Stephanie Knox Cubbon Thesis Final Draft
-
Upload
stephanie-knox-cubbon -
Category
Documents
-
view
18 -
download
3
description
Transcript of Stephanie Knox Cubbon Thesis Final Draft
Peace Education
Independent Research Project
Stephanie Knox Cubbon
Exploring the Culture of Peace at the University for Peace
June 29, 2010
Virginia Cawagas, Advisor
The concept of a culture of peace has been developed in recent years, and has gained greater attention through the United Nations (UN) declaration of the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Nonviolence for the Children of the World, 2000-2010. While the concept of a culture of peace is well-developed and researched, the area of culture of peace assessment is relatively new. The University for Peace (UPEACE), as a UN-mandated graduate level institution, has a mandate to contribute to international peace and security by providing humanity with an institution of higher education devoted to peace-related studies. The current research explores the culture of peace at UPEACE at the local, institutional level, in order to elucidate the strengths and weaknesses of the UPEACE, and to contribute to local- and institutional-level culture of peace assessment. To conduct this research, a culture of peace framework was developed in conjunction with a community working group and literature review. This framework was then used to develop a comprehensive questionnaire, which was administered to the student body in order to explore students’ experiences of the culture of peace. Following the preliminary survey results, a discussion forum was held. Research results revealed a general trend that community members
University for Peace
Acknowledgements
To all who have taught me.
To all UPEACE community members, who contributed more to this project
than I could have ever hoped. I extend my deepest gratitude to you.
To my Peace Education classmates, who supported and encouraged me
throughout the year, and from whom I learned so much.
To Virginia Cawagas, Swee-Hin Toh, and Dina Rodriguez, for their constant
support, generous spirits, and deep commitment to peace education.
To my parents, for giving me every opportunity in life, including this one.
To my husband Alistair, for his support, encouragement, love, and for helping
me to reach my highest potential each day.
2
Table of Contents
1. Introduction....................................................................................................7
2. History of a Culture of Peace.........................................................................9
2.1 Culture of Peace as it Evolved at the United Nations............................9
2.2 Evolution of culture of peace: Analysis by Groff and Smoker (1996). 11
3. The University for Peace..............................................................................12
3.1 UPEACE and contributions to the UN Culture of Peace programme. .12
3.2 UPEACE: The setting............................................................................13
4. Statement of the Research Topic.................................................................14
4.1 Purpose.................................................................................................14
4.2 Statement of the problem.....................................................................15
4.3 Research questions...............................................................................15
5. Research Methodologies..............................................................................15
5.1 The Researcher’s Role..........................................................................16
5.2 Worldviews...........................................................................................16
5.3 Data Collection.....................................................................................16
5.4 Sampling...............................................................................................17
5.5 Data Analysis........................................................................................17
5.6 Assumptions, Ethical Issues and Constraints.......................................17
6. Literature Review.........................................................................................18
6.1 Culture of Peace Conceptual Frameworks...........................................18
6.1.1 UNESCO framework...................................................................19
6.1.2 The flower model........................................................................20
6.1.1 The Integral model.....................................................................21
6.2 Culture of Peace Indicators and Assessment.......................................22
6.2.1 David Adams...............................................................................22
6.2.2 Other culture of peace indicators and assessment tools............24
6.3 UPEACE related documents.................................................................24
6.4 UPEACE independent research projects..............................................25
7. Culture of Peace Framework for this study.................................................25
7.1 Education..............................................................................................26
7.2 Environmental sustainability................................................................27
7.3 Human rights........................................................................................28
7.4 Democratic participation......................................................................29
7.5 Equality between men and women.......................................................29
7.6 Understanding, tolerance, and solidarity.............................................29
7.7 Participatory communication and the free flow of information and
knowledge...................................................................................................30
7.8 International peace and security.........................................................30
7.9 Local peace and security......................................................................31
7.10 Inner peace.........................................................................................31
8. Working group on culture of peace framework and indicators...................32
9. Questionnaire: Findings and analysis...........................................................37
9.1 Personal information for statistical purposes.......................................38
9.2 A culture of peace through education..................................................41
9.3 Environmental sustainability................................................................46
9.4 Human rights........................................................................................47
9.5 Equality between men and women.......................................................51
9.6 Democratic participation......................................................................52
9.7 Understanding, tolerance and solidarity..............................................55
9.8 Participatory communication and the free flow of information and
knowledge.........................................................................................................61
9.9 International peace and security.........................................................63
9.10 Local peace and security...................................................................64
9.11 Inner peace........................................................................................67
9.12 Culture of peace................................................................................68
4
10. Feedback session and discussion...............................................................72
10.1 Discrimination...................................................................................72
10.2 Culture of peace comparison.............................................................73
10.3 Communication..................................................................................73
10.4 Inner peace........................................................................................73
11. Conclusions.................................................................................................74
12. UPEACE Culture of Peace Action Plan.......................................................78
12.1 Policy................................................................................................78
12.2 Further research..............................................................................80
12.3 Education and trainings...................................................................80
13. References..................................................................................................87
12. Appendices.................................................................................................93
A. Summary of UPEACE contributions to UN Decade Reports 2001-2005
..........................................................................................................................93
B. Proposal for the Community Liaison Office........................................99
List of Figures
Figure 1: Flower Model....................................................................................20
Figure 2: The Integral Model of Peace Education............................................21
Figure 3: Participants by Programme..............................................................39
Figure 4: Participants by Region......................................................................40
Figure 5: Participants by Gender.....................................................................41
6
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Culture of Peace Indicator Working...............................32
Table 2: Teaching Methods...............................................................................42
Table 3: Programmes at UPEACE.....................................................................43
Table 4: Environmental Sustainability..............................................................46
Table 5: Human Rights.....................................................................................47
Table 6: Equality between Men and Women....................................................51
Table 7: Democratic Participation at UPEACE.................................................52
Table 8: Democratic Participation in the Classroom........................................54
Table 9: Understanding....................................................................................55
Table 10: Tolerance..........................................................................................56
Table 11: Solidarity...........................................................................................57
Table 12: Peer Pressure for School-related Events..........................................58
Table 13: Institutional Pressure for School-related Events..............................59
Table 14: Peer Pressure for Social Events........................................................59
Table 15: Harassment.......................................................................................60
Table 16: Communication at UPEACE..............................................................61
Table 17: Interpersonal Communication at UPEACE.......................................62
Table 18: International Peace and Security.....................................................63
Table 19: Safety................................................................................................64
Table 20: Personal Security Violations.............................................................65
Table 21: Conflict Resolution............................................................................66
Table 22: Inner Peace.......................................................................................67
Table 23: Awareness of a Culture of Peace Prior to UPEACE..........................68
Table 24: Knowledge, Values and Skills for Cultivating Peace Acquired at
UPEACE............................................................................................................69
Table 25: Culture of Peace at UPEACE............................................................69
Table 26: Summary of Participants’ Recommendations...................................71
Table 27: Summary of UPEACE Culture of Peace Strengths and Weaknesses74
1. Introduction
One of the greatest challenges humanity faces today is to create a
culture of peace, a world free from violence, poverty, injustice, inequality, and
fear. A world free from conflict is not necessarily possible nor desirable, as
conflict itself is not inherently negative, and can lead to positive change and
transformation; rather, we must find peaceful ways of handling conflict.
However, creating a peaceful world is more than simply finding peaceful
solutions to conflict, or in other words, achieving negative peace. It also
requires cultivating positive peace, which encompasses the elimination of
structural violence and the promotion of principles such as equality, justice,
and understanding. A culture of peace encompasses both negative and
positive peace, and is a process of dismantling the current culture of war and
promoting human rights, multiculturalism, solidarity, respect, and
environmental stewardship from local to global levels.
A culture of peace is not an endpoint, but rather a process and a vision;
it is not static, but rather dynamic, always changing based on how a
community changes (Adams, 2009). According to Adams (1995), "a culture of
peace consists of values, attitudes, behaviors and ways of life based on
nonviolence, respect for human rights, intercultural understanding, tolerance
and solidarity, sharing and free flow of information and the full participation
of women" (16). This process does not imply the absence of conflict. Diverse
communities will always encounter conflict, and it is not the conflict itself that
is negative, as conflict can create tension that leads to creative solutions and
actually improve our lives; it is when we handle conflict violently that it
becomes problematic. A culture of peace is a constantly evolving process of
nonviolence, in contrast to the current culture of war in which violence and
injustice are pervasive.
Education is a key tool in both dismantling the culture of war and
cultivating a culture of peace, and this is the primary goal of peace education.
According to the United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural
Organisation (UNESCO) charter (1945), “Since war begins in the minds of
8
men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be
constructed.” Through education, we can learn the knowledge, skills, and
values necessary for creating a culture of peace.
The principle that education is crucial to creating global peace is the
foundation of the United Nations-mandated University for Peace (UPEACE),
an institution of higher learning devoted to master’s degree programs in
peace-related specializations. The present research explores the culture of
peace in this unique environment.
2. History of a culture of peace
2.1 Culture of peace as it evolved in the United Nations
While the concept of a culture of peace has been developed over the
past two decades at the UN, the founding of the UN itself was a major step
towards building an international culture of peace. The UN's mission
statement includes the negative peace element of saving "succeeding
generations from the scourge of war," as well as human rights, justice and
social progress (United Nations, 1945). At its inception, the UN's concept of
peace was broader than merely the cessation of violent conflict.
In 1986, UNESCO convened a meeting of scientists in Seville, Spain to
discuss the question of whether violence is a natural human tendency. The
attending scientists agreed upon five principles, which are:
1. It is scientifically incorrect to say that we have inherited a
tendency to
make war from our animal ancestors.
2. It is scientifically incorrect to say that war or any other violent
behaviour is
genetically programmed into our human nature.
3. It is scientifically incorrect to say that in the course of human
evolution
there has been a selection for aggressive behaviour more than
for other kinds of behaviour.
4. It is scientifically incorrect to say that humans have a 'violent
brain'.
5. It is scientifically incorrect to say that war is caused by
'instinct' or any single motivation (Adams, et. al.,
1986).
From these principles, the scientists concluded that "the same species who
invented war is capable of inventing peace" (Adams, et. al., 1986). It followed
that that war and peace are essentially cultural, human-created phenomena,
and that humanity has the power to set our course, which led to the
development of the concept of a culture of peace
This concept was first elaborated at the International Conference on
Peace In the Minds of Men, held in Yamoussoukro in 1989. The document that
resulted from the meeting was the Yamoussoukro Declaration on Peace in the
Minds of Men, which elaborated a programme for peace. Through this
declaration, the Congress invited states, intergovernmental and
nongovernmental organizations, the scientific, educational, and cultural
communities of the world, and all individuals to "help construct a new vision
of peace by developing a peace culture based on the universal values of
respect for life, liberty, justice, solidarity, tolerance, human rights, and
equality between women and men" (International Conference on Peace In the
Minds of Men, 1989). This declaration directly referenced the Seville
Statement, and recommended that UNESCO should work towards
disseminating the Statement and developing explanatory material (ICPIMM,
1989). Furthermore, the document stated that the endorsement of the Seville
statement was the first stage in refuting the myth that organized human
violence is biologically determined (ICPIMM, 1989). Heeding this call,
UNESCO began to mainstream the culture of peace concept into the
organization's work, which included the publication of From a culture of
violence to a culture of peace (1996), and in 1997, the adoption of "Towards a
culture of peace" as the theme for its transdisciplinary program.
Subsequently, in 1998, the UN General Assembly drafted a resolution
entitled Culture of Peace (A/RES/53/13, 1998), which acknowledged
UNESCO's work towards a culture of peace, and called for the promotion of a
culture of peace based on the principles established in the Charter of the
United Nations. The General Assembly then proclaimed 2000 to be the 10
International Year for a Culture of Peace (A/RES/52/15, 1998), and 2001-2010
to be the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-violence for the
Children of the World (A/RES/53/25, 1998; henceforth referred to as "The
Decade"). To further elaborate the concept, the UN General Assembly passed
the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace
(A/RES/53/243, 1999), which created eight program areas under the culture of
peace theme: a culture of peace through education; promoting sustainable
economic and social development; respect for all human rights; promoting
equality between men and women; promoting democratic participation;
advancing understanding, tolerance, and solidarity; promoting participatory
communication and the free flow of information; and promoting international
peace and security.
As part of the International Year of a Culture of Peace, UNESCO (1999)
launched an awareness-raising campaign with Manifesto 2000, a personal
commitment by Nobel Peace Prize laureates that put the culture of peace
principles into a form that can be integrated into observance and practice in
daily life. The principles of the Manifesto 2000 are to:
“Respect the life and dignity of each human being without
discrimination or prejudice;
Practise active non-violence, rejecting violence in all its forms:
physical, sexual, psychological, economical and social, in
particular towards the most deprived and vulnerable such as
children and adolescents;
Share my time and material resources in a spirit of generosity to
put an end to exclusion, injustice and political and economic
oppression;
Defend freedom of expression and cultural diversity, giving
preference always to dialogue and listening without engaging in
fanaticism, defamation and the rejection of others;
Promote consumer behaviour that is responsible and development
practices that respect all forms of life and preserve the balance of
nature on the planet; and
Contribute to the development of my community, with the full
participation of women and respect for democratic principles, in
order to create together new forms of solidarity” (UNESCO, 1999).
The Manifesto was signed by over one percent of the world's population (75
million people) during the year (UNESCO, 1999).
The Decade initiated a concerted, unified effort among the UN bodies,
Member States, international organisations, and civil society to promote a
global culture of peace. The emphasis of the Decade, according to its initial
report, was to put children at the centre and to priority to be given to
education, and more specifically, education for peace (UN General Assembly,
A/55/377, 2000). For each year of the Decade, UN bodies, as well as some
States and civil society organizations, reported their efforts to the UN General
Assembly and indicated the actions they had been taking in the culture of
peace framework. These formal reports indicate the patterns within the
Decade, and show trends of greater involvement throughout the UN, and
greater collaboration between UN agencies.
While the UN has played a key role in promoting action for a culture of
peace, civil society movements have also been instrumental in taking actions
and implementing programs for a culture of peace. Some civil society efforts
were documented in the UN Mid-term report (A/RES/60/279, 2005), as well as
an independent civil society world report (Culture of Peace Foundation, 2005).
Certainly for all the efforts that were reflected in the report, more efforts
existed that were not accounted for in these reports.
This year, 2010, is the conclusion of the Decade, and will be concluded
with final reports by the UN and civil society, as well as a civil society
conference to be held in December in Spain. These reports and events will
show the progress that has been made in the Decade, and the areas that
require emphasis for moving forward.
2.2 Evolution of culture of peace: Analysis by Groff and Smoker
(1996)
In the UNESCO publication From a culture of war to a culture of peace
(1996), Groff and Smoker use six perspectives of a culture of peace that are
based on the evolution of the peace concept. These perspectives of the culture
12
of peace evolve as: the absence of war; the balance of forces in the
international system; for negative (no war) and positive peace (structural
violence); for feminist peace on macro and micro levels; for peace with the
environment; and for holistic inner and outer peace (1996). Their analysis of
the culture of peace concept traces how the concept of peace has evolved over
time in Western peace research, from the absence of war to the more holistic
perspectives that include dimensions of gender, the environment, and inner
peace. Groff and Smoker also propose working on culture of peace initiatives
at local and global levels as a key strategy for creating global cultures of
peace (1996).
As the concept of peace has evolved over time, so has the concept of a
culture of peace. The concept of a culture of peace varies across cultures and
across time. By simultaneously working at the individual and international
levels, and applying a holistic approach, we can create an international
culture of peace. The University for Peace operates at both levels, by
educating individuals to promote international peace.
3. The University for Peace
In efforts to strengthen efforts for international peace, the UN General
Assembly established the University for Peace in Costa Rica through a petition
by then-president of Costa Rica, Rodrigo Carazo (General Assembly, 1979).
The university's mission explicitly states that it exists to
"…provide humanity with an international institution of higher
education
for peace and with the aim of promoting among all human beings
the spirit of understanding, tolerance and peaceful coexistence, to
stimulate cooperation among peoples and to help lessen obstacles
and threats to world peace and progress, in keeping with the
noble aspirations proclaimed in the Charter of the United
Nations". (Presidential Commission for the University for Peace,
1982: 251).
During its first twenty years of existence, UPEACE went through periods
of high and low activity, but did not maintain a consistent student body. The
UPEACE Council is the governing body of the university, as established in the
UPEACE Charter (A/RES/35/55, 1980). The Council includes the Rector, two
representatives appointed by the UN Secretary-General and UNESCO
Director-General, two representatives of the host country government, the
UPEACE Chancellor, and ten representatives “of the academic community or
other persons eminent in the field of peace and security” (A/RES/35/55,
Annex, Article 6, 1980). In 2001, the UPEACE Council adopted a 5-year
revitalisation plan that included four major goals: the development and
teaching of a coherent academic programme and its dissemination through
state-of-the-art technologies; building up a critical mass of students and
faculty at UPEACE Headquarters; the extension of UPEACE activities into
major regions of the world in response to its global mandate; and the
establishment of a sound financial and management structure (University for
Peace, 2005). This revitalisation marked a new beginning for UPEACE, in
which it would expand its reach and impact towards increasing international
peace.
3.1 UPEACE and contributions to the UN Culture of Peace
Programme
Simultaneously, the Decade began, and the 2001 report highlights the
role of UPEACE in the Decade (UN General Assembly, A/56/349). Education
for peace was established as a priority of the Decade (A/55/377, 2001), and
UPEACE, as one of the UN bodies involved with education, along with
UNESCO and UNICEF, was called on to play a key role in the Decade and
efforts towards education for peace in a culture of peace. The 2001 report
outlines the university's plans during the Decade as they correspond to the
eight program areas. Through the Decade reports, UPEACE's efforts towards
a global culture of peace can be traced, and it is apparent that the university
undertook many efforts and actions that contribute to promoting an
international culture of peace (See Appendix A: Summary of UPEACE
contributions to the UN Decade Reports 2001-2005).
These reports show how UPEACE has been contributing to UN efforts
towards a culture of peace at the international level, indicating clear actions
in all culture of peace programme areas that the university has initiated.
However, they do not tell us what the culture of peace at UPEACE is like, nor
if there is a culture of peace at UPEACE at the local level. As noted by Groff
and Smoker (1996), it is important to work towards a culture of peace at all 14
levels, and hence a further exploration of how UPEACE is working towards a
local culture of peace is needed.
3.2 UPEACE: The setting
UPEACE is a place where creating a culture of peace is not only
desirable but necessary for its greater aims. UPEACE is a unique, UN-
mandated graduate-level institution which offers master’s programmes
focused on peace, and which draws students from approximately 60 different
countries and even more cultures. The university's setting, about 30
kilometers outside of San José, Costa Rica in the small farming community and
protected area of El Rodeo, provides a unique opportunity for cultivating a
culture of peace. The isolation and natural beauty of the campus contribute to
its uniqueness and tranquility, and while it is situated in the Costa Rican
context, the overall culture is very international due to the diverse population
of its student body, faculty and staff. UPEACE has a unique ability to have a
culture of peace at the local, campus level, and for community members to
develop skills in promoting a culture of peace and to return to their home
countries to implement these skills. Just as individuals can cultivate inner
peace so that they can act more peacefully, communities can cultivate peace
in order to contribute to peace in the wider world.
UPEACE has the potential to promote both a local and international culture of
peace.
Another unique aspect of the community is that its composition is always
changing. The one-year master’s programmes result in very little continuity
within the student body, with the exception of the American University
students, who overlap with two different graduating classes. Staff are also
primarily on one-year contracts, although many are renewed every year, and
some students are hired as staff upon graduation. The ever-changing
population of the community means that the culture of the community is also
frequently changing; however, this does not preclude it from developing a
distinct culture, a culture of peace or a sense of community. While there are
many sub-cultures at UPEACE, for example between programmes, or between
students, staff and faculty, there is also a unifying, overarching community
culture. This would be similar to other diverse communities, whose cultures
are also be dynamic and include subcultures, and are in constant contact with
other cultures. As Avruch (1998) notes, individuals in a population are
organized in many different groupings, and each group has the potential for
its own culture; thus no population can be described by a single culture, and
hence the need for the notion of subculture. This does not mean that we
cannot talk about the culture of a population; it means that we need to be
specific that this culture will be experienced differently and to a different
degree by individuals within that population. Thus while at UPEACE there are
many different subcultures, there are some factors that lead to a community
culture. Some institutional factors may contribute to a culture of peace, such
as policies, programmes, and practices, and through institutional memory,
may contribute to a certain level of cultural continuity. Furthermore, as the
UPEACE mission is to promote peace throughout the world, it could be
assumed that members who are drawn to the community are seeking to
cultivate global peace. UPEACE is a multicultural community whose members
are seeking professional development in order to promote international peace.
Another remarkable factor about UPEACE is that it is at a very
interesting stage of its development as it marks its thirtieth anniversary.
Although it has existed for 30 years, it is only since 2001 that it has been
granting master’s degrees on a regular basis to a significantly sized student
body. Since 2000, the university has been growing at a very rapid rate, both in
the student population and in the programs offered. From 2003 to 2009, the
student enrollment increased from 22 to 164 students, and over the course of
the decade, the number of programmes offered increased from two to ten
(University for Peace, 2008). At this stage in its growth, it would be an ideal
point in time for the university to develop self-awareness, to better understand
its present situation, so that it can move forward to a clear vision of the
future. As UPEACE alumnus Rizzi Carlson (2009) notes, it is “a most
opportune moment for...the formal establishment of a culture of peace on
campus, as well as the transformational shift that will add even more meaning
to UPEACE’s 30th birthday.”
A culture of peace at UPEACE is desirable in and of itself, and because
the students, staff and faculty have the opportunity to create at UPEACE what
they would like to see in the outside world. UPEACE, as a learning lab, can be
a center where we learn to create a culture of peace, and are better equipped
to foster one when we leave to our respective regions. Not only is this 16
desirable, it is critical for UPEACE to embody the culture of peace that it
seeks its learners to build in the outside world.
The year 2010 signifies two important events for a culture of peace: the
final year of the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence
for the Children of the World and the 30th anniversary of the founding of the
UN-mandated University for Peace. It is a timely opportunity to study the
culture of peace at UPEACE.
4. Statement of the Research Topic
4.1 Purpose
The purpose of this research is to explore the culture of peace at the
University for Peace, and to contribute to the larger field of community-level
and institutional-level culture of peace analysis. In investigating the culture of
peace at UPEACE, the strengths and weaknesses of the current culture of
peace at UPEACE can be determined, and recommendations can be made for
interventions based on a culture of peace analysis in order to strengthen the
culture of peace. With respect to the strengths that are found, they can be
further supported and also shared with other communities so that their
culture of peace may become stronger as well. Weaknesses that are found can
also be addressed and areas which are weaker can be improved upon. This
research will also contribute to the field of local culture of peace assessment,
as this is a new field. The audiences that will profit are the UPEACE
community, as well as any community or institution that is seeking to assess
its progress towards cultivating a culture of peace.
4.2 Statement of the Problem
The problem that this research is addressing is that while a culture of
peace may exist at the University for Peace, we do not know to what extent it
exists because it has not yet been studied. In order to progress towards a
culture of peace, we need to know the current status of the culture of peace to
move forward in a holistic, coherent, intentional way.
4.3 Research questions
To accomplish the purposes of this research, I seek to answer the following
central questions:
• Is there a culture of peace at UPEACE?
• What are students' experiences of a culture of peace at UPEACE?
• What policies, practices and behaviors contribute to cultivating a
culture of peace at UPEACE?
• What policies, practices and behaviors are detrimental to the culture
of peace at UPEACE?
• How can we assess or measure the culture of peace at UPEACE?
5. Research Methodologies and Assumptions
The research methods used to answer these questions are summarized
as follows:
1. Culture of Peace Framework and Indicator working group
2. Questionnaire (qualitative and quantitative data)
3. Presentation/Feedback session
To answer these questions, first I engaged in a literature review, and
compiled a conceptual framework for a culture of peace to begin my study. I
then held a working group in the UPEACE community on the culture of peace
framework and indicators. After this, I designed a comprehensive qualitative
and quantitative survey to gauge students' experiences of a culture of peace
at UPEACE. Then I conducted a presentation/feedback session with the
members of the community to present the preliminary results and to receive
feedback from the community as to what these results mean and the process
as a whole. Simultaneously, I analysed relevant UPEACE documents and
policies, such as the Student Bill of Rights and the Non-Discrimination Policy.
5.1 The Researcher’s Role
As I am a member of the UPEACE community, and thus know personally
most participants, and my role as a community member could compromise my
objectivity. However, I address this by making clear my conscious partiality
from the outset, which Creswell (2009) says is a technique to clarify the bias
of the researcher, and which creates a more open and honest narrative. I also
feel that my role as a UPEACE student will increase my effectiveness as a 18
researcher because I am familiar with the community and its culture. My role
as community member/researcher is also consistent with Adams' (2009)
recommendations for culture of peace assessment, that the assessment should
come from within the community and be conducted by community members
rather than outsiders.
5.2 Worldviews
The worldviews that are informing my research are a combination of
constructivism, pragmatism, and participatory action. Pragmatism arises out
of actions, situations and consequences rather than conditions, and is problem
focused, thus using all available tools to analyze the problem (Creswell, 2009).
The pragmatic worldview is conducive to the mixed methods approach that I
will be using. The participatory action world view is in line with the nature of
this research, as I tried to involve community members in each step to explore
the culture of peace at UPEACE. The participatory action world view is also
compatible with culture of peace assessment principles (Adams, 2009; see
Literature Review).
5.3 Data collection
In order to explore the culture of peace at UPEACE, I used a mixed
methods approach, applying both quantitative and qualitative data collection
and analysis. The participants in this study are current UPEACE community
members, with a primary focus on students through the questionnaire, and
inclusion of staff and faculty in the working group and feedback session.
I began with a two-hour working group to look at the culture of peace
framework and collectively develop indicators for the UPEACE environment.
Participation of community members in the development of indicators ensures
that the culture of peace assessment reflects the campus community. The
indicators were then used to develop the questionnaire questions.
Following the indicator working group, I developed a questionnaire to
assess students’ experiences of a culture of peace. Through the questionnaire
I accumulated quantitative data, using a Likert scale (for example, strongly
agree/strongly disagree statements), several yes/no questions, as well as
qualitative data, through open-ended comment boxes at the end of each
section.
Following the questionnaire collection, I presented the preliminary
results at a gathering of students, staff, and faculty (called a "brown bag" in
UPEACE parlance; see Chapter 10).
5.4 Sampling
For the working group, I used convenience sampling, which was most
appropriate here, as participants contributed up several hours of their time. I
compensated participants by providing coffee, tea, snacks so as to encourage
participation. For the questionnaire I used voluntary response sampling, as I
sent the survey to the entire student body, and participants had the choice to
participate. For the presentation and feedback session, I again used
convenience sampling, based on community members who were available,
able and willing to attend the session.
5.5 Data analysis
I used Survey Monkey to analyze the quantitative data, which allowed
me to get an overall picture of how community members view the culture of
peace at UPEACE. For the qualitative data, which will provide greater detail
about the culture of peace at UPEACE, I coded the data by clustering by
themes in my analysis.
5.6 Assumptions, Ethical Issues and Constraints
A key assumption to this project is that cultivating a culture of peace is
desirable to the UPEACE community. This is based on the idea that all
students, staff, and faculty have chosen to work and/or study at this institution
which bears "peace" in its name, which has a mandate to support world peace,
and which is affiliated with the United Nations.
Another key assumption is that there is some degree of continuity with
the community composition over time. While the student body changes year to
year, and certainly has a different culture every year, I am assuming that
there are some characteristics that will be similar from one population to the
next. For example, the student body is always highly diverse, coming from an
ever-increasing number of countries and cultures as the student body grows.
For these reasons, I assume that while the student body changes overall,
students are consistently culturally diverse and have an interest in peace.20
I assumed that respondents were familiar with the concepts in the
questionnaire, and it was up to the respondents to interpret the terms, and
thus I did not provide definitions of terms used in the questionnaire. I thought
it was important for respondents to identify with the terms as they understood
them. However, this may affect the results, as what one term (for example,
"discrimination") means to one person might mean something else to another,
particularly of a different cultural-linguistic background. However, as all
participants are master’s degree candidates in the field of peace and conflict
studies, I assumed that they were familiar with these terms.
In order to ensure ethical treatment of all participants, I clearly
communicated the goals and objectives of the research in the working group,
questionnaire, and presentation. I asked participants for their consent, and
guarantee anonymity and confidentiality. Participants had the opportunity to
withdraw at any time. I also gained approval to conduct this research from
the Vice-Rector.
A constraint of this survey was its focus on the student population.
While the students make up the largest percentage of the UPEACE
community, they are the component of the community which changes the
most. The staff and faculty are the more consistent, stable part of the
population. Due to time limitations, as well to the limitation of length of this
research project, I chose to focus on students, although staff and faculty
contributed to the working group and feedback session. Ideally, in future
culture of peace assessment projects, all community members should be
included. This will be explored in greater detail in the recommendations
section (Chapter 12).
6. Literature Review
In order to study the culture of peace at the University for Peace
(UPEACE), I have identified four main areas for theoretical research:
frameworks for a culture of peace, culture of peace indicators and
assessment, UPEACE-related documents, and relevant independent research
projects written on UPEACE by alumni relating to a culture of peace.
6.1 Culture of Peace Conceptual Frameworks
A number of different frameworks have been developed to conceptualize a
culture of peace. For this research, I have identified three key models for
investigation: UNESCO (1999), the flower model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002), and
the Integral Model of Peace Education (2004).
While these frameworks provide useful guidelines for a culture of peace,
it is important to note that there is not a singular concept of culture of peace.
Groff and Smoker (1996) discuss the existence of different definitions for
"culture" and "peace", noting that definitions can be narrow or broad for both
terms. These terms are inherently ambiguous and can be interpreted in many
different ways, ranging from a narrow definition focusing on the arts, to
broader definitions that include all socially learned behavior, and hidden
elements such as values and underlying assumptions (Groff and Smoker,
1996).
As such, the concept of a “culture of peace” may have different
meanings across cultures. Brenes (2004) notes that the values and principles
of a culture of peace "can be expressed in diverse ways in different cultures"
(79). According to Wessells (1994), "it would be culturally insensitive to
prescribe an exact meaning of 'culture of peace'" (6). As there is not a singular
definition for culture, nor a single definition of peace, there is not a singular
concept for a culture of peace, which should have flexibility for cultural
interpretation.
These issues are particularly relevant with respect to the UPEACE
community, which has a very high level of cultural diversity, and requires the
concept of "culture of peace" at UPEACE to have room for cultural plurality.
For this reason, the UPEACE community was consulted before deciding upon
the culture of peace framework and indicators used in this study, which are
elaborated in Chapter 7.
The following models provide frameworks for conceptualizing a culture
of peace.
6.1.1 UNESCO Framework
According to the UN Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture
of Peace, a culture of peace is:
"a set of values, attitudes, traditions, and modes of behaviour and
ways of life based on:22
a) Respect for life, ending of violence and promotion and practice
of non-violence through education, dialogue and cooperation;
b) Full respect for the principles of sovereignty, territorial
integrity and political independence of States and non-intervention
in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of
any State, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations
and international law;
c) Full respect for and promotion of all human rights and
fundamental freedoms;
d) Commitment to peaceful settlement of conflicts;
e) Efforts to meet the developmental and environmental needs of
present and future generations;
f) Respect for and promotion of the right to development;
g) Respect for and promotion of equal rights and opportunities for
women and men;
h) Respect for and promotion of the right of everyone to freedom
of expression, opinion and information;
i) Adherence to the principles of freedom, justice, democracy,
tolerance, solidarity, cooperation, pluralism, cultural diversity,
dialogue, and understanding at all levels of society and among
nations;
and fostered by an enabling national and international
environment conducive to peace" (A/RES/53/243, Art. 1, 1999).
From this definition, the UN General Assembly elaborated the
programme of action, which includes the eight areas of education, sustainable
social and economic development, human rights, gender equality, democratic
participation, participatory communication and the free flow of information,
advancing understanding, tolerance and solidarity, and international peace
and security (A/RES/53/243, 1999). As UNESCO was named the lead agency
for promoting the culture of peace, this framework is henceforth referred to
as the UNESCO model throughout this paper.
The UNESCO model is perhaps the most widely-known framework for a
culture of peace, as it is disseminated by the UN. The framework is
comprehensive in its breadth, international in its scope. An important addition
to this model is the area of participatory communication and the free flow of
information, which is not explicitly found in the other models.
6.1.2 Flower model
Figure 1: Flower Model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002)
The holistic flower-shaped culture of peace model developed by Toh and
Cawagas (2002) has "educating for a culture of peace" at the center, and six
petals for: 1) dismantling the culture of war; 2) promoting human rights and
responsibilities; 3) living with justice and compassion; 4) building cultural
respect, reconciliation and solidarity; 5) living in harmony with the earth, and
6) cultivating inner peace.
This model offers several notable contributions. First is the area of
dismantling a culture of war, which most closely corresponds to promoting
international peace and security in the UNESCO model. Ideally, in a culture of
peace, international security would be equated with total disarmament. The
flower model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002) goes farther by explaining that real
international peace and security will require dismantling the culture of war,
ranging from disarmament at an international level, to nonviolent conflict
resolution at micro levels, such as in communities and schools, as well as
promoting attitudes and values of non-violence. This petal includes
disarmament education.
Secondly, the idea of "living in harmony with the earth" correlates to
"sustainable social and economic development," but goes deeper by 24
highlighting the harmonious relationship with the environment. The word
"development" has very different connotations and definitions, and the
growth-centered approach to development is arguably the source of much
environmental degradation. While these two themes imply similar ideas, the
flower model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002) emphasizes the need to live in a way
that is not only sustainable, but in union with the natural world.
Finally, the inclusion of inner peace as a component to a culture of
peace is an important addition of this model. The petal of inner peace is not in
the UNESCO framework, and is a notable omission. The UNESCO framework
touches on interpersonal relations, between people, but not intrapersonal
relations, within one’s self.
6.1.3 Integral Model of Peace Education
Figure 2: Integral Model of Peace Education (Brenes, 2004: 83)
Another model for a culture of peace is the Integral Model of Peace
Education (IMPE; henceforth referred to as “the Integral model”), which was
developed by the University for Peace and Central American governments
during the first phase of the Culture of Peace and Democracy Program, from
1994 to 1996 (Brenes, 2004). The Integral Model is a mandala-shaped, person-
centered framework, which incorporates the contexts of peace with oneself,
with others, and with Nature, at ethical, mental, emotional and action levels
(Brenes, 2004). This model "considers 'peace' as a state of integrity, security,
balance and harmony" (Brenes, 2004: 83), and essentially considers the
individual as the starting point for peace. According to this model, an
individual lives within three relational contexts: to the self, to others, and to
nature, and violence or peace can be expressed in each one.
This model also emphasizes the importance of personal or inner peace,
with respect to the body, heart and mind, and also includes more public
spheres, and explicitly includes political and social participation, democratic
participation, and a culture of democracy. Its approach to ecological peace is
similar to the flower model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002), although more explicit in
its definition, but explaining that peace with nature encompasses ecological
consciousness, biodiversity, and natural balance. It is interesting that this
model was actually developed at the University for Peace, indicating that
these themes are important to the university, and that the university is
contributing to a culture of peace by facilitating the development of such
theoretical models. Another interesting component of this model is that it
explicitly includes health, which is unique to this model compared to the other
models.
The Integral model includes principles from the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (1948) and the Earth Charter (1997), which takes an ecological
sustainability-focused approach to a culture of peace. According to the Earth
Charter preamble (1997), at this critical moment in Earth's history, "we must
join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for
nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace." The
Earth Charter contains sixteen principles, guided by the following themes:
respect and care for the community of life, ecological integrity, social and
economic justice, and democracy, nonviolence and peace. Each of the sixteen
themes is elaborated with more specific actions for how the principle
translates into action. In the Earth Charter, the principle of universal
26
responsibility goes beyond our relationship one another to include future
generations and the biosphere (Brenes, 2004).
In Chapter 7, I will discuss how these conceptual frameworks informed
the development of the conceptual framework used for this study.
6.2 Culture of Peace Indicators and Assessment
While the area of culture of peace indicator research is quite new, a
number of indicator and assessment tools have been developed to assess a
culture of peace at local, national, and global levels.
6.2.1 David Adams
David Adams, one of the scientists who developed the Seville Statement
(Adams, et. al, 1986), director of the UNESCO Culture of Peace program from
1992, and coordinator of the 2005 civil society World Report on a Culture of
Peace (Culture of Peace Foundation, 2005), writes extensively on assessing a
culture of peace in his book World Peace through the Town Hall (2009). This
book was highly influential in the development of this research project.
Adams writes that
"it is essential to measure progress toward a culture of peace at
the local level. But it should not be reduced to a simple formula, or
calling in experts to do the job. Instead, it needs to be a process of
regular assessment to know if the initiatives we take are
successful or not, what works and what doesn't work, and whether
we are making progress" (2009: 93).
In measuring progress at the local level, the assessment, he elaborates, should
be "participatory and educational," involving the people who are concerned
with the various areas of a culture of peace (2009: 93). Adams states that "this
reflects the fundamental nature of culture itself which is a process that
involves the entire society and in which everyone is constantly learning and
teaching at the same time" (2009: 93). Thus the process of assessing a culture
of peace should be a learning experience for all participants.
Furthermore, the assessment of progress towards a culture of peace
should not be used to "'prove' that one entity...is better than another" (Adams,
2009: 94), but rather should be used to compare the entity to itself year after
year, to see if progress is being made or not.
Beyond the measuring of progress, another useful outcome of will be of
new ideas that emerge for initiatives to address the weaknesses (Adams,
2009: 94). In the case of the present research, numerous ideas came out in
the student survey, which will be elaborated in Chapter 9.
Adams also advocates for basing the assessment on the UNESCO
programme areas. He asserts that "this is the only way to attain universally
valid results in a subject which otherwise would be politicised and
controversial" (2009: 95).
As the process is educational, “citizens involved in measuring a culture
of peace will come to learn what the culture of peace is all about" (Adams,
2009: 98). Many members of the UPEACE community have heard of the
concept of a culture of peace prior to enrollment (to be elaborated Chapter 9),
and a culture of peace is discusses briefly in the foundation course, which is
mandatory for all masters students, and for which Toh (2007) is required
reading. While members have some initial knowledge and familiarity with the
concept, UPEACE provides great opportunity to learn more from one another
about a culture of peace.
Adams (2009) also notes that while holistic culture of peace assessment
is a new area, each of the programme areas have been studied through
indicators. For example, another institution may develop indicators on
sustainability or human rights that could be modified for the UPEACE context,
or could serve as a guide.
It is also important, in looking at the different programme areas, to not
lose sight that the programme areas are interrelated parts of the broader
culture of peace. Adams writes that "in distinguishing the various programme
areas, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that they are all interrelated
to a general overall culture of peace (2009: 109). While exploring the culture
of peace, the programme areas are useful for analysis and the development of
projects and interventions; however it is important to retain an awareness that
they are interrelated parts of a holistic conception of a culture of peace.
6.2.2 Additional culture of peace indicators and assessment
tools
At the local, institutional level, Cawagas and Toh (1987) developed a
checklist to assess the culture of peace at schools in the Philippines. While the 28
context for this research – UPEACE - is very different from the setting for their
questionnaire - primary and secondary schools in the Philippines - this
checklist helped to inform the structure of my questionnaire. Their
questionnaire uses the flower model as a conceptual framework, and
addresses knowledge, values, and practices, within the curriculum,
administrators, teachers, students and community. Candice Carter (2005) has
developed peace education standards for students, teachers, teacher
educators and administrators, grouped by knowledge, skills, and disposition.
While these standards are education-specific, can be used to explore the
education practices of the university.
Joseph de Rivera (2004) developed a template for assessing a culture of
peace at a national level, and has used this template to assess the culture of
peace the United States. De Rivera proposes using “objective” national
indicators such as GDP and crime rates, in addition to questionnaires that
measure attitudes, norms, and “emotional climate” to examine a national
culture of peace (2005: 2). To address the objectivity of national indicators
such as GDP, infant mortality, and crime, which I question, is beyond the
scope of this research. While these particular statistics are not relevant to the
local, institutional level, the areas that he looks at can be used as a guide for
areas that can be explored at UPEACE. The current research thus focused on
his second recommendation, the survey of attitudes, norms, and emotional
climate of the community in regards to a culture of peace, which I explored
through the student questionnaire.
Robyn Webster (2007, 2008), UPEACE alumnus and Director of
Canadian Centres for Teaching Peace has developed a culture of peace
assessment tool/report card based on the principles of the UNESCO Culture of
Peace Program (see Appendix 2). This assessment tool served as a guide for
the working group on indicators (to be explored in Chapter 7). For her
master’s thesis at UPEACE (2007), Stewart conducted a thorough analysis of
correlates of peace cultures.
6.3 UPEACE-related documents
Also relevant to this study are UPEACE documents, such as the founding
documents of the university (Presidential Commission for the University for
Peace, 1981) and including UN documents that relate to the university and to
a culture of peace. The UPEACE Charter includes its mission statement, as
declared in Article 2 under "Aims and Purposes," which is clearly in line with
contributing to a global culture of peace through higher education (UN
General Assembly, 1980). Furthermore, in a provisional report by Reardon &
Diallo (1980), the authors asserted, "in that the human mentality is primarily
conditioned by culture, it is suggested that University for Peace add to its
integrity principles the concept of culture." These documents help to verify
that a culture of peace is important to the University for Peace and provide
support for the culture of the university to be examined in greater detail. The
aforementioned UN documents relating to the Decade (see Chapters 2 & 3)
further strengthen the importance of a culture of peace to UPEACE, its
mission, and the greater mandate of the United Nations, but do not reflect the
culture of peace at UPEACE. Another key document is the Student Handbook,
which includes policies such as the Student Bill of Rights and the Non-
Discrimination Policy (UPEACE, 2009).
6.4 UPEACE independent research projects
In addition to Webster (2007), other UPEACE students have
incorporated the theme of culture of peace at into their independent research
projects, several of whom have examined the UPEACE context. Rizzi Carlson
(2009) carried out focus-group research on creating a peacebuilding centre on
campus, which would serve as an institutional centre for the culture of
peace. His research (2009) indicates that a centre for a culture of peace is
desired by the community. By examining the culture of peace at UPEACE, we
can better determine what aspects of the culture of peace need greater
support, perhaps through such a center or other institutional entities.
Wichman (2009) conducted a survey on inner peacefulness with
students, faculty and alumni, and found that 68% of participants perceive
individual peacefulness as important to the creation of cultures of peace.
Vaughn Chaverri (2007) explored health initiatives toward a culture of peace
at UPEACE, and made health-specific recommendations to increase a culture
of peace at UPEACE.
This research indicates the importance and desire of the UPEACE
community to have a culture of peace on campus. As these research efforts
reflect the UPEACE community from 2006-2009, they indicate a continued 30
interest within the community on a culture of peace, not only by the
researchers but by the participants, all of whom are community members.
While the community itself changes membership to a certain degree each
year, the interest in developing a campus culture of peace remains
continuous.
Through this literature review, I found that little research has been done
in developing indicators for a culture of peace, and that the culture of peace at
UPEACE has not been measured or studied in detail. Through the present
research, I intend to contribute to the greater field by further developing
indicators for a culture of peace at a community or institutional level, and to
contribute to the UPEACE community by measuring the culture of peace so
that we can strengthen it.
7. Culture of Peace Conceptual Framework for this Study
With respect to the culture of peace framework for this study, I have
adapted and expanded the UNESCO model. I chose this model to adapt
because it is the most universally recognized, and has been used as a model
for other culture of peace assessments (Webster, 2008; Adams, 2009). Adams
(2009) also emphasised the relevance of the UNESCO model in attaining
universal valid results. However, I will also include inner peace practices in
my study, as I and others (Toh & Cawagas, 2002; Brenes, 2004) feel that this
is extremely important in the cultivation of a culture of peace, and is an
omission of the UNESCO model. Toh notes that “there is a growing consensus
that the inner dimensions and sources of peaceful values and practices should
not be ignored” (2007: 12). With respect to the sustainable development
program area, I will focus on the environmental practices and policies of the
university, incorporating the ecological emphasis of the flower (Toh &
Cawagas, 2002), and Integral (Brenes, 2004) models.
Another area of the UNESCO framework requiring adaptation is
international peace and security. For most communities and institutions, the
area of international peace and security might not apply directly. However, to
UPEACE, it does, as the mission of UPEACE aims to provide "humanity" with
an institution of higher education and to "lessen obstacles and threats to
world peace and progress" (UN General Assembly, A/RES/35/55, 1980). Thus
rather than omit this category in its entirety, I chose to keep it and add an
additional element of "local peace and security," focusing on campus, but
including El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon, where most community members live.
Thus while the UNESCO framework is the primary source used to inform my
study, ultimately the framework is a unique combination of the UNESCO
framework and others to provide a holistic approach to analysis.
For this study, a culture of peace will be assessed in the following areas:
1. Education
2. Environmental sustainability
3. Human rights
4. Democratic participation
5. Equality between men and women
6. Understanding, tolerance and solidarity
7. Participatory communication and the free flow of information and
knowledge
8. International peace and security
9. Local peace and security (i.e. campus, El Rodeo, Ciudad Colon)
10. Inner peace
Below I will examine each of these areas in more detail.
7.1 Education
According to the UNESCO framework, a culture of peace through
education entails “revising the educational curricula to promote qualitative
values, attitudes and behaviours of a culture of peace, including peaceful
conflict-resolution, dialogue, consensus-building and active non-violence”
(UNESCO, 2010). This educational approach should also encompass the other
seven programme areas. Although UNESCO does not refer to this as “peace
education,” Adams (2009), who has been a key figure in the development of
the UN Culture of Peace initiatives, uses “peace education” to describe the
education section in his chapter on Assessing Progress Towards a Culture of
Peace at the Local Level (106).
The field of peace education has been deeply influenced by the work of
Brazilian pedagogue and educator Paolo Freire. According to Freire (1970),
key elements of the educational process are reforming the student-teacher
relationship to be horizontal and equal; using dialogue as a pedagogical tool;
valuing the knowledge and experience that students bring to the classroom; 32
and praxis, or continuous engagement with theory and practice. These
elements are elements are crucial to peace education, and as such, are crucial
to education for a culture of peace.
In referring to the UNESCO report to the UN Secretary General in 2000,
Adams writes:
It also proposes that the culture of peace should be modeled in the
policies and practices of the classroom, the school, and other
learning environments, providing opportunities for all members of
the school community to participate in democratic decision
making and governance processes (2009: 107).
Thus, when learning about peace, it is important for the policies and
classroom practices of UPEACE to reflect the values of a culture of peace.
According to Cawagas (2007), educating for a culture of peace requires
four crucial pedagogical principles: holism, or viewing multiple dimensions of
conflict and violence with a holistic vision; values formation, or explicitly
teaching for preferred values such as compassion, justice, equality and
nonviolence; dialogue, which entails a more horizontal teacher-learner
relationship as both educate and learn from one another; and critical
empowerment, through which learners develop critical consciousness and
seek to take transformative action. Cawagas emphasizes values development
for a culture of peace, and dialogue as a pedagogical tool.
Notably, the UN Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace
(A/RES/53/243, 1999) directly refers to the University for Peace in the
education section, in which it calls to:
Expand initiatives to promote a culture of peace undertaken by
institutions of higher education in various parts of the world,
including the United Nations University, the University for Peace,
and the project for twinning universities and the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Chairs
Programme (6).
This illustrates UPEACE’s direct call from the UN to expand its efforts
towards a culture of peace through education.
While education itself is a programme area, education for a culture of
peace will include educating for all other programme areas.
7.2 Environmental sustainability
According to UNESCO (2010), sustainable economic and social
development includes “reducing economic and social inequalities, by
eradicating poverty and by assuring sustainable food security, social justice,
durable solutions to debt problems, empowerment of women, special
measures for groups with special needs, environmental sustainability...”
However, issues of social inequality, poverty, social justice, and special
measures for groups with special needs can be incorporated into the human
rights section, and empowerment of women in the equality, section. Therefore
I chose to focus this section explicitly on environmental sustainability, as I felt
other aspects of social and economic development were captured by other
areas. Furthermore, the flower model (Toh & Cawagas, 2002) and Integral
Model of Peace Education (Brenes, 2004) also focus more explicitly on
environmental sustainability.
Environmental sustainability is extremely important to a culture of
peace, and is integrally linked to all other aspects of a culture of peace. Toh
(2006) analyzes how education for sustainability relates to education for a
culture of peace by examining the role of sustainability in each of the areas of
the flower model for conceptualizing a culture of peace (Toh & Cawagas,
2002). The current pace of environmental degradation is related to the culture
of war, as militarism and overconsumption lead to resource depletion and
inequitable distribution, and resulting in environmental destruction. The
relationships between environmental degradation and physical and structural
violence are complex and intertwined, and Wenden (2004) notes the links
between social and ecological peace. Thus environmental sustainability is a
key component of promoting a culture of peace.
7.3 Human Rights
According to UNESCO (2010), “human rights and a culture of peace are
complementary: whenever war and violence dominate, there is no possibility
to ensure human rights; at the same time, without human rights, in all their
dimensions, there can be no culture of peace.” The link between human rights
and a culture of peace is so imbedded that they cannot be separated one from
the other. All three culture of peace frameworks discussed above include a
human rights component. 34
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN General Assembly,
1948) is the most fundamental international human rights document, which
outlines basic rights of all human beings. The document states that the
“recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of
all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and
peace in the world” (UN General Assembly, 1948). Cawagas & Toh (2004)
discuss five major types of human rights: civil, political, economic, social and
cultural.
According to Brenes, fraternity is a key value necessary for human
rights, which entails “a recognition of the need to balance the universal
protection of each person, with each person’s consciousness of his/her
universal responsibility towards others, towards other living beings, and
towards the natural systems of the Earth” (2004: 81). Human rights
necessitate responsibility, and it is through a balance of exercising rights and
responsibilities that human rights are promoted.
Human rights, as universally valid principles to which all humans are
entitled, are inextricably part of a culture of peace.
7.4 Democratic participation
The UNESCO model and Integral Model both explicitly incorporate
democratic participation as being a component of a culture of peace. UNESCO
states that democratic principles, practices, and participation in all sectors of
society are “indispensable foundations for the achievement and maintenance
of peace and security” (2010). According to Brenes (2004: 85), “culture of
democracy refers to the critical and responsible participation of all citizens in
promoting the common good and security of all humans and the community of
nature.” Brenes goes on to say that as we do not live in isolation, “we need to
be able to participate critically and autonomously in the making of decisions
at all…levels” (2004: 85). Democratic participation is important for a culture
of peace so that all participants can be empowered to contribute to this
culture.
7.5 Equality between men and women
The UN General Assembly explained the importance of this programme
area to a culture of peace as follows:
“As recognized by the Fourth World Conference on Women
(Beijing 1995), there is an inextricable linkage of peace with
equality between women and men. Only this linkage of equality,
development and peace can replace the historical inequality
between men and women that has always characterized the
culture of war and violence” (A/53/370, 1998).
As inequality between men and women is a major component of the culture of
war, equality between men and women is a crucial part of a culture of peace.
Synott (2004: 27) writes that “the situation of women around the world
remains one of the most important challenges to the development of an
egalitarian society where relationships are based upon concepts of universal
human rights.” Synott also notes that domestic violence is represents the most
common form of violence in the world (2004). In order to promote a culture of
peace, promoting equality between men and women is absolutely necessary.
7.6. Understanding, tolerance and solidarity
“Advancing understanding, tolerance, and solidarity” is a program area
from the UNESCO framework, and these concepts are implicitly and explicitly
included in the Integral (Brenes, 2004) and flower (Toh & Cawagas, 2002)
models. UNESCO states that “to abolish war and violent conflicts we need to
transcend and overcome enemy images with understanding, tolerance and
solidarity among all peoples and cultures. Learning from our differences,
through dialogue and the exchange of information, is an enriching process”
(UNESCO, 2010).
Numerous United Nations documents note the importance of
understanding. The Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (UNESCO,
2001) asserts that “respect for the diversity of cultures, tolerance, dialogue
and cooperation, in a climate of mutual trust and understanding are best
guarantees of international peace and security.” Understanding is critical for
preventing intercultural conflict, and for promoting local and global cultures
of peace.
According to the UNESCO’s Declaration on Principles of Tolerance
(1995), tolerance is defined as
36
“…respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our
world's cultures, our forms of expression and ways of being human. It is
fostered by knowledge, openness, communication, and freedom of
thought, conscience and belief. Tolerance is harmony in difference. It is
not only a moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement.
Tolerance, the virtue that makes peace possible, contributes to the
replacement of the culture of war by a culture of peace.”
This document goes on to include solidarity as an integral part of
education for tolerance. UNESCO itself was founded on the principle of
solidarity, and its constitution states that “peace must therefore be founded, if
it is not to fail, upon the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind”
(UNESCO, 1945). Toh (2007) writes that, “in situations of unequal power
relations and
injustices, cultural groups that are already economically and politically
advantaged have a social
responsibility to be in solidarity with marginalized groups and communities”
(10). Here the emphasis is not solidarity within a group, but rather with other
groups, and specifically groups that are disadvantaged. The principles of
understanding, tolerance and solidarity are deeply intertwined and are
necessary components of a culture of peace.
7.7. Participatory communication and the free flow of information
and knowledge
Communication is crucial for peace, as miscommunication is so often a
source of conflict. When knowledge and information can flow freely,
communication is clearer, and misunderstanding is less likely to happen.
According to UNESCO, “freedom of information and sharing of knowledge and
information are indispensible for a culture of peace” (UNESCO, 2010).
Furthermore the free flow of information is directly linked to democratic
participation, as participants require knowledge and information in order to
make informed decisions, and also facilitates understanding.
7.8. International peace and security
International peace and security is the macro-level of a culture of peace.
In order to create long-lasting, global peace, it is necessary to address
international peace and security issues. In a culture of peace, security would
be achieved through dialogue and international understanding, rather than
through armed force. As Renner (2005) notes, “weapons do not necessarily
provide security” (5). Renner outlines a new security policy for a more secure
world, which must be preventative in nature, cross-cutting, integrative and
understanding of the root causes of conflicts (2005). It is important to note the
links between militarized security and structural injustices which occur when
national resources are diverted from meeting basic human needs to military
spending. As the global military complex is related to human rights violations,
gender inequalities, environmental degradation, disarmament is a critical
component of a culture of peace.
7.9. Local peace and security
This component to a culture of peace is similar to 7.8, but examines
security issues in a local context. Adams (2009) notes that international peace
and security does not generally apply to local contexts, and can be applied as
two separate programme areas: security (public safety) and solidarity with
other communities on an international level. In the UPEACE context, both
international and local peace are relevant to a culture of peace. For the
purposes of this research, local security will include campus security, local
security (including El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon), and conflict resolution on
campus.
7.10. Inner peace
Inner peace is the micro-level component of the culture of peace. While
not addressed in the UNESCO framework, this is a component of both the
flower (Toh & Cawagas, 2002) and Integral (Brenes, 2004) models. Nhat Hanh
(2003) calls on individuals to cultivate nonviolence by practicing mindfulness
in our daily lives so that we can transform not only ourselves, but our nations
and the world, thus illustrating the link between inner peace and international
peace. Toh (2007) explains that cultivating inner peace is important to
creating a culture of peace, but cautions against cultivating inner peace in a
self-centered way, without examining and continuing to work towards justice
for all. In the Integral Model (Brenes, 2003), there are three kinds of peace
with one’s self: peace with the body (bodily health); peace of heart 38
(satisfaction of psychological needs; and peace of mind (potential for self-
realization based on a consciousness of universal responsibility (84). As a
culture is made up of individuals, more peaceful individuals who are living
peaceful values and exhibiting peaceful behavior can help create more
peaceful societies. Inner peace is thus an integral component of promoting a
culture of peace.
This framework is a start for an initial exploration of the culture of peace
at UPEACE. As the concept of a culture of peace is dynamic, this framework
should be adapted over time to ensure its relevance and applicability to the
UPEACE community.
8. Working group on culture of peace framework and indicators
As mentioned previously, community members participated in the
development of the framework and indicators in order to inform the definition
of a culture of peace for this diverse community, and to make the process of
culture of peace assessment as participatory as possible. An invitation to the
working group was sent out to the community email list, and thus all
community members were invited to attend and share input. Nine community
members - one faculty, one non-academic staff, and seven students - attended.
The above framework was presented to the working group, and the culture of
peace assessment tool developed by Webster (2008) was given to participants
to help guide the discussion.
Table 1 summarizes the group’s discussion.
Table 1: Summary of Culture of Peace Indicator Working Group
What is a culture of peace?
Complex – includes many different people, personalities, cultures, values
People comfortable to be themselves
Values and behaviors
Tolerance, understanding, agreement, equality, solidarity, participation
Conflicts resolved peacefully
Respectful communication
A way of life without conflict
A process
Peace of mind
Recognizing others' identities
Respect the rights of others
Education What educational standards exist?
Is there intercultural training?
What pedagogies are used?
What programs exist at the university? Are they important? Holistic?
Is there sharing between programs?
Is gender mainstreamed in all programs?
Is there informal education modeling in classroom and structure?
Number of theories studies/learned
Are the values taught consistent with behaviours?
What are the intentions of students post-graduation?
Skills indicators: Can students ____?
Are teachers trained?
Evaluation: students being evaluated; students evaluating their own programs; external evaluation
Is the students’ knowledge valued?
40
Participatory Communication
and the Free flow of information and
knowledge
Are there consistent procedural messages?
Look at communication at different levels - personal, interpersonal, between departments
What are attitudes and behaviors towards other programs (stereotypes)?
What is the language of instruction compared to the language of students, faculty and staff?
How is participation evaluated
Is it easy to meet with faculty
What publications exist?
What mechanisms exist for feedback/evaluation?
What are the communication channels (mediums)? (e.g., Town Hall, SFS, email, conferences; formal vs. informal)
Are the communication channels effective (what is the quality of the communication channels)?
Does the intended audience receive the message?
Does the intended audience receive the message in time?
Are there communication standards? If so, do standards incorporate multiculturalism?
Are there trainings for communications skills?
Are there informal discussion groups? Are there institutionally supported discussion groups?
Is there transparency?
What role do rumors play?
How to measure miscommunications (i.e., double-booking of rooms)?
Democratic participation
Universities (in general, as institutions) are not historically democratic
What is the impact of course evaluations?
Examine SFS, council - governing structures
Are participants aware of goals, objectives? Is their duty described?
Is there a consensus on guidelines for decision making?
What is decision-making at the institutional level? classroom level?
What are the processes for selection, election, appointment of representatives of different governing structures?
Understanding, tolerance, solidarity
What skills are required for understanding?
How well do students work in groups?
Linking understanding to communications – if you are able to communicate differences, you can promote deeper understanding
What is participation like at different events/activities (i.e. this workshop)?
What student initiatives exist for helping each other?
Do community members have an awareness or understanding of others?
How to measure social skills
How do you engage those less willing to talk in this discussion?
social skills? How does UPEACE support students in dealing
with culture shock?
42
Human Rights What are community members’ experiences of inequality, discrimination?
How can we measure the domination of cultural values (i.e. hugging)?
What are the policies about human rights (look at student handbook, non-discrimination policy)?
Are human addressed in your classes?
Is there a community consensus on human rights? on behaviours?
Use Universal Declaration of Human Rights Articles as basis for indicators
What mechanisms exist that promote human rights (e.g., Human Rights Center, Office for Diversity and Equality)
What are the processes or mechanisms for solutions to human rights issues?
Use “Measuring the Human Rights Temperature of Your School” as indicators (Shiman & Rudelius-Palmer, 1999)
Gender equality Why gender equality, and not other kinds of equality (e.g. ability, linguistic, cultural)?
Is gender equality ethnocentric? Generational?
Is equality the ideal term? What about equity?
Is gender-neutral language used?
Is gender mainstreamed at UPEACE?
Is there affirmative action in the enrollment process? Scholarships?
Are there maternity/paternity benefits for staff/faculty members?
Environmental Sustainability
What policies does the cafeteria have relating to environmental sustainability?
What are the campus policies for energy, paper, recycling?
What happens to the vegetables from the UPEACE garden?
What is the sustainability of student initiatives vs. institutional?
Is the university’s funding sustainable?
What is the sustainability of peace? Need for continuous improvement, progress
There was adequate time to discuss seven of the programme areas, as
the dialogue began with a broader discussion about the meaning of a culture
of peace, which resulted in the topics of international peace and security, local
peace and security, and inner peace not being discussed in the session. While
the topics were presented to the participants, participants chose the sequence
of discussion. The discussion generated concrete indicators (such as “What
pedagogies are used?”), and also generated further questions that need to be
elaborated, and may be beyond the scope of this paper (such as “What is the
sustainability of peace?”).
One particular programme area that caused debate was the "equality
between men and women" category. Participants noted that many inequalities
exist other than gender, such as inequality experienced by those with physical
disabilities, or different linguistic groups, and questioned whether this
category should be expanded to include other types of equality. There was
also debate as to whether "equality" or "equity" was the desirable
term. Ultimately, the group did not reach a consensus, and I decided to
maintain the category to remain consistent with the UNESCO framework.
One of the key findings of the working group was the difficulty in
developing indicators. Many of the culture of peace concepts are hard to
quantify, and much discussion centred around the idea of a culture of peace
and the conceptual framework. While this discussion was enriching and an
educational experience for all involved, it could have gone on endlessly, and in
fact the entire research project could have been about developing the
framework and definition for a culture of peace at UPEACE. Ultimately, I
decided to continue with the UNESCO adapted framework, for its wider
applicability and validity.
9. Questionnaire: Findings and analysis
Following the working group, I developed a questionnaire entitled
"Culture of Peace at UPEACE" and posted it on Surveymonkey.com. All
questions are included in the current chapter. Prior to releasing the
questionnaire, I pilot tested the survey with 6 students from different regions,
who provided feedback as to the clarity, readability, and cultural sensitivity of
the survey which was incorporated into the final draft of the survey. The
UNESCO culture of peace definition, as well as the work of Toh and Cawagas 44
(1987), Carter (2005) and Webster (2008) were used to guide the development
of questions, and thus the questions primarily addressed knowledge, skills,
values, attitudes and behaviours with respect to the ten areas.
The survey consisted of 110 questions relating to the culture of peace
framework described in Chapter 7. Most of the questions, with the exception
of three, were closed-ended quantitative, used a 5-point Likert scale of
Strongly disagree/Strongly agree or Never/Always, and several
Yes/No/Undecided questions. Each section also included a comment box which
stated "Please add any additional comment about any aspect of this section."
Thus participants were welcome, though not required, to give qualitative
information and explain their answers to each section.
The survey link was sent via individual email to 209 students from the
2009-2010 academic year. I chose this method rather than send the email via
the community email list, as many students either disregard email to this list
or opt not to receive it. Later I used the community email list to send reminder
emails about the survey deadline. The survey was open for a period of 2
weeks, from March 23 to April 9, 2010. This overlapped with the UPEACE
spring break, which I hoped would result in more surveys completed, as
students would have more time to complete it than during the intensive 3-
week class periods. In addition to all students enrolled in classes at the time of
administering the survey, I included the American University Natural
Resources and Sustainable Development (AU/NRSD) students who had left in
November, the new AU/NRSD who arrived in January, as well as the Asian
Leaders Program (ALP) students who attended UPEACE from August 2009
through February 2010. In this way, I was able to reach all students who were
present during the 2009-2010 academic year, which is the focus of this
project.
I provided an additional incentive to complete the survey through a
raffle. Each student who completed the survey had the opportunity to follow a
link to enter their name into the raffle, the prize for which was dinner for two
at a popular local restaurant, Che's. Surprisingly, only 29 respondents entered
the raffle. The 29 names were placed in a hat and a neutral third party drew
the winning name. The prize was delivered at the end of May.
Of 209 students, 134 completed the survey, which is 64% of the 2009-
2010 student population. This is a significant number, and indicates the
interest in and importance of this topic to the community. Of the 134 students
who started the survey, 99 (73.9%) completed the survey in its entirety. This
is most likely due to the length of the survey. While students were told in the
initial email that the survey would take approximately 15-20 minutes to
complete, it is possible that it took longer for some, and this may have caused
incomplete surveys.
It is important to note the sheer quantity of data, both quantitative and
qualitative, that participants contributed to this survey. Due to the breadth of
the information, the analysis will include highlights, rather than analysing
each individual question. Similarly, with the qualitative information, highlights
will be discussed.
In discussing the survey, I will refer to the number of participants who
responded with a particular answer or combination of answers, followed by
the percentage. In general, when I say “participants agreed,” this will mean I
have added the numbers and percentages for the responses “agree” and
“strongly agree,” unless otherwise stated. Likewise, when I say “participants
disagreed,” this will mean I have added the numbers and percentages for the
responses “disagree” and “strongly disagree.” The terms “respondent,”
“participant,” and “student” are used interchangeably.
9.1 Personal information for statistical purposes
The first section involved three questions about demographics:
program, gender, and region. These questions were asked for the purposes of
cross-tabulation so that I could make a more thorough analysis if needed.
However, after an initial cross-tabulation analysis, I found that there were no
noticeable anomalies, and thus this analysis will focus on the overall university
profile, rather than by gender, programme, or region. This data was not used
to identify participants individually in any way.
46
Figure 3: Participants by Programme
These numbers correlate proportionally to the number of students in
programs, with the largest proportion of students in International Peace
Studies and Natural Resources and Sustainable Development.
Figure 4: Participants by region
Figure 4: Participants by region
Again, these numbers correspond to the proportions of the overall student
population, with the largest proportions of students from Asia and North
America, which partially relates to the joint degree programmes with
American University and the Asian Leaders Programme.
48
Figure 5: Participants by Gender
According to the Department of Academic Administration (Ortiz, 2010), there
were 114 females enrolled at UPEACE during the 2009-2010 year, which is
57% of the total population. This corresponds directly to the proportion of
females who responded to this questionnaire, also 57%. I was unable to obtain
any additional data from UPEACE on population statistics.
9.2 A Culture of Peace through Education
This section consisted of two main question blocks about teaching
methods and students’ programmes, and two comment boxes for qualitative
responses.
Table 2: Teaching Methods
To what extent are the following teaching methods used in your program? Please choose one
response per line.
Answer Options Never
Rarely
(few
days)
Sometim
es
Usually
(most
days)
Always
(everyda
y)
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
Lecture 0 3 19 54 42 0 118
Discussion 0 0 15 54 49 0 118
Group activities 2 17 55 36 7 0 117
Reflective exercises 4 46 42 16 4 5 117
Student-led activities 10 35 38 23 7 0 113
Additional Comments 24
answered question 119
skipped question 15
As shown in Table 2, 87% of respondents claim that discussion is usually
or always used as a teaching method, and 81% claim that lecture is usually or
always used. The teaching method never or rarely used is “reflective
exercises” according to 42%.
In the qualitative section, 24 participants wrote comments. Sixteen
respondents described the teaching methodologies used in their classes, and 8
students stated a combination of lecture, discussion and group activities as
being most common. In the qualitative data, one participant noted too much
discussion and too little instructor-led activity, while one participant noted the
opposite (too much lecture and too little discussion). One participant wrote
“Finding the balance between lecture, discussion, and student-led activities is
a work in progress.” This statement aptly captures the challenge in balancing
these pedagogies. Three participants also noted how the pedagogies varied
greatly from class to class, with one student noting that “it’s hard to answer
because it is very different from one class to another.”
Three students also wrote about field trips; one student noted that field
trips were part of the methodology in their program; two students noted that
field trips were not a part of the methodology of their program. Field trips or
50
field work were not included as a methodology, and this is an omission of this
questionnaire. Field work or study is an important element in peace
education pedagogy, in the process of praxis, which is moving between theory
and reality (Freire, 1970). In future surveys, field trips should be included in
such a survey as a pedagogical practice for peace education.
The UNESCO framework does not explicitly state what methodologies
should be used in a culture of peace. However, as discussed in Chapter 7, a
culture of peace through education would require the implementation of the
values and principles that are being taught, such as nonviolence, equality, and
democratic participation. Teaching in a culture of peace also means
developing equality between the professor and students through a process of
dialogue (Freire, 1970; Cawagas, 2007). A lecture, while at times a necessary
part of education, is the type of methodology with the least amount of student
input, whereas discussion and group activities would allow for more space for
dialogue. For education in a culture of peace, more dialogic activities, such as
group work, reflective exercises and student-led activities should be
integrated.
Ultimately, the variability between classes and professors made it difficult to answer
these questions, as some participants noted. There appears to be significant variability
from class to class and professor to professor, and students have varying opinions as to
whether there is too much lecturing and not enough discussion or vice versa. Thus it is
hard to make a conclusion about the overall teaching methods used at the university.
Table 3: Programmes at UPEACE
How do you feel about the following statements in regards to your program at UPEACE?
Please choose one response for each statement
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
The relationship between
teacher and students is equal
in my program.
3 23 26 51 8 6 117
We develop knowledge about
peacebuilding in my program.4 24 22 58 9 1 118
We develop skills for
peacebuilding in my program.4 30 32 44 6 2 118
The amount of work (reading,
assignments, etc.) assigned in
my program is reasonable.
1 17 17 77 5 1 118
Different viewpoints (cultural,
political, etc.) are represented
in the assigned readings for
my program.
2 14 21 68 10 2 117
There is a diversity of
viewpoints (cultural, political,
etc.) among the professors
who teach in my program.
4 10 20 66 16 1 117
Different viewpoints are
respected in my program.1 8 14 63 30 1 117
Students' knowledge is
respected in my program by
other students.
1 7 11 66 31 1 117
Students' knowledge is
respected in my program by
professors.
2 4 14 62 31 2 115
The way I am evaluated (i.e.,
grades, assignments,
participation) is fair.
9 18 24 54 9 4 118
Overall, I am satisfied with my
academic program at
UPEACE.
8 14 18 57 19 2 118
Additional Comments 41
answered question 119
skipped question 15
As shown in Table 3, 57% of participants agreed that they developed
knowledge about peacebuilding in their programs, 79% agreed that different
viewpoints are respected, 83% agreed that students’ knowledge is respected
by other students, and 81% agreed that students’ knowledge is respected by
professors. Regarding the student-teacher relationship, 50% agreed that the
relationship is equal. The statement with the most disagreement was “We
develop skills for peacebuilding in my programme,” to which 29% of
participants disagreed.
52
In the qualitative data, 41participants wrote comments. Six participants
commented that the literature and views presented are too Western-centric.
One participant commented that “the most of the literature introduced by the
professor is US and European-centric”. One participant commented that their
programme lacked a Latin American perspective in the literature, and one
participant commented that their programme lacked an Asian perspective in
the lectures and readings.
With respect to different viewpoints, three students wrote comments
that they were absent in their programmes, while one student wrote that they
were not respected. One student commented “I’ve never heard too many
conflicting viewpoints in my program (outside the confines of debates).” One
student wrote “I miss really challenging views from the other side, not only
expressed by teachers coming from the northern part of the world or that type
of education.” Regarding disrespect, one student wrote, “the classmates
within our programme respect each others’ differing viewpoints, but we have
had a number of disrespectful incidents involving other UPEACE students
from other programmes invited into our class session.”
With respect to the student-teacher relationship, one participant wrote
that “I think in general the nature of student teacher dynamics makes it
slightly uneven.” In the qualitative data, 22% of participants disagreed that
the relationship between students and teachers is equal. However, one of the
key principles of peace education, based on the pedagogy of Freire (1970) is
the development of a horizontal student-teacher relationship. Furthermore,
Freire asserts that the way oppression seems inevitable is one of the ways that
oppression is perpetuated, saying that “until they [the oppressed] concretely
discover their oppressor, and in turn their own consciousness, they nearly
always express fatalistic attitudes towards their situation” (1970: 61). While
an unequal, hierarchical relationship may be more prevalent and hence seem
natural, the process of promoting a culture of peace involves transforming
hierarchical, unequal, and oppressive relationships. That an unequal
relationship seems “natural” is no justification for its existence.
With respect to grading and evaluation, 14 students wrote comments.
Seven participants commented that the evaluation is subjective. Three
participants wrote that they wanted more feedback, rather than just a
numerical mark. One of these participants wrote that “it makes me sad to
think about all the work I put into my papers and do not receive constructive
criticism so that I may improve my writing style and arguments.” Two
participants wrote that it is too easy to get good grades. One specifically said
“Grading is not serious here – always will pass, doesn’t really mean anything.”
With respect to of participation, one participant wrote
“I actually discovered that Asian students tend not to participate
because in their culture this would mean to question the hierarchy
(and a student is not supposed to question a professor. I am not
sure if professors are aware of that and as a consequence the
discussions are lead by North American students.”
While there is little literature on educational evaluation in a culture of
peace, presumably the evaluation process would involve some exchange of
ideas (verbal or written) between the teacher and learner. Incorporating more
feedback, in a more dialogic manner, would allow students to learn more and
be more empowered through the evaluation process (Freire, 1970; Cawagas,
2007). While the system of numerical grades and corresponds to the banking
system of education (Freire, 1970), a system of evaluation that is consistent
with culture of peace values still needs to be developed. UPEACE should
develop a more transparent, cohesive system of grading, so that students
understand how they are being marked. This is especially important with
respect to the participation marks, which often make up large percentages of
the student’s overall mark for a course.
The issue of participation evaluation is of concern, as the only guideline
for participation in the student handbook is “Students who fail to attend more
than 20% of the class will not be approved to complete the class” (University
for Peace, 2009: 29). There are no other policies on how participation is
evaluated, and it is unclear as to whether cultural sensitivities are taking in
consideration during participation evaluation.
Through providing ten masters programmes relating to peace, UPEACE
is advancing a culture of peace through education. However, in order to
progress towards a culture of peace, the principles of a culture of peace, such
as equality, diversity, and cultural respect need to be further integrated into
these programmes. It should be noted that the following nine sections all
contain questions about knowledge and learning, and thus all of the remaining
54
sections also include an educational element, as education is the primary goal
of the institution, and a fundamental aspect of a culture of peace.
9.2 Environmental sustainability
Table 4: Environmental Sustainability
What do you think about the following statements about environmental sustainability at
UPEACE? Please choose one response for each statement.
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
In my program, we learn
about environmental
sustainability.
11 35 18 29 24 0 117
In my experience, UPEACE
community members behave
in ways that are
environmentally responsible.
8 41 36 25 3 2 115
At UPEACE, I have developed
skills for sustainable living.12 38 26 33 7 0 116
UPEACE is an
environmentally-friendly
institution.
13 28 42 30 2 1 116
Comments 36
answered question 117
skipped question 17
As shown in Table 4, 45% of participants agreed that in their program,
they learn about environmental sustainability, while 39% disagreed with this
statement. Forty-two percent (42%) of participants disagreed with the
statements "In my experience, UPEACE community members behave in ways
that are environmentally responsible," and 43% disagreed with "at UPEACE, I
have developed skills for sustainable living." With respect to the statement
"UPEACE is an environmentally friendly institution," results were very mixed,
with 35% disagree, 36% neither agree nor disagree, and 28% agree, and 1%
don't know/undecided.
Four out of ten masters programmes at UPEACE relate to the
environment or sustainable development (Environment, Security and Peace;
Natural Resources and Peace; Natural Resources and Sustainable
Development; and Responsible Management and Sustainable Development),
and in this survey, 37% of respondents belong to one of these four programs.
The number of students who said they learn about sustainability in their
programmes is 8% greater than the number of students in these programmes.
While my analysis does not include a programme-by-programme breakdown,
this indicates that the percentage of students who learn about environmental
sustainability is greater than the number of students in the aforementioned
programmes.
In the qualitative section, 36 participants wrote responses. Fifteen
students wrote about specific unsustainable environmental practices at
UPEACE, such as: paper cups (which, since this survey, have been replaced by
mugs in the cafeteria and removed from most water coolers); single-use items
in the cafeteria; the use of bottled, filtered water in the water coolers; too
many photocopies; transport inefficiencies resulting in unnecessary waste; use
of air conditioning in the Council Room, and energy waste overall. Four
participants discussed the contradiction between the academic theory that is
being taught and daily practice at the university. One student wrote, “What
UPEACE is teaching us and what UPEACE is doing has so much gap, and I
always felt that the theory and reality is quite different.” One participant
wrote, “subjects are taught but not lived up to here. In this way we are just
again educated to tolerate hypocrisy.” Four participants noted that UPEACE
was more environmentally friendly than other institutions. One participant
wrote, “UPEACE can be a lot more environmentally friendly, but as far as
institutions go, it’s doing pretty well.” One respondent noted the need to
clarify the term “environmental sustainability,” which could have many
definitions.
This section reflects a need for improvement with respect to
environmental sustainability at UPEACE. While the subject of environmental
sustainability is studied in many programmes, these theories are not 56
integrated into the practices of the university or community members. It was
very helpful that participants elucidated specific practices where the
university could make progress. By mainstreaming the principles of
environmental sustainability, such as those elaborated in the Earth Charter
(1997), into the university’s policies and practices, the culture of peace would
be enhanced by aligning academic theory with daily life.
9.4 Human rights
Table 5: Human Rights
What do you think about the following statements regarding human rights at UPEACE?
Please choose one response for each statement.
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagree
Disagre
e
Neither
agree nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
I am familiar with the
Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.
0 6 10 66 31 0 113
Human rights are culturally
relative.12 16 22 47 13 3 113
In my program, we learn
about human rights.0 15 16 52 30 0 113
UPEACE community
members promote the human
rights of others.
2 5 33 52 13 8 113
UPEACE community
members promote their own
human rights.
0 6 26 61 13 7 113
UPEACE community
members respect the human
rights of others.
1 4 24 64 17 3 113
Human rights are valued at
UPEACE.1 3 16 68 22 2 112
In my program, we develop
skills to promote human
rights.
2 15 28 51 14 1 111
I have experienced
discrimination at UPEACE.15 47 13 28 9 1 113
At UPEACE, I have been
treated unequally due to any
aspect of my identity
(language, culture, gender,
sexuality, ability, etc) by
UPEACE as an institution.
23 52 18 13 4 2 112
At UPEACE, I have been
treated unequally due to any
aspect of my identity
(language, culture, gender,
sexuality, ability, etc) by
other students.
17 46 18 27 3 2 112
At UPEACE, I have been
treated unequally due to any
aspect of my identity
(language, culture, gender,
sexuality, ability, etc) by
staff.
20 15 13 1 2 112
At UPEACE, I have been
treated unequally due to any
aspect of my identity
(language, culture, gender,
sexuality, ability, etc) by
professors.
24 60 10 13 3 1 111
I have witnessed
discrimination at UPEACE.12 33 16 38 10 3 112
Freedom of speech is valued
at UPEACE.6 9 17 54 22 4 112
Comments 30
answered question 114
skipped question 20
As shown in Table 5, 86% of respondents agreed that they are familiar
with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and 73% of respondents
agreed that they learn about human rights in their programmes. With respect
to the cultural relativity of human rights, 53% agreed that human rights are
culturally relative. This section also included discrimination, and while 55% of
58
participants disagreed that they had experienced discrimination at UPEACE,
33% agreed that they had experienced discrimination at UPEACE.
When asked about unequal treatment due to any aspect of their identity
(gender, sexuality, ability, etc.) by other students, staff, the institution, or
professors, 27% of students reported being treated unequally from other
students, compared to 15% reporting unequal treatment by the institution,
13% by staff, and 14% by professors. Furthermore, 43% of participants agreed
that they had witnessed discrimination at UPEACE.
In the qualitative section, 30 participants wrote comments. Eight
participants from North America talked about feeling discriminated against
because of where they are from; four of these comments reflected students
feeling that their opinions were not valid because of where they are from, and
four of the comments pertained to the lack of financial aid given to students
from North America. With respect to the former claim, one respondent wrote
“situations have arisen where peers feel like the opinions of ‘white North
Americans’ are not valid because we are perceived to not have as much ‘life
experience’ because of the North American lifestyle.” With respect to the
latter claim about financial aid, one respondent wrote, “I feel that due to the
North American country I come from I was disregarded for financial aid even
though I have incredible need for it, more so than others who were afforded
it.” Another student commented, “It is frustrating when I see students on
scholarship going clothing shopping at Multiplaza all the time, traveling all
over the Americas on the breaks, etc while other students are struggling
financially because they were not even considered for financial aid because of
their country of origin.” These participants felt that financial aid is distributed
by region, rather than by financial need, and they see this as being unfair.
Three participants said they felt discriminated against because they
were non-native English language speakers. Five students wrote that they felt
that freedom of speech was valued theoretically but not practically, in the
sense that they feel that students can say things, but don’t feel that the
administration is listening. One student wrote “I believe that freedom of
speech is tolerated at UPEACE, but the next question is whether anyone in
power is listening.” Another participant, addressing this next question, wrote
“I know many students who have tried to be heard by the university and were
not listened to. We have a lot of suggestions and constructive criticism that is
undervalued.”
With respect to accessibility, one participant wrote:
“As an institution UPEACE certainly has unequal access to people
with disabilities. However, I would only call it discrimination when
there is no intention to accommodate for special needs and
UPEACE has shown their willingness (and to a lesser extent
commitment) to make changes in the accessibility of the
institution. Yet, I am not sure to what extent equal access is really
recognized as a human right by members of the UPEACE
community.”
Another comment referred to religious freedom: “Friday is very crucial
and important day for a Moslem but it’s hard to pray in the mosque or at
UPEACE for the reasons of accessibility or arrangement of learning schedule.
Most of the Moslem student sacrifice that day to attend the class.”
The operating definition of discrimination in this survey was “unequal
treatment due to any aspect of one’s identity (language, culture, gender,
sexuality, ability, etc).” According to the UNESCO Convention on
Discrimination in Education (1960), discrimination is “any distinction,
exclusion, limitation or preference which, being based on race, colour, sex,
language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,
economic condition or birth, has the purpose or effect of nullifying or
impairing equality of treatment.”
With respect to financial aid, Section 2 of the Non-Discrimination Policy
(University for Peace, 2009) states that “The University will take affirmative
action to admit students who are under-privileged. This includes financial
assistance to prospective and current students from developing nations” (40).
This policy does not explicitly exclude students from developed countries.
Greater transparency about this process, such as elucidating specific criteria
and their respective weight for financial aid consideration, would create
greater overall understanding.
The issue of language discrimination is of great concern, as English is
the language used in the institution, but many students are non-native English
speakers. Additional language support could help, but discrimination requires
that all community members – native English speakers and non-native English 60
speakers alike – have an understanding of language rights. Education about
cultural rights and specifically linguistic rights, such as through the Universal
Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2001), would be one way to raise awareness
of this issue.
With respect to accessibility, UPEACE took many initiatives this year to
make the campus more accessible to individuals in wheelchairs. However, not
only is it important for the university to have equal access to people of all
types of ability, but it is also critical that all community members recognize
equal access as a human right. Again, this could be addressed through
education and awareness-raising, using the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (1948) and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(2006).
With respect to religious freedom, it may be difficult for the university to
adjust its schedule to accommodate all religions, as different religions have
different holy days, and many religions are represented in the UPEACE
community. However, providing a safe space that is devoted to student
reflection, meditation and prayer, that is easily accessible on campus, would
allow students to practice their faiths more freely. The university could
consider building a multi-faith reflection room as part of its building plans.
It should be noted that in the Non-Discrimination Policy (University for
Peace, 2009), the channel through which community members are to use to
handle discrimination cases is the Office of Diversity and Equality. However,
at this time, this office exists only on paper. There was a movement this year
to try to establish this office, but as of now, the office has yet to be
established, and the channel that students have to address discrimination
issues is through the administration.
This section demonstrates that while the majority of students feel that
human rights are protected, promoted, and valued at UPEACE, there is still
substantial room for improvement, particularly with respect to discrimination,
linguistic rights, equal access, and facilitating religious freedom.
9.5 Equality between men and women
Table 6: Equality between men and women
What do you think about the following statements about gender equality at UPEACE? Please
choose one response for each statement.
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
Gender equality is culturally
relative.14 18 21 45 10 3 111
In my program we learn about
gender equality.3 17 19 56 15 0 110
In my program we develop
skills to promote gender
equality in our work.
5 27 26 40 11 1 110
At UPEACE, men and women
are treated equally across the
community.
0 10 19 70 9 2 110
At UPEACE, gender equality
is valued.0 6 14 74 14 2 110
At UPEACE, I have
experienced discrimination
based on my gender.
29 48 22 7 2 2 110
Additional Comments 8
answered question 111
skipped question 23
As shown in Table 6, 50% of respondents claim that gender equality is
culturally relative, and 65% agree that in their program they learn about
gender equality. In addition, 72% of respondents agreed that men and women
are treated equally across the community, 80% agreed that gender equality is
valued, and 47% agreed that they develop skills to promote gender equality in
their work.
In the qualitative data, 8 respondents wrote comments. One participant
remarked that “it [gender equality] is valued theoretically but not practically.”
Another wrote that “I think more than in most other universities, men and
women are treated equally at UPEACE.” Another respondent commented that
“I have seen or felt gender-based discrimination during class discussions with
male students that do not believe in gender equality.”
One participant remarked that
62
“I feel like gender is often mentioned at a superficial level but
rarely discussed and understood more deeply…at UPEACE it is
clear to everyone that it is important to pay attention to gender
inequality somehow, but it is unclear to most how that needs to be
done appropriately.”
One student from the gender program remarked that “I have been
disappointed by the gender awareness at UPEACE.” This student referred to
interviews that the gender class conducted across campus about gender
awareness, and called the results “disheartening.” However, as this was
during the first course, it would be interesting to conduct a similar survey
again, to see if there had been an increase in gender awareness throughout
the year.
This section indicates that most students agree that gender equality is
valued and promoted at UPEACE. However, it is not experienced equally by all
community members, as some of the data indicates. There appears to be a gap
between knowledge-building and skill-building, in the sense that a number of
students report developing knowledge about gender equality, but fewer report
developing skills to promote gender equality. This indicates that there is room
for improvement with respect to gender equality at UPEACE. A deeper
exploration of gender dynamics, as well as more skills-based initiatives for
integrating gender equality, are possible steps for improvement
9.5 Democratic participation
This section is comprised of two subsections: one about democratic
participation at UPEACE, and the second specifically dealing with
participation in the classroom.
Table 7: Democratic Participation at UPEACE
How do you feel about the following statements regarding democratic participation at
UPEACE? Please choose one response for each statement.
Answer OptionsStrongly
DisagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
At UPEACE, we develop
knowledge about democratic
principles and decision
making.
5 8 20 65 9 3 110
At UPEACE, I can participate
in democratic decision
making about decisions that
affect me.
9 22 26 46 4 3 110
At UPEACE, democratic
participation is valued in the
classroom.
3 10 16 72 8 0 109
At UPEACE, democratic
participation is valued outside
the classroom.
6 16 28 56 3 2 111
SFS (Students/Faculty/Staff)
is a democratic decision
making body.
13 19 27 27 3 21 110
Additional Comments 27
answered question 111
skipped question 23
As shown in Table 7, 73% of participants agree that democratic
participation is valued at UPEACE, and agree 67.3% that they learn about
democratic decision making. With respect to decisions that affect them, 45%
of students agree that they can participate in democratic decision making.
When asked about the Students/Faculty/Staff (SFS) organisation, there was no
clear outcome as to whether students think that SFS is a democratic decision
making body, as 29% disagreed, 25% neither agreed nor disagreed, 45%
agreed, and 19% answered “don’t know/undecided.”
In the qualitative additional comment box, 27 students wrote comments.
Thirteen participants made claims about students not being able to participate
in decision making because of the hierarchical structure of the university. One
student wrote, “UPEACE is a vertical institution. You can push to have new
decisions, you are free to take any initiative, but when it comes to changes, it
is hard…everything finally depends on the will of the vice-rector and the
rector. There is no real accountability.” Twenty participants made comments
related to SFS. One participant wrote,
64
“During my year at UPEACE I witnessed decisions made by high
leaders (such as the rector and vice-rector) at the institution that
surpassed the SFS’ decisions. In one occasion SFS said “no” to a
procedure and still the higher level decision makers preferred to
say “yes” and the end result did not reflect SFS’s decision at all.”
Three participants explicitly noted the gap between theory and values,
on one hand, and application in daily life, on the other, in democratic decision
making. One participant wrote, “Democratic principles are valued highly
across the board, but are not practiced as much.”
The comments above reflect that the students see a structural issue with
democratic decision making at UPEACE. In a comparative study of models of
transformative peace education, Turay & English (2008) studied UPEACE:
“As the name suggests, the University for Peace in Costa Rica, is
basically oriented to peace. Yet its very structure and organization
as a bona fide university militates against participatory planning
and widespread attention to indigenous issues. Although it does
have a diversity of offerings in peace studies…its traditionally
based program is limited by its hierarchical organization” (292).
The structure of UPEACE (University for Peace, 2007: 5) is common in
universities and in UN bodies, and any organization or institution requires
some structure in order to ensure the flow of responsibilities. However, this
structure may inhibit democratic decision making and participation by all
community members.
SFS is a new body, and its role needs to be clarified in greater detail. A
committee was working on a charter for SFS, and this charter is one step in
clarifying its mission. It should be noted as well that this year student
representatives were present on most university committees this year, in an
effort to increase student involvement.
This section again reflects a gap between knowledge and values and
practical application in daily life. According to students’ experience, education
for democratic participation is strong, and most community members value
democratic participation. How this manifests in reality in university
governance and decisions, though, seems to be contrary to the knowledge and
values, according to students’ experiences, particularly with SFS.
Table 8: Democratic participation in the classroom
How do you feel about the following statements regarding participation in the classroom?
Please choose one response per line.
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
I am able to fully or actively
participate in my program.1 6 14 52 34 1 108
My professors encourage
participation in my program.0 3 11 61 34 0 109
Different forms or styles of
participation are valued in my
program.
4 9 24 49 16 6 108
I understand how my
participation is being
evaluated by my professors.
7 17 22 43 10 9 108
The way my participations is
evaluated is fair.6 15 32 37 8 10 108
Additional Comments 24
answered question 109
skipped question 25
As shown in Table 8, 80% of participants agreed that they are able to
participate fully or actively in their programs. With respect to the evaluation
of participation, 22% of students disagreed and 20% neither agreed nor
disagreed that they understand how their participation is evaluated, and 30%
neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement “the way my participation is
evaluated is fair.”
In the qualitative data, 24 participants wrote comments. Four
participants wrote comments that they don’t understand how participation is
evaluated. Three students wrote that they think participation is graded in an
unfair way, and two students wrote that they think participation evaluation is
fair or “fair enough.”
One student commented upon the participation of Asian students, which
was also discussed in the Education section (9.2). This participant wrote “In
Asian culture…it is unusual for Asian student to stand up and argue the idea
66
of professor… Some of my Japanese friends get very low score on their
participation because he/she never speak in class.”
Participation is often a large percentage of evaluation for UPEACE
courses, often between 15-25%. Participation is an important element of a
culture of peace (Brenes, 2004; Adams, 2009), and should be an element of
the educational process to promote a continuous exchange among students
and between student and teacher (Freire, 1970). It is also important for
students to understand how their participation is being graded, and for this to
be a process that is culturally sensitive and accounts for different forms of
participation, such as active listening.
With respect to classroom participation, there needs to be a clearer
policy as to how participation is evaluated. This policy needs to take into
account different forms of participation that are culturally sensitive.
9.7 Understanding, Tolerance and Solidarity
This section was divided into three subsections and questions were
asked about each theme. These questions were followed by 4 yes/no questions
about peer pressure, institutional pressure, and harassment.
Table 9: Understanding
How do you feel about the following statements about understanding at UPEACE? Please
choose one response for each statement.
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
I understand other members
of the UPEACE community.0 3 30 66 5 3 107
Other members of the
UPEACE community
understand me.
3 5 32 54 2 11 107
Understanding is valued in
the UPEACE community.1 5 23 66 12 0 107
In my program we learn about
understanding.4 17 28 49 5 4 107
UPEACE community members
behave in ways that promote
understanding.
4 8 35 50 5 5 107
There is understanding
between students, staff and
faculty.
8 18 28 44 2 8 108
Additional Comments 20
answered question 108
skipped question 26
As shown in Table 9, 66% of respondents feel they understand other
members of the UPEACE community, and 52% feel that other members of the
UPEACE community understand them. Furthermore, 73% feel that
understanding is valued in the UPEACE community, 51%
report that they learn about understanding in their program, and 51% agree
that community members behave in ways that promote understanding. With
respect to understanding between students, staff, and faculty, 47% of
participants agree that there is understanding.
In the qualitative section, 20 students wrote comments. Seven
participants wrote that community members make an effort to understand
others, but ultimately understanding is hard to achieve. One participant
wrote, “I think all strive for understanding and it is valued, and yet I’d be
hesitant to say I ‘understand’ other members of the UPEACE community….For
all I learned, I am sure there is a lot I didn’t learn as well.” Three participants
noted the role of communication in understanding. One such participant noted
this link, and connected it to language, saying
“Communication plays a key role in this understanding but there
are times due to vocabulary constraints, one has the inability to
express oneself and this may be misinterpreted as submission or
withholding of information when it is just inability to further
articulate feelings, ideas and emotions.”
Three participants noted a lack of institutional support that promotes
understanding. One participant remarked, “I don’t necessarily think there is
much space, in the classroom or institutionalized, to understand different
viewpoints.”
68
This section illustrates the difficulty in achieving understanding, even in
an environment where people are trying. One participant noted that “there is
a general attempt to understand and respect each other even if we do not
agree, but this is not really discussed or taught in class.” This correlates to the
quantitative question about learning about understanding, to which 20% of respondents
disagreed. Understanding could be further promoted by developing knowledge and skills
for it, and through greater institutional support.
Table 10: Tolerance
How do you feel about the following statements about tolerance? Please choose one response
for each statement.
Answer Options Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor
disagree
Agree Strongly agree
Don't know/undecided
Response Count
There is a high level of tolerance among the members of the UPEACE community.
2 11 19 57 10 5 104
Tolerance is valued by the members of the UPEACE community.
0 7 15 66 11 4 103
The UPEACE community members behave in ways that promote tolerance.
1 10 22 60 7 3 103
We learn about tolerance in my program.
6 21 32 36 6 2 103
Different viewpoints are tolerated in the UPEACE community.
2 8 18 63 9 3 103
Additional Comments 15answered question 104
skipped question 30
As shown in Table 10, 64% of participants agreed that there is a high
level of tolerance among the members of the UPEACE community, and 74%
agreed that tolerance is valued by the community. In addition, 65% agreed
that UPEACE community members behave in ways that promote tolerance,
and 70% agreed that different viewpoints are tolerated by the UPEACE
community, while 41% agreed that they learn about tolerance in their
programs.
In the qualitative data, 15 participants wrote comments. Four
participants wrote that the term “tolerance” itself is problematic and has a
negative connotation. One student wrote, “This question should be about
respect and not tolerance at UPEACE. Tolerating people’s behavior is not the
same as respecting them. To me the term tolerance has a negative
implication.” Participants proposed “respect,” “acceptance,” and
“compassion” as alternative concepts to tolerance. Three participants
questioned whether community members tolerate of more conservative view
points, saying that they felt more conservative viewpoints are not tolerated.
One participant wrote, “I think the more conservative amongst us at UPEACE
would tend to feel like their views are not treated with the same legitimacy as
more liberal perspectives. UPEACE is quite hegemonic in this respect.”
According to the UNESCO (1995) definition, “tolerance” includes “respect” and
“acceptance”, which other students proposed as alternatives to using tolerance. The
Merrian-Webster (2010) dictionary offers a different definition, which says that tolerance is
“sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own;
the act of allowing something.” Many people probably relate more to the second definition,
as this is how the term is used more in common speech, and this definition does not
include the ideas of respect, acceptance or appreciation. In order to include these terms in
future questionnaires and in the culture of peace framework, we should do so explicitly,
and not by expecting that people will understand them to be a part of “tolerance.”
Table 11: Solidarity
How do you feel about the following statements about solidarity at UPEACE? Please choose one response for each statement.
Answer Options Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neither agree nor
disagree
Agree Strongly agree
Don't know/undecided
Response Count
There is a high level of solidarity among the students of the UPEACE community.
5 15 24 49 9 3 105
There is a high level of solidarity among all the members (students, staff, faculty and administration) of the UPEACE community.
5 18 33 36 6 7 105
We learn about solidarity in my program.
8 32 27 29 5 4 105
Solidarity is valued by members of the UPEACE community.
4 8 26 52 8 7 105
UPEACE community members behave in ways that promote solidarity.
6 17 25 45 8 5 106
Other (please specify) 13answered question 106
skipped question 28As shown in Table 11, 55% of students agree that there is a high level of
solidarity among the students of the UPEACE community, and 40% agree that
there is a high level of solidarity among all community members. In addition,
70
57% agreed that solidarity is valued by members of the UPEACE community,
and 50% agreed that UPEACE members behave in ways that promote
solidarity. With respect to learning about solidarity, 38% of participants
disagreed that they learn about solidarity in their program.
In the qualitative section, 13 respondents wrote comments. Two
students said there was a high level of solidarity with personal problems or
concerns. One student wrote, “Somebody gets in trouble (family member
dies), we pull together – a couple of good examples throughout the year.” One
participant was unclear as to what solidarity meant, indicating a need to
clarify the concept.
While the questions in this survey dealt with solidarity within the
community, I did not ask explicitly about solidarity with other communities.
This should be included in future surveys. However, it should be noted that
the UPEACE community initiated a number of campaigns throughout the year
to raise money for communities abroad that were affected by disasters, such
as Haiti and the Philippines, and these initiatives indicate solidarity.
The last 4 questions of this section were Yes/No questions that referred to pressure
to take part in academic, extra-curricular and social events, and about harassment.
Table 12: Peer pressure for school-related events
I have experience peer pressure to take part in school-related (academic or extracurricular) events.
Answer OptionsResponse Percent
Response Count
Yes 55.6% 60No 34.3% 37Don't know/Undecided 10.2% 11Comments 22
answered question 108skipped question 26
As shown in Table 12, 56% agreed that they had experienced peer
pressure. In the qualitative section, 22 participants wrote comments. With
respect to specific events for which they felt pressured to be involved, seven
students cited the UPEACE Model United Nations Conference (UPMUNC),
two students cited open house, two students cited cultural nights (i.e.,
Thanksgiving, regional night celebrations), and one student cited the Vagina
Monologues. Four students mentioned feeling discomfort, a lack of
understanding, or disrespect for not participating. One student wrote
“sometimes the community doesn’t understand that an individual can’t
participate or doesn’t have the means to do so and then they frown upon you.”
Four students said they felt this pressure was positive. One student wrote that
they had experienced peer pressure “not really in a bad way – but people are
VERY encouraging to get involved.”
Table 13: Institutional pressure for school-related events
I have experienced institutional pressure (from professors or administration) to take part in school-related (academic or extra-curricular) events.
Answer OptionsResponse Percent
Response Count
Yes 44.9% 48
No 46.7% 50
Not sure/Undecided 8.4% 9
Comments 20
answered question 107
skipped question 27
As shown in Table 13, 45% respondents agreed that they had experienced it to
take part in school-related events. In the qualitative data to Question 5, 20 participants
wrote comments. With respect to specific events, seven students cited UPMUNC, four
cited the Open House event, one cited election observation, and one cited special
sessions that have been arranged by their department head.
Table 14: Peer pressure for social events
I have experienced peer pressure to take part in social events (either at UPEACE
or within the UPEACE community).
Answer OptionsResponse
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 42.6% 46
No 49.1% 53
Don't know/undecided 8.3% 9
Comments 8
answered question 108
skipped question 26
72
As shown in Table 14, 49% of participants disagreed that they had
experienced peer pressure to take part in social events. In the qualitative
section, 8 participants wrote comments. Two students wrote that they felt this
was not a bad type of pressure, while two other students wrote that this
pressure was negative.
Table 15: Harassment
I have felt harassed in any way by members of the UPEACE community.
Answer OptionsResponse
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 13.0% 14
No 80.6% 87
Undecided 6.5% 7
answered question 108
skipped question 26
As shown in Table 15, 81% of participants disagreed with the statement
“I have felt harassed in any way by members of the UPEACE community.”
There was no comment box for the question about harassment, which was an
error in survey design.
Peer and institutional pressure manifests as an extreme, and potentially
imposing form of solidarity, which is why I asked these questions. From the
quantitative data, it seemed that most students had experienced peer or
institutional pressure; however, in the qualitative information, it was a mixed
result as to whether this pressure was a positive element (inclusive and
encouraging) or negative (imposing).
Overall, there is a degree of understanding, tolerance, and solidarity
amongst the UPEACE community. It appears that these topics are not
necessarily included in students’ programmes, as the responses about
learning about these areas were low in agreement. One step to foster greater
understanding, tolerance (or acceptance and respect) and solidarity would be
to explicitly learn about these themes throughout all programmes. This would
give students a better background from which to develop daily life practices
that correlate to these values. However, in order to facilitate this behavior,
skill-building workshops on understanding, tolerance and solidarity could also
improve this area towards a culture of peace.
9.8 Participatory Communication and the Free Flow of
Information
Table 16: Communication at UPEACE
How do you feel about the following statements about communication at UPEACE? Please
choose one response for each statement.
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
Information is easily
accessible at UPEACE.14 30 25 31 4 1 105
At UPEACE, there is
transparency (openness and
accountability) of information.
21 27 30 19 3 5 105
There are adequate methods
of communication at UPEACE.11 31 20 38 3 2 105
There is a free flow of
information between students
at UPEACE.
8 8 24 58 4 3 105
There is a free flow of
information between the
administration and students
at UPEACE.
18 30 23 29 3 2 105
There are standards of
communication within the
UPEACE community.
9 20 33 31 2 9 104
Additional Comments 16
answered question 105
skipped question 29
74
As shown in Table 16, 42% of participants disagreed that information
was easily accessible, 46% disagreed that there is transparency of
information, and 46% disagreed that there is a free flow of information
between the administration and students at UPEACE. Furthermore, 80% of
respondents agreed that there is a free flow of information between students
at UPEACE. With respect to adequate methods of communication, 40% of
participants disagreed and 39% agreed. With respect to standards of
communication, 32% agreed that there are standards, and 28% disagreed.
In the qualitative section, 16 participants wrote comments. Three
students wrote that there is a lack of transparency in the institution. Three
participants noted that perhaps communication was “too free” in the sense
that there were not standards of use for the community email lists, which
generates many emails per day. Two of these participants noted that a filter or
a daily digest of emails might solve this issue. Two participants noted the
heavy reliance on the Internet as the primary form of communication, and that
this can be problematic, particularly for students with less frequent access
(for example, students who do not own a computer or do not have Internet
access in their homes; it should be noted that all students have computer and
Internet access on campus, as there are a sufficient number of computers in
the public computer lab). Two participants also commented that the timing of
information was often inadequate. One participant wrote, “Getting crucial
information to the students days or weeks late puts incredible pressure on us
to perform to expectations that would have been reasonable with proper
notification, but become unreasonable at the last minute (Board of Directors
meeting, Open House).”
This section shows that the area of communication at UPEACE requires
improvement in order to progress towards a culture of peace, particularly
with respect to the accessibility of information in general, and communication
between the administration and students. Participatory communication and
free flow of information is important for most other aspects of a culture of
peace, particularly understanding and democratic participation. Improving
communications would also strengthen other areas of a culture of peace, and
thus strengthen the culture of peace overall.
Table 17: Interpersonal communication at UPEACE
How do you feel about the following statements about interpersonal communication at
UPEACE? Please choose one response for each statement.
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
Members of the UPEACE
community communicate
peacefully.
3 10 30 58 4 0 105
Members of the UPEACE
community value peaceful
communication.
1 7 15 72 8 2 105
In my program we develop
skills in nonviolent or
peaceful communication.
9 25 15 49 7 0 105
In my program, professors
communicate peacefully or
nonviolently.
3 2 21 64 10 4 104
In my program, students
communicate peacefully or
nonviolently.
3 9 27 59 8 0 106
Additional Comments 16
answered question 106
skipped question 28
As shown in Table 17, 59% of participants agreed that UPEACE
community members communicate peacefully and 76% agreed that
community members value peaceful communication. With respect to skill
development, 53% reported that they develop nonviolent communication skills
in their programs. 71% agreed that professors communicate peacefully or
nonviolently, and 63% agreed that students communicate peacefully or non-
violently in their programmes.
In the qualitative section, 16 students wrote comments about
interpersonal communication. Six participants wrote that most community
members communicate peacefully, but some communicate unpeacefully. One
participant wrote “There are some students and professors with non-peaceful
communication.” Three participants said that there should be a nonviolent
76
communication course as a part of orientation or foundation course. One
participant wrote, “WE NEED NVC TRAINING. Thanks.”
This section illustrates that community members value nonviolent
communication and in their experience, community members communicate in
peaceful ways. Additional training in nonviolent communication for all
community members would strengthen this aspect of a culture of peace.
9.8 International Peace and Security
Table 18: International Peace and Security
How do you feel about the following statements about international peace and security?
Please choose one response for each statement.
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
At UPEACE we develop
knowledge about
international peace and
security.
0 3 11 77 14 0 105
UPEACE community members
value international peace and
security.
0 3 12 74 15 1 105
At UPEACE we develop skills
to promote international
peace and security.
2 7 19 68 7 2 105
After I graduate from
UPEACE, I plan to work
towards improving
international peace and
security.
1 5 14 46 27 13 106
UPEACE, as an institution,
contributes to international
peace and security.
1 7 17 51 20 9 105
Additional Comments 7
answered question 106
skipped question 28
As shown in Table 18, 87% of participants agreed that they develop
knowledge to promote international peace and security, 85% agreed that
UPEACE community members value international peace and security, and
72% agree that they develop skills to promote international peace and
security. With respect to future plans, 69% of participants agree that they
plan to work towards improving international peace and security, and 68%
agreed that UPEACE as an institution contributes to international peace and
security.
In the qualitative data, 7 respondents wrote comments, which was the
lowest number of written comments for any section. One student wrote that
UPEACE “contributes merely by existing as a space for people from many
regions in the world to coexist, interact, and support one another.” According
to participants’ responses, the area of international peace and security is one
of the strongest areas – or at least most agreed upon – in the culture of peace
at UPEACE framework.
9.10 Local Peace and Security
This section had two subsections, the first on local safety, and the
second on conflict resolution, as this was not explicitly dealt with in any other
section, but is an important part of promoting a culture of peace. The first
section also included a Yes/No question about violations of personal security
on campus.
Table 19: Safety
How do you feel about the following statements about safety? Please choose one response
for each statement.
Answer Options Never RarelySometim
esUsually Always
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
I feel safe on the UPEACE
campus.0 1 5 30 67 0 103
I feel safe getting from my
home to the UPEACE campus.1 1 8 49 45 0 104
I feel safe off-campus. 0 5 20 52 25 0 102
Additional Comments 14
answered question 104
78
skipped question 30
As shown in Table 19, 94% of participants said they usually or always
feel safe on campus, and 90% usually or always feel safe getting from their
home to the UPEACE campus, while 75% usually or always feel safe off-
campus.
In the qualitative data, 14 participants wrote comments. Four students
commented that they felt the road between Ciudad Colon and UPEACE is
unsafe. One participant wrote, “Traffic on the road to campus always makes
me feel very unsafe.” Another wrote that “the bridges are a little scary on the
way to UPEACE!” Two students specified campus safety issues; one
participant said they did not feel safe with regards to their belongings, and
one student wrote “I do not like the security guards carrying loaded guns.”
Two students remarked that they did not always feel safe on the streets of
Ciudad Colon.
It should be noted that “off-campus” could mean many things – for most
students, this means El Rodeo or Ciudad Colon, the communities where most
students live. However, this could be interpreted as anywhere in Costa Rica,
and the university as an institution would have very little control or ability to
affect students’ experiences off-campus.
One participant wrote “Safe for me is when I can practice my religion
without hesitation and it only can be done in a boarding house or Mosque.”
This section indicated that students feel safe on-campus, but that some efforts to
making the road safer would improve overall safety. It should be noted that during the
2009-2010 school year, a particularly rough patch of the road was paved by the local
government, thanks in part to lobbying by the university.
Table 20: Personal security violations
Have you ever experienced a violation of your personal security (i.e., violence,
theft, etc.) on the UPEACE campus?
Answer OptionsResponse
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 7.7% 8
No 90.4% 94
Not sure/undecided 1.9% 2
Comments 12
answered question 104
skipped question 30
As shown in Table 20, 90% of participants said they had not experienced
a violation of their personal security on the UPEACE campus, while 8% of
participants experienced a violation and 2% respondents were not sure or
undecided.
In the qualitative information, ten respondents wrote comments. The
violations they cited included: sunglasses went missing; being flashed on two
separate occasions between UPEACE and home; being asked on a date by one
of the security guards; money stolen from bag; having been touched by other
community members; theft.
While violations of personal security rarely occur on campus, they still
do occur. With the recent change in security companies, there has been a
clear effort to improve security on campus.
Table 21: Conflict Resolution
How do you feel about the following statements about conflict resolution at UPEACE? Please
choose one response for each statement.
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
In my program we develop
knowledge about conflict
resolution.
2 14 18 58 11 0 103
At UPEACE, we develop
nonviolent conflict resolution
skills.
8 15 18 52 8 3 104
80
Nonviolent conflict resolution
is valued at UPEACE.2 3 9 74 10 4 102
There are sufficient channels
at UPEACE for conflict
resolution to handle conflicts
within the UPEACE
community (i.e., between
students, between students
and faculty, etc).
7 20 26 39 2 9 103
UPEACE as an institution
promotes local peace and
security.
6 13 26 42 7 9 103
Additional Comments 10
answered question 104
skipped question 30
As shown in Table 21, 67% of participants agreed that they learned
about conflict resolution, 58% agreed that they developed nonviolent conflict
resolution skills, 82% agreed that nonviolent conflict resolution is valued, and
48% agreed that UPEACE as an institution promotes local peace and security.
Forty percent (40%) of participants agreed that there are sufficient channels
at UPEACE to handle comments within the community.
In the qualitative section, 10 participants wrote comments about conflict
resolution and local peace and security. Three participants commented that
UPEACE should be more involved with the communities of El Rodeo and
Ciudad Colon in order to promote local peace and security. One participant
wrote that “I would say that Upeace as an institution not only does not
promote local peace and security, but the opposite, since with the indifference
it projects to the local community it provokes negative feelings.” However,
one student commended UPEACE’s involvement with the communities, saying,
“I fully appreciate the strides that UPeace makes to develop good
relationships with members of El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon. Not all institutions
would work so hard at this, and it is commendable.”
These comments reflect different opinions and perceptions about
UPEACE’s involvement with local communities in respect to local peace and
security. Less than half of the students in the quantitative data agreed that
UPEACE as an institution promotes local peace and security. As suggested by
some participants, one way UPEACE could improve local peace and security is
through developing a closer relationship to local communities.
9.11 Inner Peace
Table 22: Inner Peace
How do you feel about the following statements about inner peace (personal peace)? Please
choose one response for each statement.
Answer OptionsStrongly
disagreeDisagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
AgreeStrongly
agree
Don't
know/un
decided
Respons
e Count
In my program we develop
knowledge about inner peace.16 37 20 25 2 3 103
Inner peace is valued by
members of the UPEACE
community.
4 19 30 41 5 4 103
In my program we develop
skills for cultivating inner
peace.
14 48 20 16 2 2 102
Inner peace is part of
cultivating a culture of peace.4 9 12 42 33 3 103
I have adequate time for
personal peace practices in
my life at UPEACE (i.e.,
prayer, meditation, movement
etc.).
7 19 21 39 12 5 103
Additional Comments 15
answered question 104
skipped question 30
As shown in Table 22, 51% of participants disagreed that they developed
knowledge about or skills for inner peace in their program, 60% disagreed
that they develop skills for cultivating inner peace in their programmes, and
44% agreed that inner peace is valued by UPEACE community members. With
respect to inner peace as part of cultivating a culture of peace, 73% of
participants agreed that it is. Fifty percent (50%) of participants agreed that
they have adequate time for personal peace practices.
82
In the qualitative section, 15 participants wrote additional comments.
One student noted that practicing personal peace requires “not only adequate
time, but also places.” Three students wrote that they thought other students
had negative perceptions of inner peace. One participant wrote “Inner peace
has been looked down upon by many other students I have talked to.” Notably,
no students reported that they themselves had negative perceptions of inner
peace. One participant noted that inner peace is a large part of
extracurricular activities.
The data about inner peace as a part of a culture of peace corresponds
to research conducted at UPEACE by Wichmann (2009). Wichmann asked
participants “How important is individual peacefulness to peacemaking?” to
which 68% of respondents – who were UPEACE students, staff, and faculty -
said “very important” (on a Likert scale of not important to very important).
While the questions are slightly different in their wording, they illustrate that
two years in a row, over two-thirds of the UPEACE community feel that inner
peace (or individual peacefulness) is important to peacemaking and a culture
of peace.
Overall, this information illustrates that students feel that inner peace is
an important component of a culture of peace, but do not develop knowledge
or skills for it in their programmes at UPEACE. One way that UPEACE could
strengthen this aspect of a culture of peace is by providing more information
and skill-building workshops for inner peace.
9.12 Culture of Peace
This section consisted of three yes/no questions and three qualitative questions about a
culture of peace.
Table 23: Awareness of a culture of peace prior to UPEACE
Had you heard of the concept of a "culture of peace" prior to coming to UPEACE?
Answer OptionsResponse
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 46.2% 48
No 37.5% 39
Not sure/undecided 16.3% 17
If yes, please explain (where, when, how, etc.) 26
answered question 104
skipped question 30
As shown in Table 23, 47% of participants agreed that they had heard of
the concept of a “culture of peace” prior to coming to UPEACE, while 38%
disagreed.
In the qualitative section, 26 participants wrote additional comments.
Students wrote that they had learned about a culture of peace in various
places, including: former studies (9 participants), jobs (5 participants),
extracurricular activities (2 participants), religion (3 participants), and books
they had read (5 participants).
This question was to gauge participants’ familiarity with a culture of
peace prior to coming to UPEACE. Less than half of the community was
familiar with the concept prior to their studies. This indicates that many
students bring knowledge about a culture of peace with them to the
community; however, many students do not, which is a strong reason to
integrate the concept into programs in a more intentional way.
Table 24: Knowledge, skills and values for cultivating peace
acquired at UPEACE
Has your overall knowledge, skills, and values in regards to cultivating peace
increased since beginning your studies at UPEACE?
Answer OptionsResponse
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 61.5% 64
No 17.3% 18
Not sure/undecided 21.2% 22
If so, how so? 28
answered question 104
skipped question 30
As shown in Table 24, 62% of participants indicated that their overall
knowledge, skills, and values in regards to cultivating peace increased since
beginning their studies at UPEACE.
84
In the qualitative section, 28 participants wrote additional comments.
Most comments reflected specific knowledge and skill increases. Three
respondents indicated that their knowledge had increased through
interactions with UPEACE community members. One participant wrote,
“Efforts to interact with students and faculty from other regions of the world
and to get to know Ciudad Colon community and families have increased my
ability to cultivate and value peace.”
This question indicates that most students’ knowledge, skills and values
with respect to cultivating peace have increased. However, it is slightly
alarming that so many participants disagreed with the question or were not
sure/undecided, as UPEACE is an educational institution which aims to
increase the knowledge of its students.
Table 25: Culture of Peace at UPEACE
Is there a culture of peace at UPEACE?
Answer OptionsResponse Percent
Response Count
Yes 47.1% 48No 12.7% 13Not sure/undecided 40.2% 41Please explain 43
answered question 102skipped question 32
As shown in Table 25, 47% of respondents agreed that there is a culture
of peace at UPEACE, 13% disagreed, and 40% were not sure or undecided.
In the qualitative section, 43 respondents wrote additional comments,
which is the most of any comment box in the survey. With respect to strengths
of a culture of peace, participants wrote: nonviolence is highly valued (1
participant); diversity is a main characteristic (1 participant); peacebuilding is
promoted and strongly supported (1 participant); issues that bring tension or
conflict are resolved in a democratic manner (1 participant) or by personal
communication (1 participant) . One participant wrote,
“I feel that all the students especially, but also staff and faculty,
are so kind and open and tolerant. They are happy to share their
views and cultures and everyone is happy to witness them. This
makes everyone relaxed and feel respected and valued. This leads
to peace.”
With respect to weaknesses, four participants claimed that UPEACE, as
an institution and community, is not modeling the principles and values it is
teaching. One student remarked, “I am not sure that people are committed to
walk the talk and become a model.” Three participants wrote that most
students tend to stay in their own cultural groups, and saw this as inhibiting
the culture of peace. One participant wrote, “Many people seem to spend most
of their free time with people from similar cultural backgrounds, which tells
me that there is still work to be done in strengthening this culture of peace.”
Three participants wrote that the university lacked an intentional, holistic,
integrated approach to a culture of peace. One participant remarked, “There
are components that could be used for a culture of peace but the whole
institution is not actively or intentionally doing it.”
The quantitative data and qualitative data confirm that there are
strengths to the culture of peace, such as the promotion of peacebuilding
overall, and members making an effort to promote peace. However, it also
confirmed that there are weaknesses, such as a potential gap between what is
being taught and whether this is modeled in daily life, and that the institution
lacks an intentional approach to building a community culture of peace.
In this section I also asked three open-ended questions:
1. What peacebuilding skills, knowledge and/or values did
you have prior to coming to UPEACE?
In response to this question, 71 participants gave written responses.
Participants listed a variety of skills, knowledge and values, including:
nonviolent communication (6 respondents), knowledge of social justice (2
respondents), facilitation skills (3 respondents), mediation (3 respondents),
negotiation (2 respondents), listening skills (4 respondents), inner peace (6
respondents), negotiation (2 respondents), conflict transformation (2
respondents), and self-reflecting (2 respondents). This section shows the
wealth of experience that UPEACE community members come to UPEACE
with.
86
2. Is there anything about your experience of a culture of
peace at UPEACE that this survey does not capture? If so, please
explain.
In response to this question, 23 participants gave written responses. No
participants wrote that the survey did not capture for their experience of a
culture of peace. Fourteen respondents wrote “no” or “nothing”. Four
participants commented that they thought it was a comprehensive survey
that captured their experience adequately.
3. Finally, do you have any suggestions for how we can
strengthen the culture of peace at UPEACE?
In response to this question, 22 participants wrote responses. Students
also gave extensive recommendations throughout the survey, and in this
section I will include a summary of the responses to this question as well as
additional recommendations that were incorporated into other sections.
Table 26: Summary of Participants’ Recommendations
Education •Facilitate “best practice pedagogy” among permanent and visiting faculty•Develop standards for the way students are evaluated
•Establish a system for class participation evaluation•Provide students with some feedback during the course•Incorporate minority viewpoints in readings and in views presented•Put course evaluations online to allow for greater transparency •Infuse all programs with peace education methods and pedagogies
Environmental sustainability
•Create a more explicit environmental sustainability policy•Use recycled paper for course readers•Raise awareness of the university’s recycling program•Improve the university’s recycling program•Provide more natural and healthy options in the cafeteria
Democratic Participation
Clarify SFS’s role through a mission statement Provide democratic participation skill-building
workshops and exercises
Understanding, Tolerance, Solidarity
Make the programs a year and a half long to allow time for deeper understanding
Establish (institutionalize) a dialogue forum for students to come together and discuss cultural differences and issues
Provide formal/institutionalized intercultural training, education, and exchange; cultural sensitivity training for all community members
Provide harassment training to all community members
Communications Provide nonviolent communication training for all community members
Make a daily email digest so as to cut down on community emails received
Improve transparency, particularly with respect to tuition (how it is spent) and financial aid (what the requirements are)
Have a mechanism to ensure that students who are on financial aid are working hard
Local peace and security
More defined mechanisms for conflict resolution on campus
Inner peace Offer a daily meditative exercise
Culture of peace (in general)
The administration should ask the students and alumni how together we can all strengthen the culture of peace at UPEACE
More brown bags on the culture of peace Have a Town Hall meeting on this topic
Share the results of this survey with the community
Teaching people to practice what they preach
One participant asked, “What would a place with a culture of peace look
like?” The respondent gave the following suggestions: greater respect for
others’ space and time; formalized training on non-violent communication;
formalized/institutionalized cultural exchange, training, and education; an
institutional recognition that inner peace is important for a culture of peace,
and setting time aside to cultivate inner peace.
10. Feedback session and discussion
In this section, I will discuss the main points that arose during the
presentation and feedback session on May 14 from 12:15-1:00, which was
attended by approximately 20 students, staff, faculty, and members of the
administration.
88
10.1 Discrimination
In the discussion forum, some participants felt that 32.8% was a high
percentage of the population to have experienced discrimination. One
participant commented that discrimination has to do with individual
sensitivities; for example, someone who witnesses discrimination might think
it is more important than the person experiencing it. However, this can also
relate to oppression in and of itself, and how the oppressed become
accustomed to being discriminated against and treated unequally (Freire,
1970). Thus one who is the victim of discrimination may not perceive it as
such.
Another participant commented that discrimination in and of itself is not
necessarily negative, as discrimination involves recognizing differences, which
UPEACE to some extent encourages by intentionally creating a multicultural
environment; the difficulty is how to determine when discrimination is a
negative thing rather than a grouping by difference and diversity, which
should be celebrated. This is a different definition of discrimination than the
one used by UNESCO, however, and different than the conceptualization used
in this survey.
The issue of discrimination at UPEACE requires deep consideration as to
how to address it. UPEACE has a Nondiscrimination and Non-Harassment
Policy which outlines procedures for complaints of discrimination, but as
noted above, the Office for Diversity and Equality, which is to handle such
complaints, does not exist. Establishing this office would be one way in which
the university could make steps in dealing with discrimination issues.
10.2 Culture of Peace Comparison
Another participant asked if similar data was available for other
institutions so as to compare UPEACE to other universities. According to
Adams (2009), and as discussed above, culture of peace assessment should
primarily be used to compare an institution or community to itself, not with
another institution or entity, over time to evaluate progress towards a culture
of peace. However, another participant noted that we can learn from other
institutions or communities by looking at their protocols in specific areas.
Although comprehensive culture of peace assessment is a new field, many of
the related fields have been assessed independently and researched heavily.
For example, Shuman & Rudelius-Palmer (1999) developed human rights
indicators in their self-assessment test Taking the Human Rights Temperature
of Your School. Furthermore, in cultivating local and global cultures of peace,
institutions and communities should share best practices so as to help one
another advance towards a culture of peace. Thus, while the culture of peace
assessment should be used to compare and institution or community to itself
overtime, comparisons - with the purpose of learning, rather than competition
- can be done with other communities and institutions.
One participant referred to this as “benchmarking,” and suggested that
it should be someone’s full-time job at the university to engage in a project of
comparison.
10.3 Communication
In the communications discussion, one participant reflected that there
needs to be another medium of communication other than email, and
suggested the use of the large bulletin board outside the cafeteria as another
medium of communication.
This issue was addressed in the questionnaire as well, and it would be
advisable for the university to find other forms of communication that are not
reliant on the Internet.
10.4 Inner peace
The topic of inner peace generated a lot of discussion. Several
participants noted that there are strong extracurricular student-run programs
for inner peace, such as yoga and meditation. A question arose as to how
inner peace can or should be integrated more fully into all programs. Another
participant noted that the physical location of the university was conducive to
peaceful, personal reflection and developing personal peace. Another
participant suggested that what students have added outside the program
should be considered to be added to the curriculum.
This feedback and discussion session brought up the new issue of
culture of peace comparison, and highlighted aspects of the survey such as
discrimination, communication, and inner peace. That these topics generated
the most discussion indicates that they are areas that community members
have particular interest or concern.90
11. Conclusions
In the process of promoting a culture of peace, UPEACE is certainly
engaging in this process by providing graduate-level programmes in peace-
related fields. To progress more fully, UPEACE, as an institution and
community, should take a more holistic, intentional, comprehensive approach
to promoting a community culture of peace. In this way, the UPEACE
community could be a model for the values and practices of peacebuilding.
Students’ experiences of a culture of peace at UPEACE were very mixed,
as is visible from the survey results, and in particular to the question “Is there
a culture of peace at UPEACE?” In the qualitative data, some students wrote
of experiencing a culture of peace; others wrote of experiences that were not
peaceful.
It is clear that to a degree, there is a culture of peace at UPEACE. The
following chart highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each area, in
accordance with all data collected.
Table 27: Summary of UPEACE Culture of Peace Strengths and Weaknesses
Culture of Peace Programme Area
Strengths Weaknesses
Education All programmes of study related to peace
Most students develop knowledge about most culture of peace areas in most programmes
Uncertainty of how students are evaluated
Reliance on lecture as teaching method (by some professors)
Lack of skill development for peacebuilding
Environmental Sustainability
Many students develop knowledge about sustainability
Students do not develop skills for sustainability
Institutional policies and practices do not always to align with principles of sustainability
Culture of Peace Programme Area
Strengths Weaknesses
Human Rights Most students develop knowledge about human rights
Community members value human rights
Many students report experiencing discrimination, inequalities
Gender Equality Most students develop knowledge about gender equality
Men and women are mostly treated equally across the community
Some students do not develop skills to promoting gender equality in their work
Uncertainty about overall campus gender awareness
Democratic Participation Students develop knowledge about democratic principles and decision making
Unclear as to role of SFS
Many students do not feel able to participate in decisions that affect them
Understanding, Tolerance, & Solidarity
All three are valued in the community
Many students do not develop knowledge for these three in their programmes
Many students do not develop skills for these in their programmes
Participatory Communication and the Free Flow of Information
and Knowledge
There is a free flow of information between students
Most community members try to communicate peacefully
Free flow of information between administration and students is low
Most do not develop skills for nonviolent communication in their programmes
92
International Peace and Security
Most students develop knowledge, skills, and values for international peace and security
Most students feel that UPEACE contributes to international peace and security
Culture of Peace Programme Area
Strengths Weaknesses
Local Peace and Security Most students always feel safe on campus
Most students develop knowledge about conflict resolution
Some concerns about the road between UPEACE and Ciudad Colon
Concern about relations with El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon communities
Insufficient conflict resolution channels within UPEACE community
Inner Peace Strong extracurricular programmes for inner peace
Setting of UPEACE promotes inner peace
Most students do not develop knowledge about or skills for inner peace
A major strength for the culture of peace is that community members
develop knowledge in most areas. All ten master’s programmes are related to
peace, and most students develop knowledge for peacebuilding in their
programmes. Most students develop knowledge about the other programme
areas of a culture of peace in their programmes, including human rights,
sustainability, gender equality, democratic principles, international peace and
security, and conflict resolution. Most students report that community
members value most culture of peace programme areas, including human
rights, understanding, solidarity, tolerance, gender equality, and peaceful
communication. With respect to gender equality, most students agreed that
men and women are treated equally across the community. With respect to
peaceful communication, most students agreed that community members try
to communicate peacefully and that there is a free flow of information
between students. Most students agree that UPEACE contributes to
international peace and security. Regarding local peace and security, most
students always feel safe on campus. With respect to inner peace, there are
strong extracurricular programmes for inner peace, and the tranquil natural
setting of the campus is conducive to developing a state of inner peace. These
strengths highlight the degree to which UPEACE has already developed a
culture of peace.
A challenge in all areas is the gap between knowledge development, and
skill development and application in daily life. In most areas, community
members develop knowledge and values for a culture of peace; however, the
way this manifests in daily life and in practice is often contradictory to the
knowledge and values. While this is probably often an issue in academia,
which tends to focus more on theory, it is absolutely critical that the practical,
skills-based component of the various peace-related master’s programmes be
at least as equally developed as the theoretical component. I believe that the
gap between peace theory and peace experience on campus partially relates
to skill development, and also to personal reflection as to how we are
personally integrating the knowledge and values that we are learning as
individuals and as a community. Furthermore, while each of the master’s
programmes has a different focus, there are skills relating to a culture of
peace that are relevant and necessary for peaceworkers in all fields that all
community members develop, such as active listening and conflict resolution
skills.
With respect to the hindrances to a culture of peace at UPEACE, a
number of comments reflected the need to institutionalise various practices
for a culture of peace. This means to implement policies that support a culture
of peace, and for the institution to carry out these policies in practice. With a
94
more formal institutionalisation of these practices, more community members
should engage in behaviour that is consistent with the policies.
It is also important for community members - students, staff, faculty, and
administration - to receive support to initiate programs for a culture of peace.
According to the theory of Freire (1970), the ultimate goal of education is for
action towards transformation. It is critical that through the learning process -
which is happening at all times by all community members, inside and outside
the classroom - that members also have the opportunity to take action. With
respect to democratic decision making at UPEACE as discussed above,
participants in this survey stated that they did not feel as though their voices
were heard by the administration. As a result, and as reported in the
qualitative data, some community members felt disempowered, frustrated,
and doubtful of the democratic process. In order to promote a culture of peace
at UPEACE, community members need to be empowered to be able to make
decisions and take action to promote a culture of peace, and one way that this
could happen is through increased participation in democratic decision-
making.
As noted above, students come to UPEACE with a wealth of experience
and knowledge. UPEACE as an institution and community should not miss the
opportunity to take full advantage of each student’s talents, interest, and
desire to give back to the community.
A number of issues that arose were directly related to lack of
communication between the administration with students and transparency.
For example, a number of students want to know what happens to the
recycling, how tuition money is spent, how financial aid is determined, and
what the SFS role is. These could all be clarified through improved
communication and transparency.
With respect to how to assess the culture of peace, this research project
was one step in this assessment. Through this research, it became clear that
in order to further understand the culture of peace, additional research should
be taken, which will be explored in Chapter 12.
The UPEACE community is progressing on the path of a culture of
peace. This research highlights the areas where this culture is already strong,
and the areas that can improve to move farther along this path. The UPEACE
Community Culture of Peace Action Plan in Chapter 12 outlines some steps
that the community can take in order to continue improving. I hope that this
research will be used to take action towards strengthening the UPEACE
community culture of peace in a holistic, integrated way.
12. UPEACE Community Culture of Peace Action Plan
From the exploration of the culture of peace at UPEACE, this research
offers the following recommendations in the form of a UPEACE Community
Culture of Peace Action Plan to be considered by the UPEACE administration,
staff, faculty and community. Ideally, this is the first such action plan, but this
exercise and action plan development should be performed on an annual basis
to ensure continuity and assess progress. This plan of action includes some of
the recommendations made by participants, as well as recommendations that
I, the researcher, feel would be valuable contributions to the community’s
culture of peace, in light of the research findings. The action plan is divided
into three categories: policy, research, and education and trainings.
The primary recommendation is for continued culture of peace
assessment, and for the university to develop an integrated, holistic approach
to developing a community culture of peace. The following recommendations
are initial steps on the path of culture of peace assessment.
While the community was involved in developing this action plan
through the ideas they contributed to the survey, working group and feedback
session, in future years, ideally there would be a community working group
(or series of groups) to develop the action plan.
12.1 Policy
While some policies were reviewed for the current research, a detailed,
thorough policy analysis was beyond its scope. In order to make more
thorough policy recommendations, further research on the universities
policies in regards to a culture of peace is needed. However, some
recommendations can be offered from the research findings.
Participation evaluation standards: Clear standards for
participation would strengthen the culture of peace by clarifying
the educational evaluation process. Such factors could be based on
96
attendance, and include respect for different forms of
participation, such as active listening.
Environmental policy: Mainstreaming environmental
sustainability in policy and practice would strengthen the
university’s overall culture of peace by creating greater harmony
with the environment. These policies could be articulated in the
Student Handbook, and a session given at orientation explaining
the policy so that all community members would be aware.
Greater awareness is needed of the campus recycling policy. As
different items are recyclable in different countries, recycling
education would lead to greater clarity, and could be given at
orientation, and through ongoing campaigns (such as through
posters, well-marked bins) to improve recycling efforts. These
policies should include efforts for decreased consumption,
recycling, energy conservation, and green building.
Role of SFS: Clarifying the role of SFS would lead to greater
understanding in regards to this form of community democracy.
This year, a committee was working on a mission statement, and
this effort should be completed. This effort will help to contribute
to clarifying the democratic decision making process, and
hopefully increase democratic participation on campus.
Intra-community communications committee: In order to
improve the free flow of information, a committee could be formed
to determine how to best improve communications between the
administration and students, to ensure that students receive
important information in a timely manner. This committee could
also work on issues of transparency, such as with financial aid and
other issues that require clarification.
Establishment of the Office of Diversity and Equality:
Establishing the Office of Diversity and Equality would lead to
improved protection and responsibility of human rights, and
increased understanding and tolerance. According to the Student
Handbook (University for Peace, 2009), the Office of Diversity and
Equality is responsible for handling issues of discrimination and
other issues surrounding equality, diversity, and multiculturalism.
As of now, this office only exists on paper. I recommend the
establishment of this office, in particular due to the findings in this
research on discrimination. Upon its establishment, this office
could work on issues such as disability mainstreaming and
linguistic rights.
Ombudsperson: Establishing an office of an Ombudsperson
would contribute to a culture of peace by improving campus
conflict resolution. Many universities have an ombudsperson who
handles the myriad of conflicts that may occur in the university
setting. Alcover (2009) notes that “since institutions of higher
education are as prone to conflicts as all other human
organizations, it is imperative that university practice what it
purports to teach in the area of conflict resolution” (275). This is
particularly relevant for an institution specializing in international
peace. Alcover presents a contingent model of mediation
interventions within the scope of the University Ombudsperson
based on three dimensions:
“the level of balance or symmetry of power characterizing
the relationships between the parties involved; the
foreseeable temporal perspective of the relationship (short-
term vs. medium- and long-term); and the level of
formalization of the mediation process (establishing a
continuum between formal and informal mediations)” (2009:
276).
Such a model could be used by UPEACE to implement an office of
an Ombudsperson, which would serve as a conflict resolution
mechanism for the community.
Community Liaison Office: A community liaison office could
contribute to the culture of peace by increasing local peace and
security through stronger ties with local communities. This is a
response that combines some students’ observations that the
university could have greater involvement with local communities,
and some students’ request for more field work. Appendix B
outlines a proposal for a Community Liaison Office, that would
98
coordinate projects in the local communities with UPEACE
students and community members.
12.2 Further research
The current research elucidated several areas where further research is
needed.
Culture of peace policy analysis: A deeper analysis of the
university’s formal policies with respect to culture of peace areas
would complement this research.
Culture of peace survey: Completing this survey in subsequent
years would create a better understanding of the culture of peace,
and allow the community to track its progress. In addition, all
community members should be included, and the survey adapted
according to relevance and needs of different populations (for
example, for faculty, staff, etc.).
Culture of peace benchmarking: As discussed in Chapter 9, it
would be beneficial to examine initiatives and protocols at other
universities that are working towards a culture of peace.
Systematic programme content analysis: Similar to the policy
analysis, a systematic programme content analysis would examine
the integration of all areas of a culture of peace, using the
framework in this study.
Culture of peace analysis of other communities: A similar analysis to the
one conducted through this project could be carried out at other institutions
or in other communities.
12.3 Education and trainings
Additional trainings were suggested by student feedback, including
cross-cultural, nonviolent communication, environmental, and democratic
skill-building workshops.
Cultural training and discussion groups: A number of
participants in the survey emphasized the need for promoting
understanding. I propose having some cross-cultural training as a
part of orientation and foundation course. Then, I propose the
formation of small groups – perhaps 5 students per group – from
different regions, that would meet on a weekly basis to have cross-
cultural dialogue. Another peace education student, Dawn
Warmbrand, is currently carrying out her research on
interculturalism at UPEACE, and will be making recommendations
for increased understanding. Please see her independent research
project for further details.
Nonviolent communication training and groups: A number of
students who participated in the survey requested nonviolent
communication training, and previous classes also expressed
interest in such training in research by Wichmann (2009) and Rizzi
Carlson (2009). In a similar pattern to the intercultural training, I
suggest some nonviolent communication training during
orientation and foundation course, followed by study groups that
would meet periodically, perhaps once a week, to continue
practicing nonviolent communication. Marshall Rosenberg’s
Nonviolent Communication (2003) is one method, but other
methods should also be presented. A companion workbook exists
for Rosenberg’s book that could be used to guide the study groups.
Culture of peace workshop series: In order to advance the
culture of peace at UPEACE, and turn academic theory into daily
practice, I propose a 12-week Culture of Peace workshop series.
Each week, one workshop would be offered on the week’s featured
programme area. The workshop series would be carried out once a
semester, with different emphases in the second semester. The
workshops would be skills-oriented and reflective. These
workshops are specifically to address the gaps that remain in skill
development and application in daily life. The sequence of the
workshops is from inner to outer peace, from the individual to the
international. Each workshop would be 1.5 hours long.
These workshops would be intended for all community members. Each
workshop would be offered once in the morning and once in the afternoon to
accommodate everyone’s schedules.
The following is a sample format and list of topics. Ideally, different sessions
would be run by one community member who would ensure continuity and 100
coherence throughout the program. When appropriate, guest speakers from
within or outside the community would be invited to share their expertise or
relevant experience. As with other culture of peace practices, best practices
from other communities could be integrated. Many educational workshops on
these topics have been developed by other institutions. The sample list
includes workshop ideas from the Bonner Foundation (2010), an organization
that works with college communities in promoting education for social
change. As with the benchmarking, a similar research could be carried out to
compile different curricula on these topics.
Week 1: Culture of Peace – Overview
Key questions: What is a culture of peace? How do I already apply these
principles to my life? How can we promote a culture of peace at
UPEACE?
Objectives: After this workshop, participants will be able to:
Define a culture of peace
Envision a culture of peace at UPEACE
This session would provide an overview of the culture of peace framework,
and ask participants to start thinking about how to apply the concepts in their
daily lives, using the Manifesto 2000 guidelines. Ideally, this session would
take place during orientation or foundation week.
Exercises: Participants brainstorm about culture of peace. The culture of
peace framework is presented. Participants break into small groups and
create a vision of a culture of peace at UPEACE – What would a culture of
peace at UPEACE look like? What practices and behaviours do we as
community members need to exhibit and integrate in order to manifest a
culture of peace on campus?
Resources: Culture of Peace Framework, Manifesto 2000
Week 2: Inner peace
Key questions: What is inner peace to me? What are different practices
for inner peace?
Objectives: After this workshop, students will
Understand different techniques for cultivating inner peace
Understand the importance of inner peace in a culture of peace
This session will examine different practices that participants can use to
cultivate inner peace. Different non-religious techniques for cultivating inner
peace will be explored. Students will be asked to share any techniques that
they use that help them to develop inner peace. Sample activities include
brainstorming on inner peace, a mindful eating exercise and compassion
meditation.
Week 3: Environmental Sustainability
Key questions: How does my lifestyle impact the environment? What can
I do to live sustainably at UPEACE?
Objectives: After this workshop, participants will be able to
Assess their personal environmental impact
Understand ways that they can personally reduce their impact
Learn ways to create a more sustainable community,
collectively
This session will ask participants to reflect on their lifestyles in terms of
environmental sustainability. Participants will use a tool (such as an ecological
footprint questionnaire) to evaluate their personal environmental impact in
order to reflect on ways they can improve their relationship with the
environment. Participants will also examine the UPEACE community to think
of collective initiatives that could be taken to increase the sustainability of the
community.
Week 4: Participatory Communication and the Free Flow of
Information – a nonviolent communication primer*
*Note: if the nonviolent communication training has already occurred as a
part of training or orientation, then this session can be a review, or take a
different focus, such as focusing on active listening, etc.
Key questions: What does it mean to communicate nonviolently? How
can I be peaceful in my speech?
Objectives: After this workshop, participants will be able to
Use nonviolent communication techniques to connect
observations, feelings, needs and requests102
Use active listening
Explore other ways of communicating peacefully
This session will introduce key concepts in nonviolent communication, such
as:
Differentiating between observations and evaluation
Differentiating feeling from thinking
Connecting universal needs/values to feelings
Making clear requests for what you want
Active listening
Week 5: Education: Creating a peaceful classroom environment
Key questions: What does education for peace/peace education mean?
What does it mean to have a peaceful learning environment? How can we
create peaceful learning environments here at UPEACE, without avoiding
conflict?
Objectives: After this session, participants will
Define what attributes are part of a peaceful classroom
Be able to integrate these attributes as students or teachers.
In this session, participants will explore the ideas of creating a balanced
learning environment, where students feel safe and are free to express
themselves, while diving deeply into issues that could potentially cause
conflict. Ideas discussed will include classroom guidelines, dialogue dynamics,
and handling classroom conflicts.
Week 6: Advancing Understanding, Tolerance and Solidarity
Key questions: What tools do I need to understand others? What
assumptions do I bring from my worldview/culture? How can I heighten my
awareness to be respectful of others?
Objectives: After this session, participants will
Have skills for cross-cultural understanding
Be able to reflect on their own identities and ethnocentricities
This session will focus on cultural understanding in order to help students to
take full advantage of the multicultural environment at UPEACE. Students will
also explore ideas of ethnocentrism.
Resources: “Communicating Across Cultures” http://www.culture-at-
work.com/ex1xcincidents.html
http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/BonCurIdentityCircles.pdf
http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/EthnocentrismTraining.pdf
Week 7: Gender equality
Key questions: What is my understanding of gender? How do gender
roles play out in my life? How can I integrate gender principles into my
work?
Objectives: After this session, participants will be able to
Define gender
Understand how gender roles are present in their lives
Begin the process of integrating gender sensitivity into their
work
This session will focus on gender equality and personal identification with
gender. Through personal reflection, participants will gain a deeper
understanding in the role that gender plays in their lives, and begin to think of
ways that they can mainstream gender equality in their work.
Resource:
http://www.bonner.org/resources/modules/modules_pdf/BonCurGender2Deepe
ning.pdf
Week 8: Local peace and security – Conflict Resolution
Key questions: How can I solve daily conflicts in a nonviolent way?
Objectives: After this workshop, participants will
Understand basic mediation techniques
Be equipped to handle interpersonal conflicts
Ideally this session would be co-taught by community members who have
mediation experience, as generally there are several members of the
community who have mediation backgrounds.
Resource: http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/BonCurConflictResolution.pdf
Week 9: Human Rights: Exploring Discrimination
Key questions: What is discrimination? How do I discriminate?
Objective: After this workshop, participants will 104
Understand different kinds of discrimination
Understand how to take action if they have experienced
discrimination at UPEACE
This session will explore issues of discrimination in daily life. Participants will
explore ways in which they may have personally experienced discrimination or
have discriminated against others. Participants will become familiar with ways
to deal with discrimination at UPEACE.
Resource: http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/BonCurRacism.pdf
Week 10: Democratic Participation
Key questions: How does democratic decision-making happen in daily
life? What are different ways to participate democratically? How can we
promote democratic participation at UPEACE?
Objective: After this workshop, participants will
Understand different ways to participate democratically
Have an action plan for how they can participate democratically at
UPEACE
This session will focus on how to apply principles of democratic participation
to daily life, at home and at UPEACE.
Resource: http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/BonCurCitizenshipRts.pdf -
this would need to be adapted for the UPEACE context, but provides ideas for
exploring the idea of democratic citizenship.
Week 11: International Peace and security
Key questions: How can we contribute to the global culture of peace?
What would international security look like in a culture of peace?
Objectives: After this workshop, participants will
Be able to apply culture of peace concepts in their home regions
Understand different ideas of international security and how to
achieve it
In this session participants will look globally, with a discussion on how they
can contribute to cultures of peace in their home regions, and how this can be
integrated towards a global culture of peace. Ideas of alternative international
security will be examined.
Week 12: Integrating practices: Reflecting on the semester, Action
plan for next semester
Key questions: What are related topics that we’d like to explore next
semester? What does the culture of peace look like so far in the semester?
How should we move forward?
Objectives: After this session, participants will
evaluate the UPEACE culture of peace up to this point in their
experience
leave with concrete actions to take to strengthen the culture of
peace
This session will integrate the knowledge and work of the past 11 sessions.
Participants will reflect on their experience at UPEACE so far, assess the
culture of peace, and develop a vision for the next semester. Participants will
brainstorm ways in which the community can strengthen the culture of peace.
This session should also include an evaluation of this 12-week workshop
series.
Resource: http://bonnernetwork.pbworks.com/f/BonCurSharedVision.pdf
106
14. References
Adams, D., et. al. (1986). The Seville Statement on Violence. Retrieved on June
12, 201
from:http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.phpURL_ID=3247&URL_DO=D
O_TOPIC
&URL_SECTION=201.html
Adams, D. (1995). UNESCO and a Culture of Peace: Promoting a Global
Movement. Original
edition out of print. Available at:
http://www.culture-of-peace.info/monograph/page1.html
Adams, D. (2009). World Peace through the Town Hall: A Strategy for the
global movement for a
culture of peace. Self-published. Available at: http://www.culture-of-
peace.info/books/worldpeace.html
Alcover, C. (2009). Ombudsing in Higher Education: A Contingent Model for
Mediation in
University Dispute Resolution Processes. Spanish Journal of Psychology
12(1), 275-287.
Retrieved on June 23, 2010 from:
http://147.96.1.15/BUCM/revistas/psi/11387416/articulos/SJOP0909120275A.
Avruch, K. (1998). Culture and conflict resolution. Washington DC: United
States Institute of
Peace, pp. 5-21.
Brenes-Castro, A. (2004). An Integral Model of Peace Education. In Educating
for a Culture
of Social and Ecological Peace, Wenden, A. L., (ed.) Albany: State
University of New
York Press. pp. 77-98.
Carter, C. (2005). Standards for Peace Education. Handout.
Cawagas, V. (2007). Pedagogical principles in educating for a culture of
peace. In Toh, S.H., & V.
Cawagas (Eds.) Cultivating Wisdom, Harvesting Peace. Brisbane,
Queensland: Multi-Faith
Centre, Griffith University.
Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design. London: Sage. pp. 3-21.
Culture of Peace Foundation. (2005). World Report on the Culture of Peace:
Civil Society report at
midpoint of the Culture of Peace Decade. Barcelona. Available at:
http://www.decade-culture-of-peace.org/2005report.html
de Rivera, J. H. (2004) A template for assessing cultures of peace. Peace and
Conflict, 10(2). pp.
125-146.
de Rivera, J. H. (2005). Opinion: Assessing the Culture of Peace. UN Chronicle
Online Edition,
issue 2. Retrieved on December 4, 2009 from:
http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2005/issue2/0205p53.html
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder & Herder.
Groff, L. & Smoker, P. (1996) Creating global/local cultures of peace. In
UNESCO (Ed.) From a
culture of violence to a culture of peace. Paris: UNESCO. pp. 103-127.
108
International Congress on Peace in the Minds of Men. (1989) The
Yamoussoukro Declaration on
Peace in the Minds of Men. Yamoussoukro, Côte D'Ivoire.
Merriam-Webster. (2010).Online Dictionary. http://www.merriam-
webster.com/
Nhat Hanh, T. (2003). Creating true peace. London: Rider. Pp. 182-208.
Ortiz, C. (2010). University for Peace Department of Academic Administration.
Personal
Communication via email. June 29.
Presidential Commission for the University for Peace (1981). University for
Peace:
Basic Documents. San José, Costa Rica.
Reardon, B. & Diallo, D. (1980). Creation of a Pedagogic Institute for Peace.
International Seminar
on Education and Communications for Peace: Provisional Report.
In University for Peace:
Basic Documents. pp. 195-197.
Renner, M. (2005). Security redefined. In M. Renner, H. French, & E.
Assadourian (Project
Directors). State of the World. Pp. 3-19. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
Rizzi Carlson, O. (2009). The Peacebuilding Center @ UPEACE. Master’s
thesis. University for
Peace.
Rosenberg, M. (2003). Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life.
Encinitas: Puddledancer
Press.
Shiman, D. & Rudelius-Palmer, K. (1999). Taking the Human Rights
Temperature of Your School.
In Economic and Social Justice: A Human Rights Perspective.
Minneapolis: Human Rights Resource Center, University of Minnesota.
Retrieved on June 24, 2010 from:
http://www.hrusa.org/hrmaterials/temperature/temperature.shtm
Synott, J. (2004). Global and international studies. Transdisciplinary
perspectives. Southbank,
VIC: Social Science Press (since acquired by Thomson Learning
Australia), Chapter 12:
Ethics, Rights and Subordinated People. pp. 300-334.
The Bonner Foundation. (2010). Accessed on June 30, 2010 at:
http://www.bonner.org.
The Earth Charter. (1997). Retrieved on December 9, 2009 from:
http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/uk/uk_sum_cp.htm.
Toh, S.H. & Cawagas, V.F. (1987). Peace education: A framework for the
Philippines. Quezon
City: Phoenix Publishing House, pp. 57-76.
Toh, S.H. & Cawagas, V.F. (2002). A Holistic Understanding of a Culture of
Peace. Presented at
the APCEIU Expert Consultation on EIU, Fiji.
Toh, S.H. (2006). Education for sustainable development and the weaving of a
culture of peace:
Complementaries and synergies. Paper presented at the UNESCO
Expert Meeting on
Education for Sustainable Development (ESD): Reorienting Education to
Address
Sustainability, 1-3 May 2006, Kanchanaburi, Thailand.
110
Toh, S. H. (2007). Pathways to the building of a culture of peace. Presented at
the Peace Education
Workshop in Uganda, 10-13 July 2007, organized by the Ugandan
National Commission for
UNESCO and the Korean National Commission for UNESCO. pp. 1-14.
UN General Assembly. (26 June 1945). Charter of the United Nations.
Retrieved on June 12, 2010
from: http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/preamble.shtml
UN General Assembly (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Retrieved on June 23, 2010
from: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
UN General Assembly (17 December 1980). A/RES/35/55: Resolution on the
Establishment of the
University for Peace.
UN General Assembly (15 January 1998). A/RES/53/13: A Culture of
Peace. Retrieved on
December 16, 2009 from http://daccess-dds-
ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N98/760/15/PDF/N9876015.pdf?
OpenElement.
UN General Assembly (15 January 1998). A/RES/53/15: Proclamation of the
year 2000 as the
International Year for a Culture of Peace. Retrieved on June 12, 2010
from:
http://www.undemocracy.com/A-RES-52-15.pdf
UN General Assembly (2 September 1998). A/RES/53/370: Consolidated
report containing a draft
declaration and programme of action on a culture of peace. Retrieved on
June 12, 2010
from:
http://www.culture-of-peace.info/annexes/resA-53-370/coverpage.html
UN General Assembly (19 November 1998). A/RES/53/25: International
Decade for a Culture of
Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the World, 2001-
2010. Retrieved on December
16, 2009 from http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/uk/uk_sum_refdoc.htm
UN General Assembly (6 October 1999). A/RES/53/243: Declaration and
Programme of Action on
a Culture of Peace. Retrieved on December 9, 2009 from
http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/uk/uk_sum_cp.htm.
UN General Assembly (25 February 2005). A/RES/59/143: International
Decade for a Culture of
Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the World, 2001-
2010. Retrieved on December
10, 2009
from http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/kits/Resolutions%20UN/A_RES_59143e.pdf.
UN General Assembly (19 August 2005). A/60/279: Midterm global review of
the International
Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the
World, 2001-2010.
Retrieved on June 12. 2010 from:
http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/Report/A%2060%20279%20ENG.pdf
UN General Assembly (13 December 2006). Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities.
Retrieved on June 23, 2010 from:
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/disabilities-
convention.htm
112
UNESCO. (1945). Constitution of the United Nations Education, Scientific,
and Cultural
Organization. Retrieved on June 23, 2010 from:
http://www.icomos.org/unesco/unesco_constitution.html
UNESCO. (1995). Declaration of Principles on Tolerance. Retrieved on June
16, 2010 from:
http://www.unesco.org/webworld/peace_library/UNESCO/HRIGHTS/124-
129.HTM
UNESCO. (1999). Manifesto 2000. Retrieved on June 12, 2010 from:
http://www3.unesco.org/manifesto2000/uk/uk_manifeste.htm
UNESCO. (2002). Mainstreaming the culture of peace. Retrieved on June 7,
2010
from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001263/126398e.pdf
UNESCO. (2001). Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. Paris:
UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2010). Culture of peace: what is it? Retrieved on June 16, 2010
from:
http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/uk/uk_sum_cp.htm
University for Peace. (2005). Contribution of the University for Peace to the
Mid-Term Report of
the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the Implementation of
United Nations General Assembly resolutions on the International
Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the
World, 2001-2010. Retrieved on June 6, 2010 from:
http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/Report/UPEACE.pdf
University for Peace. (2008). Annual Report: 2007-2008. Retrieved on June 12,
2010 from:
http://www.upeace.org/PDF/UPEACE%20anuual%20report%2007-08.pdf
University for Peace. (2009). Student Handbook. Department of Academic
Administration.
Vaughn Chaverri, C. (2007). Peace through Health Initiatives toward a Culture
of Peace: A New
Perspective to Incorporate at the University for Peace? Master’s thesis.
University for
Peace.
Webster, R. (2007). Correlates of Peace Culture: Towards Culture of Peace
Indicators.
Master’s thesis. University for Peace.
Webster, R. (2008). Culture of Peace Assessment Tools/Report Card. Retrieved
on December
9, 2009 from
http://www.cultureofpeace.ca/culture_of_peace_assessment_tool.htm
Wenden, A. Introduction. In A. Wenden (Ed.) Educating for a Culture of Social
and Ecological
Peace. Albany: SUNY Press.
Wessels, M. (1994). The Role of Peace Education in a Culture of Peace: A
Social-Psychological
Analysis. Peace Education Miniprints No. 65. Malmo, Sweden: School of
Education.
114
Appendix A: Summary of UPEACE contributions to UN Decade Reports
2001-2005*
Programme Area
2001 (A/56/349)2002
(A/57/186/Add.1)
2003 (A/58/182)
2004 (A/59/223)
Culture of Peace Through Education
· Consultations
· Advisory meetings
· Memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with UNESCO & UNU
· Priority to develop peace studies courses to build capacity in developing world
· Short courses in Central Asia, Latin America, Africa
· UPEACE foundation course
· Peace education masters and international consultation on the programme
· Training programmes and international peace studies
· Students graduated from NRSD, HRS, and ILSD
· Capacity-building in peace education and conflict prevention
· Courses in Budapest and Bangkok
· Multicultural courses on key peace-related issues (and dissemination to partner universities)
· Foundation course in international peace studies
· Repetition of newly established masters programmes(GPB, IPS, PE, ESP)
· Missions in 10 countries for education for peace in Africa
· 3 curriculum development workshops conducted in Africa
· Short courses for mid-career professionals
· Formal partnership with UNESCO & UNDP on Foundations for Africa's future leadership
116
2001 2002 2003 2004
Sustainable Economic and Social Development
· The Earth Council partnership
· Short courses in natural resources and conflict prevention and socio-economic development and peace
· American University (AU) dual master’s programme being planned
· Short courses in natural resources and conflict prevention
· 2nd year of AU dual master’s programme in Natural Resources and Sustainable Development (NRSD)
· partnership with LEAD International
· Short courses
· Continuation of AU NRSD programme
· LEAD International partnership
· New master’s programme in Environment, Security and Peace
· Continuation of NRSD programme
· Launching Environmental Peace and Security (ESP) programme
· Research on "Conflict and collaboration in natural resources management in Latin America and the Caribbean"
· Curriculum development on the relationship between youth,
employment/economic opportunities, and the prevention of violence
· Continued support to Earth Charter Initiative
2001 2002 2003 2004
Respect for all human rights
· Expert seminar on Human Rights and Peace in Geneva
· New Masters programmes in Human Rights Studies (HRS) and International Law and Settlement of Disputes (ILSD)
· 2nd year of HRS and ILSD programmes
· ILSD & International Law and Human Rights (formerly HRS)
· Preparation of human rights education material to disseminate in developing countries
118
Equality between men and women
· Masters in gender being prepared
· Short course on gender and conflict being launched
· International training on gender and peace-building for UN staff
· International meeting for development of gender master’s programme
· 2nd international training on gender and peace-building
· Gender master’s programme to be launched in 2003
· Consultation between UPEACE & UNESCO to address gender issues in Latin America
· New course in gender and peacebuilding
· Speicialised courses on gender and peacebuilding
· African women peacemakers programme for training and support
· One-week advanced intensive course on gender focus in peace processes
2001 2002 2003 2004
Democratic participation
· MOU with International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA)
· Continued collaboration with International IDEA on bilateral and multilateral projects
· Continued collaboration with International IDEA
· All 7 masters programmes deal with democratic participation
· Short courses on democratic participation
· Consultations in Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay
120
Understanding, tolerance and solidarity
· Project to launch peace education and research in central Asia
· International Seminar on Disability
· Development on courses for civil-military relations
· Follow-up work with Seminar on Disability
· Further projects with Inclusion International
· Civil-military course being developed in Asia and Latin America
· Summer course on human rights and religion
· Specialized course in "practises in conflict management and peacebuilding" for wide dissemination
· Brazil - assisting government with Peace in the cities and peace in the countryside" programme
2001 2002 2003 2004
Participatory communicationand the free flow of information
· Established media and peace institute (3-yr. development plan)
· International conference on the Lessons of the Tajik Peace Process for Afghanistan
· Institute for Media, Peace and Security to be located in Geneva
· Research on media and peace being initiated in Latin America and Africa
· Module being developed for UPEACE masters programmes
· Centre for Education and Information Technology at UPEACE - to develop infrastructure to make UPEACE materials available globally and maintain UPEACE web site
· Institute for Media, Peace and Security launched 4 new courses
· Revamping Africa programme's web site
122
International Peace and security
· Agreement with Royal Thai army to develop education and training programs
· Initiative w/Colombian government to est. conflict resolution institute
· Partnership with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
· Agreement for the establishment of a subsidiary office of the International Court of Arbitration at the main campus
· Promising contacts with UNiLAC
· Seminars on drug abuse and firearms
· Official launch of World Center for Research and Training in CR (WCRTCR) in Bogota
· 2 international seminars on international security
· In contact with ICA about establishing court on main campus
· Working with various agencies in the Americas on courses on control of illicit small arms trade
· WCRTCR
· 2 books on security published in Spanish
· High-level trainings aimed at senior officials, teachers and scholars in Central America
· Peace education and human rights curriculum for military services in Sierra Leone
· Creation of Latin America Centre for dispute settlement
· Course on illicit trafficking of small arms
*While UPEACE contributed to the 2005 mid-term report (A/60/279), the report was an overall summary of 2001-2004 efforts, emphasizing the development of new master's academic programmes, 5-year revitalisation plan
adopted by the UPEACE council, and the dissemination of worldwide teaching materials.
124
Appendix B: Proposal for UPEACE Community Liaison
Proposal for University for Peace Community Liaison Office
(Submitted as part of Peace Education: Strategies for Life, Final Paper,
Stephanie Knox)
Introduction
In the course Peace Education: Strategies for Life, we had the
opportunity to conduct field research in El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon, the two
communities most directly connected with the University for Peace. Even
though we live and spend a lot of time in these communities, for many of us it
was the first time we visited a school or other community institutions. In
speaking with community members, we realized the strong desire for greater
involvement from the University, and at times an even negative perception of
the University for its lack of involvement in the communities thus far. At the
same time, UPEACE students would like to develop greater connection with
the communities, and would also gain practical experience in their related
fields. The local communities are potential "live learning labs" for the students
to turn theory into practice, which are currently being underutilized.
Furthermore, it provides the opportunity for service learning, allowing
students to make meaningful contributions to their host communities.
Although in our field work we worked specifically with the education sector,
opportunities exist for students in all programs who would like to gain
experience and give back to the community.
A constraint on maintaining consistent community relations is that there
is no permanent structure at UPEACE dedicated to these efforts. While
different efforts have been made from year to year, by different individuals
and different programs, there is a lack of continuity in these efforts that is
detrimental to sustainability, partially due to the fact that students are only at
the university for one year. In order to build lasting ties, and to build
programs that meet community needs, there needs to be a permanent
structure established at the University to promote community partnerships
and outreach. Thus I am proposing the establishment of a Community
Outreach Program at the University for Peace, headed by the Community
Liaison Officer.
The Community Outreach Program would help students to begin
projects within the community soon after their arrival, matching them based
on their interests and skills, and to develop projects and relationships
throughout the year. The Community Liaison Officer would be responsible for
maintaining ties within the community, for seeking out new partnerships, and
for assisting students with project development and implementation. The
Outreach Coordinator would also be responsible for maintaining institutional
memory of the outreach projects from year to year.
Background: Past to Future
While the University for Peace has been in existence for 30 years, it is really
only within the past several years that it has hosted a significant student
population. The increase in student population has had a significant impact on
the local communities of El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon. The University is located
in El Rodeo, a small farming community of 37 families. Some students live in
el Rodeo, while most live in Ciudad Colon, a larger city of 21,000 inhabitants
located 7 kilometers from the university. As the university population has
increased, there has been an increase in the number of local businesses, local
taxis, and many local residents can earn money by providing student housing.
However, at this time, this relationship is largely economic, and has the
potential much stronger and deeper, and transformative for all parties
involved. The University has plans for further expansion, increasing the
number of programs offered and the number of students. With this plan for
expansion, it has the possibility of having greater impact, and it is important
to develop good relations with the communities now, so that all can be
mutually involved in this growth process. Furthermore, if this growth is going
to affect the local communities, which it inevitably will, it would be advisable
for these stakeholders to be consulted in the planning process.
From the global to the local
The University for Peace's mission is "to provide humanity with an
international institution of higher education for peace and with the aim of
promoting among all human beings the spirit of understanding, tolerance and 126
peaceful coexistence, to stimulate cooperation among peoples and to help
lessen obstacles and threats to world peace and progress, in keeping with the
noble aspirations proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations " UN
General Assembly, 1980). While the mission is global, the university should
begin its aims at the local level, by sharing knowledge, skills and resources
with the local communities, and promoting "understanding, tolerance, and
peaceful coexistence, (and) cooperation" within the immediate communities.
Structures and Partnerships
This project will be a joint effort between the University and the communities
of El Rodeo and Ciudad Colon, thus involving multiple structures. To begin, I
propose the following partnerships:
1. UPEACE and El Rodeo elementary school
2. UPEACE and Casa de la Cultura in Ciudad Colón
3. UPEACE and the Ciudad Colon elementary school
In the future, the University could expand its efforts, but for the first
year, I would suggest these partnerships, beginning with the first two, and if
time and resources allow, including the third.
As UPEACE is a formal educational institution, I propose the creation of
a new structure (of the Community Liaison Office) within the present larger
university structure. The Community Outreach Program would operate within
UPEACE and in conjunction with the structures of the formal Costa Rican
educational system and the nonformal Casa de la Cultura community
education center.
Considerations in planning will have to take into account the structures
of UPEACE and the Costa Rican formal educational system, of which the el
Rodeo school is a part. For example, within UPEACE, programs could be
offered as an extracurricular activity, for credit, or as internships. Programs
would thus have to meet the requirements for credits or internships, whereas
the extracurricular activities would have greater flexibility. UPEACE will also
have to consider any formalities that should be taken in order to formally
establish the partnership with the school. It will be the job of the Outreach
Coordinator to understand these structures, and help inform students
accordingly.
The Casa de la Cultura, as a nonformal educational structure, most
likely has greater flexibility than the formal school system. Again, the
Outreach Coordinator should meet with the appropriate individuals (such as
the president of ADHERAC, Minor Perez) in order to better understand the
structure.
Form
This endeavor should be between the UPEACE community and the El Rodeo
and Ciudad Colon community members. The UPEACE students should work in
collaboration with community members to develop project that meet
community needs as well as the needs and skills of the UPEACE students. The
relationship should be equal and horizontal, and based on mutual learning and
dialogue. The entire process should be participatory and democratic. To foster
cultural respect and strengthen communication, UPEACE students should
make a best effort to learn and communicate in Spanish (unless they are
teaching a language class, which could be a part of cultural exchange efforts
with the Casa de la Cultura).
The main role of the Community Outreach Coordinator would be the
liaison between students and the communities, rather than to design projects
his/herself. Maintaining healthy community relations will be an integral part
of this position. All projects should involve peace education pedagogies, such
as dialogue, creativity, reflection, and critical inquiry.
Sample Content: Art for Peace Project
The content of projects will again vary depending on community and UPEACE
student needs, the possibilities for which are unlimited. As both of our field
trips involved interviews with community members, some community needs
have already been established.
The El Rodeo school is highly interested in developing peace education
programs for the school. Two projects that could begin immediately are:
1. Peace Education teacher training for El Rodeo teachers
2. Art for Peace class for students
128
For this report I would like to focus on the Art for Peace Project, which
could be done in conjunction with the El Rodeo school, Casa de la Cultura, and
possibly the Ciudad Colón elementary school.
At this time, there is no art class offered at the El Rodeo school, and art
has a significant role in peacebuilding. In our interview we asked the children
to draw pictures in response to the question, "What is peace?" It was evident
that they really enjoyed drawing, and that this could be offered on a more
regular basis. Furthermore, and Art for Peace class could be carried out by
UPEACE students with limited Spanish language abilities (in comparison with
a teacher training, which would require Spanish fluency). The school is also
lacking any decorations, and thus art projects could be used to beautify the
school, and give the children a source of pride in their work on display.
The Art for Peace program would be a one hour weekly class conducted
by UPEACE students according to the schedule of the school. To get supplies,
UPEACE students could solicit donations through a bake sale and/or concert,
both of which have proven to be successful mechanisms for fundraising in the
past at UPEACE. This project could potentially be carried out at the Ciudad
Colon school as well, perhaps with an art show at the Casa de la Cultura, thus
incorporating 3 institutions and strengthening partnerships.
Here is a sample lesson for the Art for Peace class:
Lesson 1: Peace Dove
Objective: To talk about symbols and meanings of peace
Materials: If possible, teachers should cut out dove bodies beforehand
(otherwise, would require scissors for all the children).
Thick paper for doves' bodies, thin paper for wings, scissors for cutting,
colored pencils or markers, string
Warm-up: Ask children "What symbols remind you of peace?” Invite students
who answer to come to the whiteboard and draw their image.
Perhaps by this point someone will have already mentioned a dove. Ask
students, "Why is the dove a symbol of peace?" (Answer: from the Noah's Ark
story in the Bible).
Activity: Making Peace Doves
Please see
http://www.sites4teachers.com/links/redirect.php?url=http://www.enchantedl
earning.com/crafts/newyear/dove/ for diagrams and instructions for how to
make the doves.
First have the children color the doves' bodies and wings. Then have
children assemble the doves. Finally, as a class hang the doves together
(inside the classroom, or on a tree. One option would be to bring a big branch
to class, put it in a box, and have the students hang them on the branch. That
way it can serve as a classroom decoration and will not contribute to outside
litter).
Wrap-up: Ask children for reflections on the activity. Suggested questions:
How do you feel when you make art?
What did you learn during this class?
What other kinds of art would you like to try?
A lack of community involvement from UPEACE is not only a lost opportunity;
it has the potential to negatively impact the university's reputation and
perception within the local communities. It is an ideal time for UPEACE to
develop a community outreach and service program, which will benefit
UPEACE students and local community members alike, and contribute to
cultivating a culture of peace at the local level.
130