“This brief informs the Principles for Peace (P4P), a global participatory initiative to develop a new set of principles, standards and norms to fundamentally reshape how peace processes are structured, sequenced, and actualized. Recognizing that over half of formal peace agreements fail to sustain peace, the P4P explores a multidimensional model. P4P’s Peacemakers’ Covenant defines legitimate peace as requiring sustained long-term processes to transform state-society and intergroup relations through locally led, inclusive, and pluralist governance as well approaches based on a partnership compact between national and international actors.
The brief is a result of a series of interviews and a workshop organised through the thematic track of digital space and peace co-convened with Fondation Hirondelle and ICT4Peace Foundation. Beyond informing the P4P iterative process, it also identifies a menu of thematic tracks for the Swiss government to promote while participating as a non-permanent member on the UN Security Council.
Special thanks to the following people who participated in providing guidance and advice, provided interviews and/or the attended the workshop to discuss this report:
Three advisors provided extensive guidance and feedback to this paper.
Digital spaces bring both risks and opportunities to peace processes from Zimbabwe to Venezuela from Ukraine to the US, and from Sri Lanka to Syria.
This paper begins by describing hybrid information ecosystems and their role in sustained peace processes. Public interest news media is essential for democratic decision-making and successful peace processes. Digital media interacts with legacy media, such as radio, television, and newspapers. Ultimately, solutions require supporting both online and offline public interest news media.
Next the paper maps digital risks. Both state and non-state political actors are weaponizing tech platforms which by their very design tend to amplify divisive and antagonistic content. The digital space can dramatically increase risks by enabling the rapid spread of false information aimed at undermining an election or referendum. Digital risks likely outweigh the current contributions of the digital space to peace, as illustrated in a variety of case studies in this paper.
This brief then reviews how digital tools and spaces can contribute to sustained public peace processes. This section explores conflict analysis, information ecosystem analysis, planning interventions, and a review of the types of digital tech tools and approaches useful for peace processes. New digital forms of communication can scale public inclusion and improve efficiencies in peace processes. Digital spaces can transform how people share information and communicate with one another. Digital spaces can offer more inclusive and equitable avenues for participation and can incentivize the development of policy options.
The final section of the paper identifies trade-offs and dilemmas, practical strategies for analysing and intervening in digital spaces, and policy recommendations to governments, tech companies and civil society groups on a variety of themes.
A Note on Hybrid Information Ecosystems
In this paper, digital spaces and legacy media spaces coexist within a hybrid information ecosystem. Legacy media now produce and broadcast in digital spaces. Legacy media can also use digital information such as a post on social media as a source of information for a news story in newspapers, radio, or TV. Online and offline media reinforce each other, if there is false or deceptive information on social media, this can bleed over to radio or TV, and vice versa.
The digital space is unique from legacy media. Digital information travels faster, further, and more quickly than information on legacy media. Digital spaces can transform how people share information and communicate with one another. These digital affordances offer new possibilities for scaling public engagement, improving collaborative multi-stakeholder decision-making, and supporting elements of sustained public peace processes.”
Digital risks to sustained public peace processes likely outweigh the current contributions of the digital space to peace.
Digital affordances enable individuals to create user-generated content and to endorse information, including false, deceptive, and polarizing information.3
Digital amplification of false and distorted information can quickly sway public opinions about the prospects for peace and cause massive disruptions in democratic processes such as referendums or elections. Digital technologies can amplify polarisation, disinformation, and discrimination patterns fuelling conflict dynamics.
These distinctions affect the quality of the information, and the level of accountability for unverifiedinformation.Asatool,socialmedialends itselftounverifiedinformation,asinmostcountries technology companies are not held accountable for hosting hateful or false information. Public-interest oriented legacy media can provide opportunities to provide accurate information on trusted media sources to counter viral mis/disinformation online. Legacy media are bound to professional journalism standards, while content on social media is not.
Public interest media is essential to sustained peace processes and the healthy expression of conflicts within a democratic system. Democratic discussions and decision-making are difficult if the public consumes false, deceptive, or divisive information on either legacy media, digital media or both. Ultimately, creating information ecosystems the provide the public with verified information on both legacy news media outlets and in digital spaces is essential. The newly launched International Fund for Public Interest Media (IFPIM), headed by Nobel Peace Prize winning Filipino journalist Maria Ressa, recognizes the urgency in addressing information ecosystems both for democracy, and for the prevention of violent conflicts relevant to sustained peace.
See also the recent ICT4Peace publication:
by Sanjana Hattotuwa (Author) and Daniel Stauffacher (Editor)