Impact of the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution on peace building and conflict prevention in Nigeria, 2000-2014

Abstract

The study was undertaken to evaluate the impact of the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR) on peacebuilding and conflict prevention in Nigeria from 2000 to 2014. Established by the government as it transitioned to democratic governance in 2000, IPCR was mandated to identify the root causes of violent conflict in Nigeria through research and provide possible solutions through evidence-informed policy and practice options, and promotion of peacebuilding strategies. Recurring violent conflicts had not only destroyed several lives and property and displaced millions from their homes, but had also retarded the nation’s growth and development. Drawing from extensive sources of qualitative and quantitative data, the study examined the peacebuilding evidence that had worked and did not work for IPCR, and why, through conflict analysis model, theories of change and intervention theory for organizational development. Through historical, evaluative and descriptive analysis, the study found out that the Institute had within fifteen years of its history contributed to the promotion of peace through design and implementation of relevant, effective and efficient peacebuilding programmes for communities, women, youth, media, legislators, public servants, traditional, religious leaders and civil society. These groups of beneficiaries are the study’s target population. There was a strong evidence to argue that the impact of the interventions were mostly in short-term as it had impacted on the mind and work of beneficiaries but not enough to manage the underlying factors behind the recurrence of violent conflict in Nigeria. Nigeria often relapsed into more violence as soon as it gained some respite. Therefore, to achieve its mandate in the long, coherent and sustainable terms, the study suggests that the Institute must scale up its programmes to drastically stem the tide of violence through community peacebuilding. IPCR must make itself more visible at the community level because that was where most violent conflict originated. While the study recognized the fact that, though, the prevalence and complexity of underlying drivers of conflict in Nigeria were far beyond the ambit of one agency, it recommends the Institute to deepen and broaden its partnership and networks for greater peacebuilding impact. Similarly, the government needs to prioritize peace and security by increasing funding and giving sustainable support to IPCR as a democratic institution. Though much of its intervention impact still needed to be studied and learned, the study contends that better and more expanded programmes will make peacebuilding more effective and promote Nigeria’s peace in the long-term.