From ceasefire to cohesion: An integrated review of peacemaking and peacebuilding

Lisa Hultman & Salma Mousa

Economic Policy: a European forum2025https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiaf011article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.41

Abstract

How can societies escape the conflict trap of violence and distrust between social outgroups? Existing research offers a plethora of tools for reducing conflict through peacemaking, peacebuilding, and reconstruction efforts. Peacemaking tools are often international efforts aimed at reducing violence in the short term by changing the immediate behavior of organized actors. Once violence has been stymied, additional peacebuilding efforts are necessary to foster intergroup trust, tolerance, and a shared national identity, thereby reducing incentives for violence and building resilience against future “shocks” to tolerance in the long term. Such efforts typically occur at the grassroots level, seeking to change the attitudes of individuals in post-conflict societies. We provide an overview of the evidence base on peacemaking and peacebuilding—identifying promising policies and programs, limitations, and shared mechanisms driving positive effects. We integrate these literatures into a framework tracing the path from immediate violence reduction to durable peace, pinpointing critical empirical and theoretical gaps in our knowledge of how to break the conflict trap.

2 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiaf011

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{lisa2025,
  title        = {{From ceasefire to cohesion: An integrated review of peacemaking and peacebuilding}},
  author       = {Lisa Hultman & Salma Mousa},
  journal      = {Economic Policy: a European forum},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiaf011},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

From ceasefire to cohesion: An integrated review of peacemaking and peacebuilding

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.41

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.25 × 0.4 = 0.10
M · momentum0.55 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.