In November 2007 Adam Moore was conducting fieldwork in Mostar when the southern Bosnian city was rocked by two days of violent clashes between Croat and Bosniak youth. It was not the city's only experience of ethnic conflict in recent years. Indeed, Mostar's problems are often cited as emblematic of the failure of international efforts to overcome deep divisions that continue to stymie the postwar peace process in Bosnia. Yet not all of Bosnia has been plagued by such troubles. Mostar remains mired in distrust and division, but the Brcko District in the northeast corner of the country has become a model of what Bosnia could be. Its multiethnic institutions operate well compared to other municipalities, and are broadly supported by those who live there; it also boasts the only fully integrated school system in the country. What accounts for the striking divergence in postwar peacebuilding in these two towns?
Moore argues that a conjunction of four factors explains the contrast in peacebuilding outcomes in Mostar and Brcko: The design of political institutions, the sequencing of political and economic reforms, local and regional legacies from the war, and the practice and organization of international peacebuilding efforts in the two towns. Differences in the latter, in particular, have profoundly shaped relations between local political elites and international officials. Through a grounded analysis of localized peacebuilding dynamics in these two cities Moore generates a powerful argument concerning the need to rethink how peacebuilding is done-that is, a shift in the habitus or culture that governs international peacebuilding activities and priorities today.
In November 2007 Adam Moore was conducting fieldwork in Mostar when the southern Bosnian city was rocked by two days of violent clashes between Croat and Bosniak youth. It was not the city's only experience of ethnic conflict in recent years. Indeed, Mostar's problems are often cited as emblematic of the failure of international efforts to overcome deep divisions that continue to stymie the postwar peace process in Bosnia. Yet not all of Bosnia has been plagued by such troubles. Mostar remains mired in distrust and division, but the Brcko District in the northeast corner of the country has become a model of what Bosnia could be. Its multiethnic institutions operate well compared to other municipalities, and are broadly supported by those who live there; it also boasts the only fully integrated school system in the country. What accounts for the striking divergence in postwar peacebuilding in these two towns?Moore argues that a conjunction of four factors explains the contrast in outcomes in Mostar and Brcko: The design of political institutions, the sequencing of political and economic reforms, local and regional legacies from the war, and the practice and organization of international peacebuilding efforts in the two towns. Differences in the latter, in particular, have profoundly shaped relations between local political elites and international officials. Through a grounded analysis of localized peacebuilding dynamics in these two cities Moore generates a powerful argument concerning the need to rethink how peacebuilding is done-that is, a shift in the habitus or culture that governs international peacebuilding activities and priorities today.
Industry Reviews
"By comparing two cases in Bosnia--Mostar, where ethnic conflict still flares intermittently, and Brcko, where public institutions are models of effective multiethnic functioning-Moore (geography, Univ. of California, Los Angeles) identifies an interrelated set of four factors that explain the success and failure of peace building... The book is strongly recommended for those interested in peace building in the wake of international intervention, as well as those interested in applicable research methodology."-R.P. Peters, Choice (April 2014) "Methodologically, Peacebuilding in Practice is an exemplary study of postwar Bosnia. Moore engaged in eighteen months of fieldwork between 2004 and 2012, gaining competence in Bosnian and combining three methodological approaches: formal interviews (more than 120), archival research, and ethnography. The interviews were with local political and administrative personnel in the two towns who had been active during the war or afterward and with international officials working in the towns and in Sarajevo. Thus, the study is based on rich data compiled by a researcher very well-grounded in the localities studied."-Robert M. Hayden, Slavic Review (vol. 75, no. 1) "In Peacebuilding in Practice, Adam Moore provides a powerful narrative of the complex interactions between outsiders and insiders as countries emerge from the violence and separation of ethnic civil war. The comparison of Mostar and Brcko is engaging, and the story of international missteps in one circumstance while other outsiders made progress in another, comparable, setting yields deep insights into the goals and means of peacebuilding in the wake of civil war."-Timothy D. Sisk, University of Denver, author of International Mediation in Civil War: Bargaining with Bullets and editor of Global Governance "Adam Moore argues that the outcome of any given international peacebuilding effort is affected not only by its own organization and implementation but also by the design of local political institutions, sequencing of political and economic reforms, and the local and regional legacies of the war in question. Peacebuilding in Practice is a valuable contribution to our understanding of how peacebuilding is done and why it is often done poorly and only sometimes done well."-Paula Pickering, College of William and Mary, author of Peacebuilding in the Balkans: The View from the Ground Floor "Peacebuilding in Practice is an original contribution to understanding the complexity of ethnic conflict in the Western Balkans. It reveals the local mechanisms of ethnopolitical spacing and territorial appropriation as a substantial part of ethnonationalist projects in postwar Bosnia."-Asim Mujkic, University of Sarajevo
