Conflict- Sensitive Programming and PAR Objective is to discuss to what extent: A) Ongoing and proposed PAR programmes are conflict-sensitive B) Stronger focus on conflict-related impact of PAR programmes would be useful/ a priority PAR Community of Practice Meeting, Bratislava, May 2005

 A politicized civil service (dominated by one ethnic, religious or political group), and exclusion from involvement in public sector institutions (lack of consultative mechanisms) are structural causes of conflict.  PAR challenges the existing distribution of power and affects the real and/ or perceived distribution of material and symbolic resources.  Decentralization can reduce tensions but also generate conflict.  As a consequence of ethnically-based power-sharing arrangements, the public service often becomes ethnicised, thus reinforcing divisions and impeding common solutions to common problems.  Anti-corruption reform will face opposition from powerful groups that have built their lives on the proceeds from corruption. PAR and Conflict - Key Assumptions

 Conflict analysis (causes, actors, dynamics) as a contextual framework  Conflict-sensitive programming, implementation, monitoring  Building broad consensus on reform requirements  Minimizing the amount of apparent “losers”  Avoiding a witch-hunting of lower ranks in anti-corruption reforms  Linking anti-corruption programmes to security sector governance  Facilitating involvement of local councils/ municipal committees in recovery/ development programming – avoid parallel structures  Developing national skills for conflict assessment of proposed policies Programming - Implications/ Experiences