Unpacking Conflict Sensitivity: Why It Does Not Make sesne?

After over 15 years of studying, working, training, and advising on conflict sensitivity, I still encounter resistance—or at best, a lack of priority—toward this concept within the humanitarian, development, and peacebuilding sectors. This has always puzzled me. Why doesn't it resonate that avoiding harm and striving for peace should be at the core of our work?

I believe this disconnect often stems from misconceptions and the way we communicate conflict sensitivity. Let's explore this together.

Over-Complicating the Obvious

Conflict sensitivity is about understanding the environment in which we operate and making informed decisions to avoid causing harm. Yet, we often present it in technical jargon or as an additional burden, making it seem overwhelming and risky to field workers. For example, I've seen organizations produce extensive conflict analyses filled with academic language that offer little practical guidance for those on the ground.

But understanding the context isn't an optional luxury; it's essential. Local staff usually have an innate grasp of their environments—we don't need to teach them about their own lives. The real task is to translate this understanding into concrete, actionable steps that make projects safer and more effective.

Actionable Steps:

• Simplify Conflict Analysis: Focus on what's directly relevant to your staff and projects. Use clear language and break down complex ideas into actionable points. Instead of lengthy reports, consider concise briefs that highlight key conflict dynamics affecting your work.
• Empower Local Staff: Let them lead discussions on context to ensure interventions are culturally sensitive and locally informed. In one project, we held regular community meetings where local team members shared updates, which directly informed our planning and reduced potential tensions.

Conflict Sensitivity as a "Buzzword"

Too often, conflict sensitivity appears as a checkbox in project proposals or a line in reports claiming it was "considered throughout the implementation." Without dedicated budgets, clear outputs, and accountability measures, these are just empty words. For instance, I've witnessed projects that mention conflict sensitivity but allocate no resources to implement it effectively.

Conflict sensitivity shouldn't be about "looking good"; it must translate into practices that actively prevent harm.

Actionable Steps:

• Allocate Resources: Include a dedicated budget line for conflict sensitivity. Whether it's for hiring advisors, conducting regular context reviews, or training staff, make it a visible part of the financial plan.
• Set Clear Indicators: Develop specific metrics to measure the impact of conflict-sensitive approaches. Instead of vague statements, quantify how these practices help achieve project goals and enhance community safety. For example, track the reduction in local conflicts related to project activities or improvements in community relations.

The Myth of Neutrality

A common misconception is that humanitarian organizations must remain neutral to avoid engaging in conflict dynamics. However, neutrality doesn't mean inaction. Being conflict-sensitive requires acknowledging conflict realities and actively working to minimize harm—even if that means adjusting practices that inadvertently exacerbate tensions.

For example, in a resource distribution project, we realized that delivering aid through certain local leaders was fueling community resentment. By shifting to neutral community centers and involving representatives from different groups, we maintained our neutrality while reducing tensions.

Actionable Steps:

• Encourage Creative Solutions: If an intervention might fuel tensions, brainstorm alternative ways to achieve the same goals without triggering conflict.
• Invest in Staff Training: Equip your team to recognize and navigate conflict dynamics. Provide training that builds confidence to act appropriately, rather than being hindered by the fear of making mistakes.

From Analysis to Action

Contextual understanding is only as useful as its application. Without translating conflict analysis into meaningful, actionable outcomes that field staff and managers can utilize, it becomes a pointless exercise—another report gathering dust.

The goal of conflict sensitivity is not just to understand but to act. In one case, after identifying that our project inadvertently favored one group over another, we adjusted our beneficiary selection criteria to be more inclusive. This improved community relations and enhanced the effectiveness of our interventions.

Actionable Steps:

• Integrate Findings into Planning: Ensure that conflict analysis informs your project planning process. Every team member should understand how these insights affect their daily tasks and decisions.
• Scenario-Based Training: Develop training that allows staff to practice applying conflict-sensitive principles in real-world situations. This builds confidence and ensures that theory translates into practice.

A Call for Accountability and Change

Conflict sensitivity is a commitment to ethical, effective programming. We must move beyond token gestures and ensure that our projects genuinely consider the complex environments they operate in. By simplifying our approaches, empowering local staff, allocating resources, and actively applying our analyses, we can enhance the impact of our work and contribute to lasting peace.

Imagine the difference we could make: projects that not only avoid harm but also actively promote harmony, interventions that are embraced by communities because they address real needs without exacerbating tensions, and teams that feel confident and equipped to navigate complex environments.

What's Next?

I would love to hear your thoughts. How do you integrate conflict sensitivity into your work? What challenges have you faced, and what solutions have worked for you? Let's share insights and collectively work towards a more practical, impactful approach to conflict-sensitive programming.