Peacebuilding and Conflict Resolution is an exciting field of study and engagement. But trying to know if our peacebuilding efforts are really making a difference often entails a more tedious and painful process for many program managers and development practitioners. Scholars have acknowledged that there are few methodologies that have been developed outside of the regularity and counterfactual frameworks to address the impact challenge in complex conflict settings. The increasing complexity of peacebuilding interventions to better nuance and respond to the demands of a dynamic conflict context are often not matched by appropriate methodologies for capturing change and lessons, and clarifying causation between interventions and outcomes. The failure of evaluation to adequately capture change and insights from peacebuilding efforts has implications for program funding and program improvement.
Given the numerous challenges of conducting a credible and robust impact evaluation of peacebuilding programs, this study proposes a framework for doing an impact evaluation of peacebuilding programs implemented in conflict-affected areas, and attempts to demonstrate its feasibility by conducting actual impact evaluations in the field. In doing so, it will focus on addressing the key theoretical and methodological challenges identified in evaluation and peace and conflict literature. This study is significant from a methodological standpoint because it attempts to address a common weakness of the conflict resolution and peacebuilding fields: how to find credible and useful evidence that peacebuilding interventions are making a difference. Such an endeavor is also important because it attempts to bridge the methodological divide between the academe, the evaluation field, and the peace and development field in the use of research methods in evaluation. The insights gained from this exercise will be used to improve the design and implementation of peacebuilding programs and evaluation methodologies.