Peaceshaping

Global agencies, framed by peace institutions, are struggling to prevent or constrain existing conflicts, let

alone new ones. Numerous nations and organisations exacerbate enmities through the pursuit of power,

‘security’, greed and self-interest. In doing so, some actively undermine the institutional rationale of

organisations such as the United Nations (UN). Generations of activists, scholars, diplomats, Non-

Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and UN organizations have attempted to ‘fix’ peace institutions as

well as challenge those who undermine them2. As such, all parties are engaged in ‘institutional work’ -

the ‘purposive action aimed at creating, maintaining and disrupting institutions’3

.

We argue that there are two distinct but interrelated categories of institutional work with great

consequences for peace institutions: ‘peaceshaping’ and ‘warshaping’. We define peaceshaping as the

disruption of institutions which sustain enmity and the creation and preservation of institutions which

constrain enmity and build amity. Conversely, we define warshaping as the disruption of institutions

which sustain amity and the creation and preservation of institutions which constrains amity and builds

enmity.