Phase 2
Informal negotiations
Phase description
Several rounds of informal negotiations between representatives of the conflict parties will take place. These are likely to be initiated or facilitated by a third party. They may take place through shuttle diplomacy without face-to-face meetings between the conflict parties, or meetings between representatives outside the country. This phase usually sees concessions from both sides to increase trust and de-escalate the conflict, including the withdrawal or repositioning of troops, the release of political prisoners, or the granting of amnesty. The parties may also reach a ceasefire agreement or implement a unilateral cessation of hostilities, which constitute the first formal milestones in the peace process. Follow-up mechanisms may also be established, such as for cease-fire monitoring.
Explore the following 4 use case(s) of digital technology:
Use Case 1
Dynamic mapping of power relations
An online tool that allows for the interactive visualization of key peace process actors, their attitudes and interests, how these actors are connected, and the power relations between them. The data for this online dashboard would be collected by focal points through offline focus group discussions or individual interviews with key stakeholders. The tool could be periodically updated by the focal points to measure changes in the network of peace process actors. The data could be used by negotiators to inform the design of their mediation strategy. The tool could help mediators understand how attitude and interest changes among stakeholders relate to the causes and dynamics of conflict. Mediators could also analyze who of the stakeholders can influence attitude change and identify shared values and possible connectors among them.
This tool can be applied in phases 2 and 3.
Important context factors
The tool requires commitment from a mediator or mediation support actor to collect data continually. Depending on the context, there may be sensitivities around what information is shared by whom. A strong network of local focal points (for instance local civil society organisations) that support the assessment will also be needed.
Risks and possible unintended consequences
- Stakeholders may misrepresent their interests or power for strategic reasons
- Access to the field may be limited due to insecurity
- Stakeholders may have limited political will to contribute to the assessment
- The participation rate in the asessment may decrease over time
Strategic purpose of digital inclusion
Functions of digital Technology
Outputs of digital Technology
Technologies used
Online visualisation tool
Use Case 2
Virtual exchange between conflict parties
This tool could be used to build trust between communities on different sides of the conflict and build momentum for a developing or ongoing peace process. Cohorts of 8-12 people reflecting different dividing lines would participate in a series of exchanges. The topics of each discussion would be announced, and the participants would be asked to provide their feedback. The virtual exchange would take place before or in parallel to the formal dialogue process, focusing on shared needs and allowing participants to lead the conversation and topics. Through the process, participants would begin to understand and feel empathy towards each other, supporting an enabling environment for peace negotiations.
This tool can be used in phases 2 and 3.
Important context factors
Successful virtual exchange requires strong facilitation and a high quality platform to ensure success. The type of conflict and types of grievances among the population will influence to which degree a meaningful online dialogue is possible. The proximity of the participants to the formal peace negotiations will determine the impact of the virtual exchange on the overall mediation.
Risks and possible unintended consequences
- Spoilers may aim to sabotage the dialogue by leaking the content of the discussions or spreading misinformation about it
- High-profile participants may assert undue influence and monopolize the dialogue
- There may be limited progress or limited substantial outcomes of the dialogue activities
Strategic purpose of digital inclusion
Functions of digital Technology
Outputs of digital Technology
Technologies used
Video conferencing
Use Case 3
Countering misinformation about the negotiations
This reporting and analysis system tracks the spread of misinformation on social media and offline. The system would combine automatic monitoring of specific keywords and accounts on social media with reports from critical informants on rumors that they are picking up. Informants could be civil society actors trusted by the mediation team. Such rumors could include false information about security incidents, such as ceasefire violations, about the negotiation process, as well as any other information that mediators consider might derail peace talks. Once a rumour relevant to the negotiations is identified, the system would analyse its factual validity, source, spread and impact on public opinion. This analysis would be used by mediation support actors to counter the rumor with targeted messaging.
This tool can be applied in phases 2 and 3.
Important context factors
The availability of suitable informants is critical to the effectiveness of the system. The system requires a reliable and fast communication infrastructure that allows for swift analysis and response. The reach of the audience for counter messages will depend on their digital literacy, language diversity, and connectedness to communication infrastructures.
Risks and possible unintended consequences
- By addressing a rumour in order to debunk it, more attention may be drawn to it than if it had gone unmentioned
- Counter messages may not work if not appropriately crafted based on the context and the information ecosystem environment.
Strategic purpose of digital inclusion
Functions of digital Technology
Outputs of digital Technology
Technologies used
Apps, online forms, SMS systems, social media analysis tools
Use Case 4
Mapping voice on social media
This social media analysis tool identifies voices on social media platforms that relate to constituencies significant to a mediation process. It specifically aims to identify conflict stakeholders that are not the “usual suspects” (i.e., representatives of political parties or armed factions) and are therefore excluded from offline mediation activities. The tool would screen a stream of seed pages, and Twitter handles that have been curated manually by political analysts. The analysis would be conducted by identifying specific keywords or hashtags from the stream, followed by a network analysis that looks at who is connected to the particular seed pages or handles, or who uses the same keywords or hashtags that they do. The results of the social media analysis could be triangulated with data collected from focus group discussions to identify differences between online and offline representation. The analysis tool would help mediators to develop a formula for inclusion that does justice to the increasing role of social media in peace processes.
This tool can be used in phases 2 and 3.
Important context factors
This use case is only applicable where there is a thriving civil society that is vocal on public social media platforms. Cases where Twitter is used widely are most suited. Where Facebook is the primary platform in use, only public content can be easily accessed. The tool can also be best applied in longer-term dialogue processes that allow sufficient time for the analysis.
Risks and possible unintended consequences
- Not all groups important to an inclusive process may have vocal representatives online
- Some actors may not acknowledge the relevance of online actors and sentiments to the mediation process
Strategic purpose of digital inclusion
Functions of digital Technology
Outputs of digital Technology
Technologies used
Social media analysis tools
Proceed to another phase
Phase 2