Van de Veen, ‘Introduction’, in Searching for Peace in Asia Pacific, An Overview of Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding Activities, edited by A. Heijmans, N. Simmonds and H. Van de Veen, European Centre for Conflict Prevention, The Hague, 2004.

Hensengerth, O., ‘Violence Research in Northeast and Southeast Asia: Main Themes and Directions’, in International Journal of Conflict and Violence School of Social Sciences, Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Southampton, UK, vol. 5. no. 1, 2011, pp. 55–86.

Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies Working Group on Education and Fragility, The Multiple Faces of Education in Conflict-Affected and Fragile Contexts, Minimum Standards for Education: Preparedness, Response and Recovery, INEE, 2008.

Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies, Tools and Guidance Note for Conflict-Sensitive Education, INEE, 2013.

Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies and International Institute for Educational Planning, Understanding Education’s Role in Fragility: Synthesis of Four Situational Analyses of Education and Fragility: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, Liberia, IIEP, Paris, 2012.

International Institute For Educational Planning, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and United Nations Children’s Fund, Integrating Conflict and Disaster Risk Reduction into Education Sector Planning, Guidance Notes for Education Sector Planners, IIEP, 2011.

56

International Save the Children Alliance, Rewrite the Future: Education for children in conflict-affected countries, International Save the Children Alliance, London, 2006.

International Save the Children Alliance, Where Peace Begins: Education’s Role in Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding, International Save the Children Alliance, London, 2008.

International Save the Children Alliance, The Future is Now, International Save the Children Alliance, London, 2010.

International Save the Children Alliance, Breaking the Cycle of Crisis, Learning from Save the Children’s delivery of education in conflict-affected fragile states, Rewrite the Future Global Evaluation Final Report, International Save the Children Alliance, London, 2011.

Joseph, Cynthia and Julie Matthews, Proposal to Routledge Critical Studies in Asian Education Series for an Edited Book, Equity, Opportunity and Education in Postcolonial Southeast Asia, Australia, 2012.

Kosonen, K., and C. Young, ‘Introduction’, ch. 1 in Mother Tongue as Bridge Language of Instruction in Southeast Asian Countries: Policies, Strategies and Advocacy, Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organisation, 2010.

Ledda, Michele, ‘A Liberal Education Policy’, A Manifesto Club Think-piece, UK, 2010.

Lewin, K., and Consortium for Research on Education, Access, Transitions and Equity, Making Rights Realities: Researching Education Access, Transitions and Equity, CREATE Consortium, University of Sussex Centre for International Education, Brighton, UK, 2011.

Lo Bianco, J., ‘Language, Education and Social Cohesion: Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand’, Final Desk Review, Conceptual Framework and Workplan, January 2013.

Masten, A., K. Best and N. Garmezy, ‘Resilience and Development: Contributions from the Study of Children who Overcome Adversity’ in Development and Psychopathology, vol. 2, no. 4, Cambridge University Press, October 1990, pp. 425–444.

Mundy, K., and S. Peterson, eds., Educating Children in Conflict Zones: Research, Policy and Practice for Systemic Change, A Tribute to Jackie Kirk, New York Teachers College Press, 2011.

Muturzikin.com, Language Maps for Southeast Asia and South Pacific (various).

Nicolai, S., ed., Opportunities for Change: Education Innovation and Reform During and after Conflict, UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning, Paris, 2009.

Novelli, M., and A. Smith, The Role of Education in Peacebuilding: A Synthesis Report of Findings from Lebanon, Nepal and Sierra Leone, United Nations Children’s Fund, New York, 2011.

Osher, D., et al., UNICEF Child-Friendly Schools Programming: Global Evaluation Final Report, American Institutes for Research, Washington D.C., 2009.

Plan International, Because I am a Girl. In Double Jeopardy: Adolescent Girls and Disasters. Plan International, 2013.

Sadeed, S., ‘Peace Education Can Make a Difference in Afghanistan’, in Education for Global Citizenship, Education Above All, Doha, 2012.

Salomon, Gavriel, ‘Does Peace Education Make a Difference?’, in Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, vol. 10, 2004, pp. 257–274.

http://edu.haifa.ac.il/personal/gsalomon/Does PE make diff - Final.pdf

57

Save the Children’s Education Global Initiative, Ending the Hidden Exclusion: Learning and Equity in Education Post-2015, Save the Children, London, April 2013.

Save the Children UK, Breaking the Cycle of Crisis: Learning from Save the Children’s Delivery of Education in Conflict-Affected Fragile States, Save the Children UK, London, 2012.

Seel, Amanda, ‘Addressing Gender Disparity and Social Exclusion in SWAps and PBAs in South Asia: How Can We Use World Experience?’, in United Nations Girls’ Education Initiative South Asia Education Debate Series, Title No. 6, UNGEI/United Nation’s Children Fund, 2006.

Seel, Amanda, Language and the Right to Quality Education: An Overview of Issues for Tribal and Minority children in Andhra Pradesh and Orissa States, India, Save the Children UK, 2004.

Seel, Amanda, Social Inclusion: Gender and Equity in Education SWAps in South Asia: Synthesis Report, United Nations Children’s Fund Office for South Asia, Kathmandu, 2007.

Sigsgaard, M., Conflict Sensitive Education Policy, A Preliminary Review, Education Above All, Doha, 2012.

Sinclair, M., et al., Learning to Live Together: Education for Peace, Human Rights, Humanitarian Principles and Responsible Citizenship, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and Deutsche Gesellschat fur Technische Zusammenarbeitand, Eschborn, Germany, 2008.

Smith, Alan, ‘Education in the Twenty-First Century: Conflict, Reconstruction and Reconciliation’, Compare, vol. 35, no. 4, 2005, pp. 373–391.

Smith, Alan, ‘The Influence of Education on Conflict and Peace Building’, Background Paper prepared for the Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2011, The hidden crisis: Armed conflict and education, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2010.

Smith, Alan, et al., The Role of Education in Peacebuilding: Literature Review, United Nations Children’s Fund, New York, 2011.

Smith, Alan, and Christine Smith Ellison, Youth, Education and Peace-Building, for IIEP Planning Policy Forum, Paris, 16–18 October 2012, UNESCO Centre, University of Ulster, Londonderrry, Northern Island, 2012.

Smith, Alan, and Tony Vaux, Education, Conflict and International Development, Department for International Development, 2003.

Smith, M., Schools as Zones of Peace: Nepal Case Study, in Protecting Education from Attack: A State of the Art Review, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Paris, 2010.

Thyne, C. L., ‘ABCs, 123s, and the Golden Rule: The Pacifying Effect of Education on Civil War, 1980–1999’, in International Studies Quarterly, vol. 50, no. 4, December 2006, pp. 733–754.

United Nations, Peace Dividends and Beyond: Contributions of Administrative and Social Services to Peacebuilding, UN Peacebuilding Support Office, New York, 2012.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Conflict Sensitivity and Peacebuilding in UNICEF, Technical Note’, UNICEF, June 2012.

United Nations Children’s Fund, Conflict Analyses for Peacebuilding, Education and Advocacy in Conflict Affected Contexts from (i) Somalia, (ii) Sierra Leone and (iii) Uganda, UNICEF, 2012.

United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2013: The Rise of the South: Human Progress in a Diverse World, UNDP, New York, 2013.

Annex C: References for chapter 2 – Concepts and themes in the literature 58

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, EFA Global Monitoring Report 2011, The hidden crisis: Armed conflict and education, UNESCO, Paris, 2011.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, EFA Global Monitoring Report 2012, Youth and skills: Putting education to work, UNESCO, Paris, 2012.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, ‘How Do We Learn To Live Together Through Education Systems: PowerPoint Summary of Desk Research from Selected Countries in the Asia-Pacific Region’, APEID Conference, Bangkok, 2012.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Enhancing Learning of Children from Diverse Language Backgrounds: Mother Tongue-Based Bilingual or Multilingual Education in the Early Years, UNESCO, Paris, 2011.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Protecting Education From Attack: A State-of-the-Art Review, UNESCO, Paris, 2012.

United States Agency for International Development, Education and Fragility Framework, USAID, Washington D.C., September 2006.

United States Agency for International Development, ‘Checklist for Assessing Conflict Sensitivity in Education Programs’, Draft Report, USAID, 2012.

Vaillancourt, D., Sweet Harmony? A Review of Health and Education Sector-wide Approaches (SWAps) in the South Pacific, AusAID, New Zealand MFAT and The World Bank, 2011.

Vargas-Baron, E., and H. B. Alarcon, From Bullets to Blackboards: Education For Peace in Latin America and East Asia, Inter-American Development Bank, 2005.

Vaux, Tony, The Role of Education in Peacebuilding: Nepal Case Study, part of a UNICEF research project on education and peacebuilding in post-conflict contexts, United Nations Children’s Fund, 2011.

Walker, B., ‘Resilience Needs Financial Overhaul’ in The Bangkok Post, 9 July 2013.

West, Amy R., ‘Addressing Perception in the Delivery of Education in Conflict and Crisis’, in Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, vol. 37, no. 1, Winter 2013.

Winthrop, R., et al., Education’s Hardest Test: Scaling Up Aid in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States, Centre for Universal Education at Brookings and CfBT Education Trust, UK, 2010.

Woodrow, P., and D. Chigas, A Distinction With a Difference: Conflict Sensitivity and Peacebuilding. CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, 2010.

The World Bank, ‘In Their Own Language…Education for All’, Education Notes, The World Bank, 2005 (at http://www.worldbank.org/education).

Wright, S. J., Assimilation or Difference? ‘Processes of Development and Modernisation in Tibetan Education’, Unpublished Masters Dissertation, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, September 2010.

59

Students play outdoors during a recreation period, at No.3 Basic Education Primary School in Pantanaw Township in Ayeyarwaddy Region in Myanmar. Despite ongoing policy reforms, including in education, children and women in poor, rural and remote households, especially in ethnic minority areas, continue to have limited access to basic social services.

© UNICEF/NYHQ2012-2061/Dean

62

UNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office (EAPRO)

19 Phra Atit Road

Chanasongkram, Phra Nakorn

Bangkok 10200, Thailand

E-mail: [email protected]

Website: www.unicef.org/eapro

Tel: +662-356-9499 Fax: +662-280-3563

peace-promoting education sector reform in sea and south pacific

Education

southeast asia

south pacific unicef

south pacificunicef

aunicef east asia

south pacific bpeace

regional analysis

position of unicef

unicef country offices