Summary of Conflict Analysis frameworks
7/29/04: Andy added USAID to Anne’s analysis of WB, DfID. Also, took a look at Peace and Conflict, but it looks
at very structural factors that cannot be affected by development programming so I am not sure how useful it would
be
Below are summaries of the World Bank and DFID conflict analysis frameworks as well as very brief descriptions
of the USAID and FEWER approaches (from the World Bank study). The approaches seem to have several things in
common:
1) risk factors for conflict include structural factors, actors involved, and neighborhood vulnerability
(USAID uses a motive-means-opportunity framework and then adds regional and international factors)
2) both frameworks also emphasize DG issues as well as economic and ethnic issues as factors to be aware
of in assessing conflicts and designing programs to mitigate conflicts (USAID also includes ethnic/religious,
political, and economic issues, also uses the greed/grievance approach)
3) both frameworks also recognize that development programs and policies may increase the risk factors
for conflicts
4) both frameworks also point to the additional factor of accelerators that may spark violence when the
underlying risk factors are present (USAID discusses windows of vulnerability and triggering events. Also discusses
interaction effects among variables, which is similar I think))
5) both frameworks involve the assessor knowing the case study in order to make determinations along a
number a variables that lead to conflict
6) the DFID analysis pays a bit more attention to the role of international actors as well as offers a
framework (thought minimal) for developing programs/policies to help reduce conflicts; the DFID report has good
examples of cases demonstrating the use of the framework. (USAID discusses international factors, but in a pretty
simplistic way.)
7) the appendices of the World Bank report are quite useful with in-depth descriptions about the variables
used in making conflict analyses and sources for finding the data (mentions MAR)
USAID has a good section on analyzing group’s ability to mobilize. This is the means that need to combine with the
motive.
1) WORLD BANK CAF (Conflict Analysis Framework)
A) Section on why conduct CFA
B) When to conduct Risk Screening Process (more important as # of risk factors increase)
Appendix B elaborates on the 9 risk screening factors below
1) violent conflict in past 10 years
2) low per capita GNI
3) high dependence on primary commodities for exports
4) political instability (state structure transformation and/or breakdown of rule of law)
5) restricted civil and political rights
6) militarization
7) ethnic dominance
8) active regional conflicts
9) high youth unemployment
C) 6 Categories of variables used in the CAF
1) social and ethnic relations
2) governance and political institutions
3) human rights/security
4) economic structure and performance
5) environmental and natural resources
6) external factors
In addition, there are corresponding indicators for changes in intensity of conflicts
VARIABLES Impact on Conflict + Link with Poverty  Priority Areas Identified
Objective is to highlight the effect of variables on conflict looking at underlying causes, opportunity of groups and
governments for violence, and consequences of conflicts.
D) Methodology
1. In the conflict analysis table, consider each variable. Refer to the Guide to Variables
(Appendix C), where the indicator for the variable being examined is viewed across the three levels
of intensity (warning; increasing intensity; and de-escalation), and highlights the components of a
variable to ensure consistency.
2. With the help of the guide (Appendix C), “translate” each relevant variable in the conflict
analysis table into the local context to make it more specific.
3. Conduct a brief description/analysis of the variable being examined in seven areas:
a.) history/changes: how the issue has developed/changed over a reasonable
timespan;
b.) dynamics/trends: what is determining the future path of the issue, and how it is
likely to develop;
c.) public perceptions: public attitudes and biases regarding the issue;
d.) politicization: how the issue is used politically by groups or organizations;
e.) organization: the extent to which the issue has led to the establishment of interest
organizations, and/or influenced political parties and militant organizations;
f.) link to conflict and intensity: how the factor contributes to conflict and the
current level of intensity;
g.) link to poverty: how the issue relates to poverty
The analysis on each of the seven dimensions above represents a critical component
of the conflict analysis. The results from the analyses would comprise the backbone
of any meaningful and systematic report on conflict analysis.
4. Impact on conflict: Check the box that best defines the impact of the variable on conflict:
high, medium, low, increasing, decreasing, not applicable . Note that a factor may need two boxes to
best capture the situation: for example, high and increasing. If there is no
impact, check NA.
5. Poverty Link , i.e., the relationship of the factor to poverty: First, check if the factor is
related to poverty in a direct or indirect manner or is not applicable. If there is a direct or
indirect link, the level of significance of the link needs to be indicated. There are five
degrees of significance: high, medium, low, increasing, decreasing. Here again, note that
a factor may need two boxes to depict the situation: for example, high and decreasing.
6. Repeat process for all the relevant variables in each category.
7. After the table is completed, based on results, identify if a country overall is “at risk ”—
high likelihood of outbreak of, or revival of, violent conflict; “escalation”— likely that the situation
will continue to intensify and exacerbate; or “de-escalation”— likely that
the situation is under control and the country is on its way to post-conflict recovery.
Next, provide a brief analysis to explain the country’s position according to the findings
on each category, and its likely future trend.
8. It is useful to develop a prioritized list of factors for conflict and poverty independently
according to their degree of import. The factors having a high degree of impact on both conflict and
poverty, and especially if their degree of importance is increasing, should be considered priority
areas within a PRSP or CAS, if feasible.
9. Conflict analysis helps to highlight priority problem areas. Based on findings, teams may
decide to conduct further (in-depth) studies on selected issues found to be of particular importance.
10. Based on the findings and the descriptions on each category, teams may conduct a
stakeholder analysis to identify groups who have the ability to affect political and social change,
including violence, and the main groups who are likely to be affected by such
changes.
E) Appendix A has an assessment of the USAID Conflict Vulnerability Analysis, DFID Conflict
Assessment Guide, and FEWER Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment
1) USAID CVA: medium to long term analysis that a country will descend into violence
conflict and assessment of capacity of country to cope with risk factors
*identify significant groups involved
*identify sources of conflict and level of risk for conflict on each factor (structural
factors, social tensions and fragmentation factors; viability of state (state capacity) factors)
2) FEWER Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment
*conflict analysis (dynamics outlined; root causes-dynamics link analyzed;
stakeholder analysis)
*strategy building
*country strategy developed
2) DFID Conducting Conflict Analysis
A) What to use Assessments for:
1) risks of negative effects of conflicts on programs
2) risks of programs/policies exacerbating conflicts
3) improving effectiveness of development interventions in contributing to conflict
prevention and reduction
B) Methodology
1) flexibility: what is the goal in assessing the conflict
2) political economy of war
3) greed and grievance analysis
4) analysis of structures and actors
*institutions that might predispose a country to violence
*individual incentives and motives (perceptions and meanings)
5) regional analysis (context/neighborhood)
6) conflict as a dynamic social process (root causes may become irrelevant as the conflict
progresses)
C) Model
Structures
*security
*political
*economic
*social
Actors
*interests
*relations
*capacities
*peace agendas
*incentives
Dynamics
*long-term trends
*triggers for accelerators
*capacity to manage conflicts
*likely future conflict scenarios
1) structures
*compile broad contextual analysis
*map out and weight importance of sources of tensions and conflict
*identify linkages and connections between sources of tension in different sectors and levels
of society
*make initial judgments of key sources of conflict
2) actors
*make a list of all relevant actors and for each identify:
-interests, relations, capacities, peace agendas, and incentives
3) dynamics
*analyze long term trends
*assess short-term triggers
*identify factors likely to increase or decrease conflicts including institutions or processes
that can mitigate or increase tensions
*brainstorm for future scenarios: which are most likely
-interaction between 3 critical factors: society’s structural vulnerability to violent
conflict, opportunity to benefit from conflict by elite groups, socirty’s capacity to manage or contain
conflict
D) International Response Analysis
1) mapping the responses of international actors
2) role of development actors analyzed
3) assess interactions between development interventions and conflict/peace dynamic
Model
Int’l Actors
Development actors
Interaction
*military/security
*map magnitude and focus
*assess impact of conflict on devel.
of dev. Programs/policies
progs/policies
*diplomatic
*analyze devel actors’
*assess impact of devel progs/policies
approach to conflict
on dynamics of conflict and peace
*trade
*assess capacities to work in
and on conflict
*immigration
*development
(assess level of coherence &
analyze impacts of above factors)
E) Developing strategies and options for conflict reduction and to ensure development approaches
are conflict sensitive
1) develop common donor approaches
2) individual donor strategies
*security sector reform, arms proliferation and reintegration of combatants, rule of
law and human rights
*political and democratic reform, justice system, media and civil society
*reduce economic inequalities, address war economies, support resource management
systems
*tackling social exclusion and underlying grievances, promote dialogue and
cooperation, support women’s role in conflict resolution, peacebuilding in education
3) USAID – Conducting a Conflict Assessment: A Framework for Analysis and Program
Development
Which countries? USAID claims 2/3 of countries have recognized conflict potential. Recommends
assessments for all countries that score red or yellow on Peace and Conflict Ledger.
Framework is primarily for assessment and diagnosis. The CMM office is producing sectoral toolkits
that provide more specific advice on program design.
Structured using a “motive-means-opportunity” framework.
Motive:
Grievance
Ethnic and Religious Divisions
Stagnant Economy
Demographic Factors
Greed
Lootable resources
Ability to profit from conflict
Means:
Overcome collective action problem.
Financial and humanresources.
Opportunity:
Triggering event, window of vulnerability.
Elections, economic shocks, political scandal
Framework adds to this:
State’s ability to manage conflict:
Inclusion versus exclusion.
Strength of Institutions
Regional and international causes:
Transnational flows (arms, refugees, criminals).
Global market shocks.
Bad neighborhoods.
Framework emphasizes the need for motive means and opportunity to be present and the importance
of looking at interaction effects between the factors listed.
Document then provides instructions on how to link existing programs to the assessment through a
mapping procedure and a checklist of questions.