Few would dispute the importance of ideas in shaping international policies. But if an academic institute’s currency is ideas — not contributions, campaigns, or constituents — how can those ideas contribute to national and international policymaking processes that, at times, seem hopelessly reactive, shortsighted, and politicized?

At the Kroc Institute, we are convinced that peace studies should matter to the world of policy and that policy should be integral to peace studies. We define policy broadly to include the institute’s critical assessment of pressing issues such as U.S. policy in Iraq, as well as its engagement with institutions that are involved in policy-relevant peacebuilding at the local, national, and international levels.

There are three hallmarks to the institute’s approach to policy. First, we specialize in a multidisciplinary and integrative approach to a set of issues — including the cultural, religious, and ethnic dimensions of conflict — that have gained new salience for policy makers in recent years. Second, the institute helps build the capacity of governmental and nongovernmental organizations to support and be involved in policy-relevant peacebuilding. Third, attention to the policy and practice of peacebuilding enhances the institute’s scholarship and teaching, while providing a way for its academic resources to serve the wider society.

Linking multidisciplinary peacebuilding to policy
International policy has traditionally focused on the structure of the international system, especially political, economic, and military power relationships. In recent years, greater attention has been given to the role of religion, culture, and “movements from below,” all areas in which the Kroc Institute specializes. What distinguishes the institute’s contribution to policy is the way its scholarship brings together in a creative synthesis the insights and methods of a variety of disciplines, as well as the theory, policy, and praxis of peacebuilding at different levels and stages of conflict.

How does this multi-dimensional approach shape our policy responses in a specific situation, such as the crisis in the Darfur region of Sudan? An accurate understanding of such a conflict requires attention to the complex role of cultural and religious factors in fueling hostilities, which is a specialty of our director, Scott Appleby. Rashied Omar, coordinator of Kroc’s Program on Religion, Conflict and Peacebuilding, has observed that historic tensions between Muslim communities in northern and western Sudan play a central role in the violence. Omar suggests that these tensions could be reduced if the global Muslim community showed greater support for both humanitarian efforts and UN investigations of atrocities. Senior fellow Robert Johansen has proposed establishing a UN emergency service that could send military, police, judicial, and humanitarian personnel to Darfur and other crisis points. In addition to increasing security, the service would support peacebuilding efforts. Another faculty member, Larissa Fast, explores the potential of interventions by humanitarian organizations, giving particular attention to how security issues in places such as Darfur affect the agencies’ capacity to respond effectively. Each of these scholars brings to the table not only special expertise and understanding, but a viewpoint that has been expanded by continual conversation with Kroc colleagues working different dimensions of the crisis.

While policy makers focus on international intervention and formal peace processes to bring these conflicts to an end, the institute’s integrative peacebuilding approach identifies and develops the conditions under which these wider processes can lead to a sustainable peace. John Paul Lederach has done pioneering work on strategic peacebuilding, writing extensively on the subject and training local peacebuilders throughout the world. This fall, John Darby’s Research Initiative on the Resolution of Ethnic Conflict (RIREC) will celebrate the publication of a three-volume work on three dimensions of peacebuilding: youth, transitional justice, and post-accord violence. The RIREC books will offer insights for those designing post-accord reconstruction and reconciliation programs. Daniel Philpott’s work on reconciliation and forgiveness is useful to policy makers who are aware that traditional approaches to post- conflict reconstruction may be missing an important ingredient.

Marrying ideas and institutions
Ideas have the greatest impact on policy when they are embraced by institutions, both governmental and nongovernmental. Kroc Institute faculty contribute regularly to foreign policy debates through commentaries, media interviews, and policy articles. They also work with a wide range of institutions on policy issues. Drawing on their decade of research on UN economic sanctions and incentives, George A. Lopez and David Cortright are advising governments on ways to improve the UN’s Counter Terrorism Committee. Professor Johansen provides academic assistance to organizations that advocate for U.S. participation in the International Criminal Court.

Given the importance of Notre Dame’s Catholic identity, the institute has developed a particularly close relationship with key Catholic institutions. Catholic Relief Services, one of the world’s largest aid agencies, is a prime example. Several faculty have helped CRS integrate justice and peace issues into its relief and development programs. The institute hosts an annual Summer Institute on Peacebuilding for senior CRS staff and church leaders from around the world, and through CRS provides training in peacebuilding to Catholic bishops from Latin America and Africa. Professors Lederach and Fast have also helped develop two widely used training manuals on peacebuilding for Caritas Internationalis, a worldwide coalition of Catholic relief and development agencies. Finally, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has invited the Kroc Institute and the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University to convene a colloquium on ethical and policy implications of the U.S. intervention in Iraq and its aftermath.

Our degree programs provide another, different way to embed ideas in institutions. There are many schools of international policy, but we are educating and training a particular kind of policy maker: the specialist in peacebuilding. Many of our graduates return to countries torn by conflict to assume leadership positions in government, civil society, or the academy. Kroc graduate students, who spend six months working with nongovernmental organizations in Africa, Southeast Asia or the Middle East, bring to their work a solid background in theory, policy and practice. Kroc alumni include a human rights officer for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, a member of the Georgia mission of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and an assistant to the president of Brazil. They are trained to see problems, not just from a policy perspective but through the distinctive lens of peacebuilding.

Serving the academy and society
The extent to which peace studies programs should include policy in their research, teaching, and outreach is not a settled question. Despite the revolving doors among government, NGOs, and the academy, the world of policy and the world of academics are sometimes worlds apart. Policy makers often dismiss academics as too removed from the practical realities of policymaking and too apt to write only for other academics. Academics chafe at the superficiality of the policy process and disagree about whether a focus on policy enhances or undermines the academic credibility of peace studies programs.

At the Kroc Institute, we do not accept this separation of theory and practice, academic and policy studies. We are convinced that we cannot fulfill our academic mission if we do not ground peace studies in both solid theory and an empirical understanding of how policies hinder or help conflict transformation. At the same time, we are convinced that the multidisciplinary and integrative approach of peace studies has something to offer the world of policy, especially as greater attention is given the significance of religion, civil society, and norms in international affairs.

How relevant, then, is policy studies? Our horizon is at once short-term and generational. The work of Lopez and Cortright on UN sanctions and counter-terrorism programs addresses current policies, while Johansen’s work on a UN rapid reaction force provides a theoretical and policy rationale for a proposal that might not be politically feasible for many years. Our multidisciplinary, integrative approach to strategic peacebuilding is concerned with long-term social and political transformation. We are convinced, however, that current policy decisions must be informed by an understanding of the complex dynamics of religion, ethnicity and culture at the local level. We not only are ensuring that peace studies will contribute new theoretical approaches to the study of international affairs, but also that peace studies will be embodied in institutions that make a difference in the world. The role of theories and ideas in foreign policy may be indirect and difficult to trace, but we are confident that the Kroc Institute is fulfilling Notre Dame’s vision of scholarship serving the wider society.

Top of Page

Home > Publications > Peace Colloquy, Issue 8, Summer 2005 > Policy Studies