ABSTRACT

Conflict is everywhere in the world and can be caused by a number of factors, including limited financial, natural, or territory resources; ethnic, cultural, or religious differences; political differences; and the like. Many nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) exist to help conflict-stricken populations manage, resolve, and/or recover from conflict. These intervention efforts might focus on relief, rehabilitation, reconciliation, or any combination of these. Some of these efforts are successful while others fail. Interventions may fail or succeed for a number of reasons. An intervention might fail because the intervention neglects to address the conflict holistically. The Structural-Attitudinal-Transactional (SAT) Model takes a holistic, systems approach to international conflict intervention. While the model could prove to be useful, there is no systematic empirical evidence supporting the utility of the model. This meta-analysis begins the difficult task of evaluating the SAT Model and its potential for success in international interventions.