Better together? Civil society coordination during peace negotiations

Extensive research has been conducted in the field of peacebuilding concerning the role of civil society in peace negotiations. However, although research has stressed the importance of coordination among civil society groups, we have limited knowledge concerning the impact civil society coordination can have on the content of a peace agreement. This article addresses this gap by examining how the extent of coordination among civil society groups during peace negotiations influences the reflectiveness of a peace agreement in regard to civil society viewpoints. We argue that a high extent of coordination, where civil society actors coordinate tasks and spearhead viewpoints together, can help facilitate peace agreements that are more reflective of civil society group views. Based on a comparative analysis of Guatemala and El Salvador, the findings show that whereas coordination between different civil society groups was quite extensive in both peace processes, civil society viewpoints were inscribed into the peace agreement to a larger extent in the Guatemalan case. We identify two factors that contribute in shaping how coordination influences the content of peace accords: symmetrical transfer of information, and openness from the negotiation parties to consider suggestions from civil society.

Automated summary

This article investigates the impact of coordination among civil society groups on the reflectiveness of a peace agreement in regard to civil society viewpoints. The findings suggest that a high extent of coordination can contribute to peace agreements that better reflect civil society group views.