Did we get civic activism wrong? Understanding the waltz between constructive and aggressive civic tendencies in Bosnia–Herzegovina

Author:

Guest Alexander,Dagli Ilke,Machlouzarides Marian

Abstract

Purpose Despite the end of conflict in 1995, Bosnia–Herzegovina still suffers from unresolved ethnic and social tensions, where fostering social cohesion, active citizenship and mitigating ethnonationalist tensions and politically motivated violence remains among the main goals to achieve transformative peace. This paper, based on quantitative analyses of 3,637 adult respondents, shows that the tendency of Bosnians to be active or violent citizens sometimes overlaps and are not very distinct patterns of behaviour. The purpose of this paper is to identify factors that differentiate pathways and help explain (un)civil civic behaviours and inform the work of peace and development actors. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on a quantitative household survey conducted with a representative sample of 3,637 adults in Bosnia and by using a wide range of statistical tools from scaling to correlation analysis. This data set measures factors and conceptual notions associated with passive, constructive and aggressive civic tendencies and social cohesion in a nuanced way by using different metrics and scales. The survey was designed and conducted by The Centre for Sustainable Peace and Democratic Development (SeeD) and the Bosnia–Herzegovina Resilience Initiative in 2020, in partnership with The United States Agency for International Development (USAID)/The Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI) and The International Organization for Migration (IOM) for the SCORE Bosnia–Herzegovina study (SeeD, 2020). Findings Overall, the factors that were discovered to be linked to the manifestation of constructive and aggressive civic tendencies are multidimensional, and range from intergroup relations (e.g. tension, tolerance) to political and civic attitudes (e.g. ethnonationalism, civic responsibility, gender equality), from individual traits (e.g. education, economic stress) to the media landscape (e.g. information consumption). While the empirical evidence shows that some of these factors can push citizens towards both active and violent civic behaviours simultaneously, this study identifies and distinguishes those that can reduce aggressive civic tendencies while increasing constructive civic tendencies. Practical implications This paper proposes a replicable approach and evidence-based conclusions which can help validate the theories of change for the peace and development actors to ensure that scarce peacebuilding resources are invested where the impact is greatest, and the actors can protect the sanctity of their responsibility to do no harm. Social implications This paper seeks to provide a robust empirical understanding for more effective policy-making and programming that can support Bosnia–Herzegovina’s endogenous resilience against socio-political shocks and transformative peace trajectory. This paper seeks to demonstrate how peace and development actors can build and use an evidence-base for understanding civic behaviours and as a result formulate tailored efforts with greater likelihood of impact. This would help fulfil commitments towards sustainable development goals and the 2030 global agenda (UN General Assembly, 2015). Originality/value This study contributes insights to the emerging literature at the nexus of peacebuilding, individual skills/attitudes and civic behaviour. While the conclusions are highly contextual, the methodology is informed by multidisciplinary literature and is replicable in other post-conflict and non-conflict contexts, and thus can be used for cross-country comparisons and theory building around civic activism and constructive citizenship. The approach distinguishes between passive citizens, constructive activists, aggressive activists and purely violent citizens. This study discovers that the bifurcation is between passive citizens and active citizens, and although constructive and aggressive civic tendencies might be theorised to be contradictory, they overlap and tend to co-occur.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Law,Sociology and Political Science,Social Psychology,Health (social science)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3