Beyond the Metropolis? Popular Peace and Postconflict Peacebuilding

David Roberts

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    The debate on peacebuilding is deadlocked. Leading scholars of ‘fourth generation’ peacebuilding, who take Liberalism to task for creating what they refer to as crises in peacebuilding, have themselves been challenged by those they criticize for over-stating Liberal failure and failing themselves to produce the goods in terms of an alternative. But behind this debate, it seems that both approaches are asking the same question: how can stable, legitimate, sustainable peace be engineered? This article engages critical theory with problem-solving social sciences. It proposes that the crises in orthodox postconflict peacebuilding are genuine, but there are approaches that might put flesh on fourth generation concepts without bringing the Liberal edifice down, shifting the debate away from ontology and ideology and returning it to the people in whose name it is held
    LanguageEnglish
    Pages447-467
    JournalReview of International Studies
    Volume37
    Publication statusPublished - 9 Dec 2011

    Fingerprint

    metropolis
    peace
    critical theory
    liberalism
    ontology
    ideology
    social science

    Cite this

    @article{3b03923246fa44d6b36851652598affd,
    title = "Beyond the Metropolis? Popular Peace and Postconflict Peacebuilding",
    abstract = "The debate on peacebuilding is deadlocked. Leading scholars of ‘fourth generation’ peacebuilding, who take Liberalism to task for creating what they refer to as crises in peacebuilding, have themselves been challenged by those they criticize for over-stating Liberal failure and failing themselves to produce the goods in terms of an alternative. But behind this debate, it seems that both approaches are asking the same question: how can stable, legitimate, sustainable peace be engineered? This article engages critical theory with problem-solving social sciences. It proposes that the crises in orthodox postconflict peacebuilding are genuine, but there are approaches that might put flesh on fourth generation concepts without bringing the Liberal edifice down, shifting the debate away from ontology and ideology and returning it to the people in whose name it is held",
    author = "David Roberts",
    year = "2011",
    month = "12",
    day = "9",
    language = "English",
    volume = "37",
    pages = "447--467",
    journal = "Review of International Studies",
    issn = "0260-2105",
    publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

    }

    Beyond the Metropolis? Popular Peace and Postconflict Peacebuilding. / Roberts, David.

    In: Review of International Studies, Vol. 37, 09.12.2011, p. 447-467.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Beyond the Metropolis? Popular Peace and Postconflict Peacebuilding

    AU - Roberts, David

    PY - 2011/12/9

    Y1 - 2011/12/9

    N2 - The debate on peacebuilding is deadlocked. Leading scholars of ‘fourth generation’ peacebuilding, who take Liberalism to task for creating what they refer to as crises in peacebuilding, have themselves been challenged by those they criticize for over-stating Liberal failure and failing themselves to produce the goods in terms of an alternative. But behind this debate, it seems that both approaches are asking the same question: how can stable, legitimate, sustainable peace be engineered? This article engages critical theory with problem-solving social sciences. It proposes that the crises in orthodox postconflict peacebuilding are genuine, but there are approaches that might put flesh on fourth generation concepts without bringing the Liberal edifice down, shifting the debate away from ontology and ideology and returning it to the people in whose name it is held

    AB - The debate on peacebuilding is deadlocked. Leading scholars of ‘fourth generation’ peacebuilding, who take Liberalism to task for creating what they refer to as crises in peacebuilding, have themselves been challenged by those they criticize for over-stating Liberal failure and failing themselves to produce the goods in terms of an alternative. But behind this debate, it seems that both approaches are asking the same question: how can stable, legitimate, sustainable peace be engineered? This article engages critical theory with problem-solving social sciences. It proposes that the crises in orthodox postconflict peacebuilding are genuine, but there are approaches that might put flesh on fourth generation concepts without bringing the Liberal edifice down, shifting the debate away from ontology and ideology and returning it to the people in whose name it is held

    M3 - Article

    VL - 37

    SP - 447

    EP - 467

    JO - Review of International Studies

    T2 - Review of International Studies

    JF - Review of International Studies

    SN - 0260-2105

    ER -