This thesis discusses the work of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in the field of conflict prevention, management and resolution, from 1990 until late 1998. Two theoretical perspectives, neo-realism and neo-liberal institutionalism, provide a framework for analysis. Both theories are able to highlight different strengthsa nd weaknesses in the OSCE's approach which are described in three case studies. However, neither theory can fully explain the findings of the case studies. In the thesis's conclusion the shortcomings of both theories are discussed and the gaps in explanation are explored by reference to constructivist approaches. Three case studies are described in order to demonstrate different facets of the OSCE's work. Macedonia provides an example of the OSCE's work in conflict prevention (it is in the field of conflict prevention that the OSCE is seen at its most successful). The second case study, Nagomo-Karabakh, examines the OSCE's handling of an ongoing conflict and attempts to arrange both a peace conference and a peacekeeping mission. The issues surrounding the conflict here demonstrate the complexity of external involvement in mediation and negotiation processes, and the difficulties of trying to find solutions that are acceptable to the parties in a context complicated further by the interests of external actors. The third case study is an analysis of the OSCE's engagement in the post-conflict reconstruction of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This reveals the problems of implementing aspects of an unsatisfactory peace agreement. The case study highlights the enormity of the tasks assigned to the OSCE and the lack of coherent international support for the organisation's work. It also discusses the effects of the interplay of both external and internal power political struggles on the OSCE's operations. The thesis concludes that the OSCE has in limited ways performed valuable work in all three case studies but that its real strengths are most apparent in the field of conflict prevention.

Yes / The key questions to be addressed in this study are: with the benefit of hindsight, what conflict prevention 'packages' could the international community have designed in order to minimise the probability of the conflicts that actually took place? How much would have been saved if these packages had been implemented, given reasonable estimates about their costs, compared with the actual cost of conflict and post-conflict intervention. The first section provides a background to the conflicts. This is followed by an assessment of the levels of resources that the international community has committed to the Western Balkans since 1991. The third part of the study provides two hypothetical scenarios for CP interventions that might have restrained conflict from breaking out. These CP packages are then costed and an assessment of their probability of success is made.

yes / P5. The evaluation was undertaken by Bradford University, Channel Research Ltd, the PARC & Associated Consultants. The ACPP Sierra Leone Case study was carried out by Dr Jeremy Ginifer with Ms Kaye Oliver. Work was conducted in three phases. The first was London-based, and involved situating Sierra Leone ACPP activities in the context of UK approaches to conflict prevention and the overall policy framework of the ACPP. The second phase involved field work in Sierra Leone, whilst the third phase involved consultations in London with key government stakeholders. P7. The Sierra Leone Case Study is one of six studies undertaken within the framework of the evaluation of the CPPs. In accordance with the Terms of Reference (ToRs) and the Inception Report, the Evaluation placed maximum emphasis on the macro level: the policy processes in Whitehall by which decisions on allocations are made and implemented by the CPPs. Considerable attention has also been placed on the meso level: the degree to which CPP policies and activities in a given conflict form part of a coherent package of direct interventions by the international community and local actors to the problems of particular large scale deadly conflicts or potential conflicts. The micro-level of analysis (review of specific projects) confines itself largely to the way in which projects impact on the meso and macro levels. The Evaluation has not analysed systematically whether specific projects funded by the CPPs have been well managed and whether they have achieved their specific project goals. Single projects have been analysed to the extent that they reflect on the macro and meso levels. P8. The main findings of the evaluation, reflected in this Synthesis Report, are that the CPPs are doing significant work funding worthwhile activities that make positive contributions to effective conflict prevention, although it is far too early in the day to assess impact. The progress achieved through the CPP mechanisms is significant enough to justify their continuation.

yes / P5. The evaluation was undertaken by Bradford University, Channel Research Ltd, the PARC & Associated Consultants. The United Nations (UN) Case study was carried out by Mr Pierre Robert with Professor Andrew Mack. The study was carried out through documentary review and interviews with members of the UN GCPP Steering Committee, other London-based officials, UK officials and other stakeholders in other case study countries, staff from the UK¿s UN Mission in New York (UKMIS) and with senior staff at the UN and at other relevant institutions involved in managing projects funded under the Strategy.1 The main evaluator also drew on experience from having evaluated a specific GCPP UN Strategy project, the Early Warning and Preventative Measures (EWPM) training, implemented by the UN System Staff College, early in 2003. P7. The UN Case Study is one of six studies undertaken within the framework of the evaluation of the Conflict Prevention Pools. In accordance with the Terms of Reference (ToRs) and the Inception Report, the Evaluation placed maximum emphasis on the macro level: the policy processes in Whitehall by which decisions on allocations are made and implemented by the CPPs. Considerable attention has also been placed on the meso level: the degree to which CPP policies and activities in a given conflict form part of a coherent package of direct interventions by the international community and local actors to the problems of particular large scale deadly conflicts or potential conflicts. The microlevel of analysis (review of specific projects) confines itself largely to the way in which projects impact on the meso and macro levels. The Evaluation has not analysed systematically whether specific projects funded by the CPPs have been well managed and whether they have achieved their specific project goals. Single projects have been analysed to the extent that they reflect on the macro and meso levels. P8. The main findings of the evaluation, reflected in this Synthesis Report, are that the CPPs are doing significant work funding worthwhile activities that make positive contributions to effective conflict prevention, although it is far too early in the day to assess impact. The progress achieved through the CPP mechanisms is significant enough to justify their continuation.

yes / P5. The evaluation was undertaken by Bradford University, Channel Research Ltd, the PARC & Associated Consultants. The GCPP Security Sector Reform (SSR) case study was carried out by Ms Nicole Ball who has conducted extensive fieldwork on SSR in a number of countries. This study was carried out through review of relevant documents, including the reports of geographic case studies undertaken for the evaluation, and interview of UK-based officials involved in SSR work. The UK-based interviews focused on several categories of stakeholders: members of the SSR Strategy Steering Group; members of the SSR Policy Committee; representatives of three main SSR Strategy instruments (DAT, GFN, Defence Diplomacy); representatives of the GCPP and ACPP; and officials currently working on or recently working on key geographic desks (Balkans, Indonesia, Uganda). P7. The GCPP SSR Case Study is one of six studies undertaken within the framework of the evaluation of the Conflict Prevention Pools. In accordance with the Terms of Reference (ToRs) and the Inception Report, the Evaluation placed maximum emphasis on the macro level: the policy processes in Whitehall by which decisions on allocations are made and implemented by the CPPs. Considerable attention has also been placed on the meso level: the degree to which CPP policies and activities in a given conflict, or given sector of conflict prevention policy such as SSR, form part of a coherent package of direct interventions by the international community and local actors to the problems of preventing large scale deadly conflicts. The micro-level of analysis (review of specific projects) confines itself largely to the way in which projects impact on the meso and macro levels. The Evaluation has not analysed systematically whether specific projects funded by the CPPs have been well managed and whether they have achieved their specific project goals. Single projects have been analysed to the extent that they reflect on the macro and meso levels. P8. The main findings of the evaluation, reflected in this Synthesis Report, are that the CPPs are doing significant work funding worthwhile activities that make positive contributions to effective conflict prevention, although it is far too early in the day to assess impact. The progress achieved through the CPP mechanisms is significant enough to justify their continuation.

Conflicts are a natural part of people's daily lives and we all know that they cannot be avoided. Equally common are conflicts in school as an institution, not at least in the interaction between teachers and students. The purpose of this study is to investigate how teachers think and reflect on the various classroom conflicts that arise with students, and which preventive measures the teachers use. This study intends to answer the following questions; What is it that characterizes conflicts between teachers and students in middle school?     How do teachers think that these conflicts can be prevented and what solutions can be applied? I have used in this study a qualitative research method as a tool. This study examines how teachers reflect and discuss about their perceptions of classroom conflicts. My theoretical connection consists of the senior lecturer in pedagogic, Arne Maltén and his ideas of communication theories. He describes different perspectives that teachers can relate to in the prevention of conflicts that may arise.                                                                                                                                                                                                                   The results of my study reveal that teachers receive a negative view of conflicts while they share different approaches of how conflicts could be prevented. The teachers are aware that conflicts at school are impossible to avoid but at the same time they decide to deal with them with their own methods. There are a number of these which can be applied in dealing with conflicts. Some teachers do not shy away from the conflicts, while others choose to avoid them. In school and in learning environment there should be a constructive approach to prevent conflicts.

<p>The purpose of the thesis is to see how operational prevention has been carried out in cases of internal conflicts in the last five to six years in order to see whether it has been ineffective just due to lack of political will or if there could be other explanations to it. To fulfil the purpose, two main questions are answered in two steps. The first question is:</p><p>What other factors than political will are necessary for operational prevention to be more effective? These other factors then form a model for more effective operational prevention together with political will. The second question is based on this model and is as follows:</p><p>Is the model that these factors form followed when operational prevention is applied in practise?</p><p>Three cases of conflict are looked at in order to answer the second question, Darfur, Nepal and Haiti. Both steps of the analysis are conducted by means of qualitative text analysis. The results support the common notion that effective conflict prevention is due to political will to act within the international community, but the results also indicate that political will is not all it takes for operational prevention to be effective.</p>

no / While the general argument that it is easier and more cost-effective to prevent conflicts before the outbreak of violence has considerable attraction, a rigorous approach to estimating the cost and benefits of this policy is still lacking. The objective of this study is to contribute to the development of such an approach. The project involves six case studies, three retrospective (the Western Balkans, Afghanistan, and Rwanda) and three prospective (Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and southern Sudan). Its main conclusion is that targeted programmes of conflict prevention are (or would have been) significantly cheaper than cure.

no / Wars, armed violence and insecurity continue to blight Sub-Saharan Africa. Preventing and reducing such conflict has become a key priority not only for African governments and peoples, but also for Europe and the rest of the world. But successes have been limited, and important lessons have not been properly learned. This timely and important book examines the continuing sources and dynamics of violent conflict in Sub-Saharan Africa, and critically analyses policies and programmes to help to prevent, manage and reduce such conflicts

yes / P5. The evaluation was undertaken by Bradford University, Channel Research Ltd, the PARC & Associated Consultants. The GCPP Russia and Former Soviet Union (FSU) Case study was carried out by Dr Greg Austin with Mr Paul Bergne. Work was conducted in three phases. The first was London-based, and considered the Russia and FSU Strategy¿s activities in the context of UK approaches to conflict prevention in the region and the overall policy framework of the GCPP. The second phase involved fieldwork in Georgia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, whilst the third phase involved consultations in London. P7. The Russia and FSU Case Study is one of six studies undertaken within the framework of the evaluation of the Conflict Prevention Pools. In accordance with the Terms of Reference (ToRs) and the Inception Report, the Evaluation placed maximum emphasis on the macro level: the policy processes in Whitehall by which decisions on allocations are made and implemented by the CPPs. Considerable attention has also been placed on the meso level: the degree to which CPP policies and activities in a given conflict form part of a coherent package of direct interventions by the international community and local actors to the problems of particular large scale deadly conflicts or potential conflicts. The microlevel of analysis (review of specific projects) confines itself largely to the way in which projects impact on the meso and macro levels. The Evaluation has not analysed systematically whether specific projects funded by the CPPs have been well managed and whether they have achieved their specific project goals. Single projects have been analysed to the extent that they reflect on the macro and meso levels. P8. The main findings of the evaluation, reflected in this Synthesis Report, are that the CPPs are doing significant work funding worthwhile activities that make positive contributions to effective conflict prevention, although it is far too early in the day to assess impact. The progress achieved through the CPP mechanisms is significant enough to justify their continuation.