ABSTRACT
In this chapter, the authors argue that promoting local-level institutions can significantly improve the success rate of peace agreements in countries previously ravaged by civil war. In engaging actors at the local level, it is possible to not only reduce violence in the short term, but also give local actors a stake in the construction of peace. By looking at negotiated settlements which provide a clear opportunity for non-governmental organizations (NGOs), local communities, and grassroots actors to get involved in the implementation process, the authors look at the features of “top-down” approaches in comparison to “bottom-up” ones. The authors add to current studies by emphasizing the importance of provisions in peace agreements that acknowledge the preferences of local actors who are often excluded from negotiation tables and have a stake in the enforcement of the agreement. Two datasets provide evidence on termination of conflict (UCDP Conflict Termination dataset) and peace agreements (UCDP Peace Agreement Dataset) for this chapter. The evidence from this chapter shows that peace agreements with local governance provisions are correlated with a reduction in the likelihood of violence. The effect of local governance provisions is larger than the effect of inclusion of security, power-sharing agreements, or general elections. The authors hypothesize that “going local” will encourage the formation of civil society, thus mediating the relationship between local provisions and peace. A clear policy implication emerges from this chapter’s analysis: including a local dimension in a peace agreement can play an important role in reducing the recurrence of violence.
