2015). Examples abound, such as non-governmental organizations telling their donors that a yearlong project will produce democracy( author’ s interview, 2016) or program documents explaining that“ democracy brings stability and elects leaders who can ensure peace”( Cameron et al. 2015, 5). In addition, these theories often include massive leaps in logic( Brown et al. 2015, 9, 11, and 14). A case in point is the expected peacebuilding impact of livelihood programs for victims of sexual violence. They rely on a tenuous causal chain, arguing that providing rape victims with sewing machines( or chickens, or the means to set up a beauty salon) will help these women gain financial independence, which will in turn give them greater political voice, and will thus help end sexual violence( as analyzed in Gowrinathan and Cronin-Furman 2015, section 3).
Most peacebuilders also assume that their initiatives will influence war and peace outcomes, but they often do not have evidence to support this belief. Indeed, in its review of all available impact evaluations of peacebuilding initiatives, the Evidence for Peace project found that evaluations often measure“ individual outcomes,” or“ societal and institutional outcomes,” but that“ there is a dearth of studies that attempt to measure outcomes further along a peacebuilding causal chain— that is, actual peace and violence outcomes,” such as displacement and repatriation, intergroup conflict, interpersonal conflict and violence, crime and gang violence, and perceptions of safety and security( Cameron et al. 2015, 55). All in all, assumptions play a central role in the design of most peacebuilding efforts. It is therefore crucial to examine the assumptions on which policymakers base their support to local programs. Surprisingly, despite their importance, assumptions have been the focus of only one scholarly article on peacebuilding, whose goal is very different from that of my analysis( Jantzi and Jantzi 2009). As a result, we have no theoretical framework to analyze how assumptions influence peacebuilding effectiveness. Building on the extensive literature on related concepts, the rest of this section develops a framework to fill this gap.
The Origin, Diffusion, and Persistence of Assumptions
While peacebuilders’ initiatives can be context specific, their shared assumptions often transcend national and regional boundaries. Indeed, as I have demonstrated in a previous book( Autesserre 2014b), interveners from various geographic, religious, professional, and organizational backgrounds— including civilian, military, and police staff members— form a transnational group. Although there are many differences between the various members of this group, there are also numerous similarities. In particular, most foreign peacebuilders share common practices, habits, and narratives when they are deployed on the ground( Autesserre 2014b). These shared ways of working and thinking are“‘ free-floating,’ transportable, mobile, and transient,” and thus can be readily“ transplanted in any” conflict and post-conflict context( Verma 2011, 59). Assumptions are a central part of this culture. Tracing the origin of each assumption I identify is an essential part of my
broader project, but it falls beyond the scope of this article. The findings of organizational
theorists( DiMaggio and Powell 1983; Weick 1995), sociologists( Berger and Luckmann 1967), and political scientists( Barnett and Finnemore 2004; Finnemore 1996; Krebs 2015; Paris 2003), however, provide two useful starting points. First, assumptions are socially constructed over long periods of time. Second, one can locate their sources on the global stage( for instance, the idea that outsiders have what local populations lack), in the peacebuilding field( the view that good things always go together and that peacebuilding efforts are always necessary), or in practice8( the funding of education to promote peace) combined with the belief that lessons from one place can be transferred to another( Autesserre 2014b, 90 – 93; Stewart and Knaus 2012, 101). In addition, the literature on frames, habits, and narratives is useful to understand why some assumptions become