From reducing violent conflict to creating underlying conditions for peace, facilitated dialogue has long been used in pursuit of peacebuilding goals. In June 2015, the United States Institute of Peace commissioned a meta-review of its grant-funded dialogue projects since 1992. In an effort to better understand how and why dialogue programs can be effective in different contexts, to enhance future programmatic efforts, and to contribute to the evidence base for the benefit of the broader peacebuilding community, this report synthesizes the key findings from that evaluation. 

Summary

  • From reducing violent conflict to creating underlying conditions for peace, dialogue has long been used to achieve a broad array of peacebuilding goals.
  • Dialogue is a facilitated, conflict-intervention process that brings stakeholders together in a conflict or around a problem or concern to transform drivers of conflict.
  • Transfer approaches—the spread of dialogue effects to society—include a focus on the target of change and how change happens.
  • An evaluation of grant-funded dialogue projects since 1992 was undertaken using a meta-review approach to better understand how dialogue can be effective in different settings.
  • Approaches to dialogue projects have shifted considerably since the early 1990s, including the recent trend of projects focusing to a greater extent on spurring changes at the local level through bottom-up and middle-up approaches, rather than top down.
  • A range of factors were associated with the success of dialogue projects. These are grouped around three key themes: who to engage, attributes, and management.
  • Highly successful projects more often took an inclusive approach to selecting and convening participants for the dialogue.
  • Projects that coupled capacity building with action or advocacy components tended to be more successful at transferring outcomes beyond the participants than those that focused solely on dialogue.
  • Outbreaks of violence and unstable security situations were cited as leading reasons undermining project effectiveness.
  • Organizations with credibility and strong connections in local communities were better able to reach stakeholders, attract the ideal participants, and secure buy-in from the authorities to hold dialogues.
  • During and after the review and evaluation, several questions emerged that would benefit from further exploration. These relate to public sentiment about dialogues, effective strategies to build organizational credibility, the nature of the conflict drivers, and the relationships between dialogues and outcomes, factors and results, and leader characteristics and the dialogue process.

About the Report

With an eye to better understanding how and why dialogue programs can be effective, this report synthesizes the key findings and lessons from a commissioned meta-review of dialogue grants funded by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) since 1992. Nike Carstarphen and Ilana Shapiro of the Alliance for Conflict Transformation undertook the evaluation in collaboration with USIP. The report’s target audience includes those funding dialogue projects as well as organizations designing and implementing projects that use dialogue as a strategy. 

This Special Report is based on findings from the evaluation, “USIP Report on Dialogue Projects and Transfer.” 

About the Authors

Jack Froude is the grants program specialist on USIP’s Applied Conflict Transformation team. Michael Zanchelli is a USIP program officer on the Planning, Learning, and Evaluation team.

Related Publications

As Vice President Pence Visits the Middle East, Hopes for Diplomacy Languish

As Vice President Pence Visits the Middle East, Hopes for Diplomacy Languish

Friday, January 19, 2018

By: Lucy Kurtzer-Ellenbogen

Vice President Mike Pence heads to Egypt, Jordan and Israel with little diplomatic quiet, and even less hope, on the Israeli-Palestinian front. President Abbas has declared the Oslo peace process dead, and the U.S. mediating role over, President Trump has broken with international consensus on Jerusalem, and pointedly not endorsed a two-state solution since coming to office, and Prime Minister Netanyahu has now hedged on his commitment to the end goal of a Palestinian state.

Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

A Diplomatic Window Opens, Briefly, on the Korean Peninsula

A Diplomatic Window Opens, Briefly, on the Korean Peninsula

Thursday, January 18, 2018

By: Frank Aum

Last week’s “sports diplomacy” between South and North Korean negotiators—the first direct dialogue in more than two years—was a good first step in reducing tensions on the Korean Peninsula. North Korea’s participation in next month’s Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang, South Korea, along with news that the joint U.S.-South Korean military exercises will be delayed until late April, has produced a rare window of opportunity for diplomatic progress.

Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

Iraq’s Impasse with Kurds Puts Post-ISIS Stabilization at Risk

Iraq’s Impasse with Kurds Puts Post-ISIS Stabilization at Risk

Thursday, January 11, 2018

By: Andrew Snow

The impasse between Iraq’s central government and its Kurdistan Region is building into an economic problem, and both sides need to quickly find a way to negotiate a solution. While political conflict between the authorities in Baghdad and the regional capital of Erbil has been quieter since Iraqi troops ousted Kurdish forces from disputed territories in October, the Kurdish region’s economy is unraveling, with risks for both sides.

Economics & Environment; Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue; Democracy & Governance

View All Publications