Peace and Conflict Studies - Spring 2014

Peace and Conflict Studies Volume 21, Number 1 29 literature remains ad hoc and descriptive, missing out on the potential to learn from the experience of many youth peacebuilders around the world. Finally, youth is a period –whether defined by chronological age or socially constructed roles- during which individuals undergo a number of important transitions. It is a difficult period under the best circumstances. During times of conflict, however, many youth can be stuck in “waithood” (Singerman, 2007, p. 6), unable to make the transition into adulthood. As just one example, unemployment often affects youth more than any other group. The frustrations that this generates and the effects can last well beyond the end of war. Youth in situations of conflict therefore have specific needs that require analysis and attention. Furthermore, as Hamilton points out, “Youth voices tend to go unheard by political and economic leaders (even by social scientists) unless they are raised as a revolutionary cry or as an articulated threat to the social order” (2010, p. 7). Youth, Education and Conflict: The Theory Overall the evidence suggests that youth get involved in violence for multiple and diverse reasons, which need to be understood in each specific context. In practice, there is usually no one singular reason why a particular young person participates in violence. Different individuals may join the same violent group for different reasons (see for example Weinstein & Humphreys, 2008). There are, however, three broad approaches in the literature to examining the linkages between education youth and conflict: social/cultural, economic, and political. Social and Cultural Theory One hypothesis is that conflict is generated out of grievances based on “horizontal inequalities”, defined as inequalities in economic, social or political dimensions or cultural status between culturally defined groups (Stewart, 2008). This is especially the case where the inequalities have perceived “social significance”. Gurr (1970) adds that even in contexts where the data shows no evidence of inequalities, there may be an increased risk of conflict where there is perceived “relative deprivation” between groups. Opinion is divided on whether the existence of different identity-based groups (linguistic, cultural, religious) carries an inherent potential for conflict. Although the view that cultural differences are the root cause of violent conflict underpins concepts such as “a clash of civilizations” (Huntington, 1996), Stewart argues that identity is important as it may be mobilized to generate or escalate conflict.