The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Peace Katerina Standish Full Chapter

The Palgrave Handbook of Positive
Peace Katerina Standish

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-positive-peace-katerina-sta
ndish/
Katerina Standish
Heather Devere
Adan E. Suazo
Rachel Rafferty
Editors
The Palgrave
Handbook of
Positive Peace
The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Peace
Katerina Standish • Heather Devere •
Adan E. Suazo • Rachel Rafferty
Editors
The Palgrave Handbook of

Positive Peace
With 28 Figures and 24 Tables

Editors
Katerina Standish Heather Devere
National Centre for Peace and National Centre for Peace and
Conflict Studies Conflict Studies
University of Otago University of Otago
Dunedin, New Zealand Dunedin, New Zealand
Adan E. Suazo Rachel Rafferty

National Centre for Peace and Department of Criminology and
Conflict Studies Social Sciences
University of Otago University of Derby
Dunedin, New Zealand Derby, UK
ISBN 978-981-16-0968-8 ISBN 978-981-16-0969-5 (eBook)

ISBN 978-981-16-0970-1 (print and electronic bundle)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0969-5
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the
material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte
Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Preface to The Palgrave Handbook of Positive
Peace
Positive Peace is a conceptual objective that grasps and seeks to craft a world
without violence. The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Peace is a twenty-first century
expansion of a theoretical construct that originally imagined Positive Peace as the
absence of direct and structural violence, later, the absence of direct, structural, and
environmental violence, to offer the Quadrant of Positive Peace which envisages
Positive Peace to result from four practices of peace including nonviolence, social
justice, environmental sustainability, and positive relationships.
From its inception, this project has been driven and carried forward by two main
tenets. First, a thematic consensus by the editorial team that Positive Peace, like
nature, is more than a portrait on a wall: it is a wide landscape comprised of a
plethora of elements and participants, each contributing to furthering its study and
understanding. From the beginning, we strove to make this handbook both a
publication and a venue for our authors to elaborate unique perspectives, and
practices, which collectively embrace a holistic view of Positive Peace.
And second, this project has been anchored on the acknowledgment, respect, and
admiration of the editorial team for our authors’ work. Each contribution in this
handbook reflects the tireless dedication of researchers, practitioners, and commu-
nity leaders, each making a crucial difference in their own field of study and practice.
The coming together of these voices is helping us progress and refine the theoretical
and practical underpinnings of Positive Peace and redefines the boundaries of its
study. This work seeks to advance the field, to provide a comprehensive platform of
building peace in the twenty-first century, and to incorporate avenues of
peacebuilding that frequently, but need not, labor in isolation of one another.
The editors of this book see these curricula as instrumental – contributory to a
world without violence in their comprehensive perspective: nonviolence without
positive relationships can estrange, positive relationships without social justice can
maintain oppressions, social justice without nonviolence and positive relationships
can alienate, and nonviolence, social justice, and positive relationships without
environmental sustainability are not only negligent of the impact of human “doings”
on nature, they ignore the destruction of our shared ecology, the Earth.
Ultimately, the editors and authors of this handbook consider Positive Peace to be
a platform of engagement, of action, and of change; a way to see conflict as a signal
that needs attention and an opportunity for positive and integrative transformation.
v
vi Preface to The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Peace
As you will see in the voices and vantage points present in this handbook, Positive
Peace is not an incarnation without violence, it is an interconnected appreciation that
building peace in one part of the Positive Peace Quadrant is not enough; we need to
participate and partner in building peace that amplifies and incorporates nonviolence,
social justice, environmental sustainability, and positive relationships. This hand-
book is a gathering in and illumination of one aim – that positive peace is possible,
and that we can work to support a healthy planet, to foster a just and dignified
humanity, together.
The editors of this handbook wish to thank the generous, creative, and persever-
ing authors who have contributed their words, worlds, and wisdom to this work.
Entering into a relationship is an act of connecting to someone or something beyond
ourselves. Positive relationships are marked by concern for the well-being of the
other and by recognition of the inevitability of human interdependence with one
another as well as the natural world. This work is rooted in positive relationship, and
each one of the authors in this handbook has not only offered their writing and
worldviews, they contributed their time, their attention, and their humanity. Out of
nothing, together we have created a wonder and our gratitude for your work is
boundless.
Contents
Volume 1
Part I Introduction ....................................... 1
1 Defining the Platform of Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Katerina Standish, Heather Devere, Adan E. Suazo, and
Rachel Rafferty
Part II Personal Nonviolence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2 The Nature of Reflective Choice and Nonviolence as a Personal

Practice of Yoga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Tatiyana Bastet
3 Personal Peacebuilding and COVID-19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Katerina Standish
4 Humor as a Major Intellectual Device for Thriving in

Complexity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Marianella Sclavi
5 Contemplative Practices and Nonviolence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

Joseph Llewellyn
6 Resilience and the Claiming of Voice by Marginalized

Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Lacey M. Sloan and Cathryne L. Schmitz
Part III Interpersonal Nonviolence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
7 True Colors: Nonviolent Communication in the Postcolonial

Workplace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Tatiyana Bastet
vii
viii Contents
8 Forgiveness: A Nonviolent Resolution of Interpersonal

Conflict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Ann Macaskill
Part IV Social Nonviolence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
9 Peace Education ....................................... 167

Heather Kertyzia
10 Classroom Resistance: Peace Education in a Time of Rising
Authoritarianism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
Cheryl Lynn Duckworth
11 Nonviolent Resistance, Social Justice, and Positive Peace ....... 211
Jonathan Pinckney
12 Pragmatic Nonviolence and Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
Joseph Llewellyn
13 Women in Environmental Nonviolent Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
Marty Branagan
14 Satire and the Public Sphere: Ethics and Poetics, Reverse
Discourses, Satiractivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
James E. Caron
Part V International Nonviolence .......................... 293
15 Unarmed Civilian Peacekeeping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295

Ellen Furnari, Berit Bliesemann de Guevara, and Rachel Julian
16 Diplomatic Heroism and Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
Peter Grace and Robert G. Patman
17 International Conflict Transformation: The Pursuit of
Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
Laura E. Reimer and Cathryne L. Schmitz
18 Conflict Transformation in the Arab World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
Engy Said
19 The ABCs of Measuring Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369
Preston Lindsay, Ane Cristina Figueiredo, and Sean Byrne
Part VI Social Justice: Types of Justice ...................... 415
20 Retributive Justice: The Restoration of Balance .............. 417

Vicki A. Spencer
Contents ix
21 Restorative Justice: Blending Western and Indigenous

Restorative Justice Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429
Heather Devere and Kelli Te Maihāroa
22 Promoting Peace via Inclusionary Justice ................... 441

Susan Opotow
23 Transformative Justice: Exploring the “Relational” in

Transformative Gender Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455
Natasha Teresa Jolly
Part VII Social Justice: Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473
24 The Right to Peace: From Just War to Just Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . 475

Heather Devere
25 Women’s Rights/Gender Rights: Positive Peace as Indigenous

and Womxn’s Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489
Sylvia C. Frain
26 Disability Rights: Positive Peace Through a Disability Lens . . . . . 501

Roberta Francis Watene
27 Indigenous Rights: Colonial Chimera? The Illusion of Positive

Peace in a Settler Colonial Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 519
Pounamu Jade William Emery Aikman
28 Refugee Rights: Essential for Positive Peace ................. 531

Rose Joudi
29 The Rights of Children: Tensions Between Protection and

Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 543
Penelope Carroll
Part VIII Social Justice: Freedoms .......................... 557
30 Media Freedom: A West Papuan Human Rights Journalism

Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559
David Robie
31 Freedom from Violence: A Samoan Perspective on Addressing

Domestic or Family Violence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583
Michael Fusi Ligaliga
32 Freedom from Discrimination: On the Coloniality of Positive

Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611
Mahdis Azarmandi
x Contents
Volume 2
Part IX Environmental Sustainability: Conceptual

Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 623
33 Ecocide, Speciesism, Vulnerability: Revisiting Positive Peace

in the Anthropocene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 625
Rimona Afana
34 Searching for New Ethics in the Era of the Capitalocene ....... 643
Silviya Serafimova
35 Environmental Sustainability: The Missing Pillar of Positive
Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661
Ayyoob Sharifi and Dahlia Simangan
36 A Framework for Grassroots Environmentalism in Academic
Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 681
Shir Gruber
Part X Environmental Sustainability: Local Perspectives . . . . . . . . 703
37 Decentralizing Consumption to Recenter the Land . . . . . . . . . . . . 705

D. P. Rice
38 When a Sense of Place Lies at the Heart of a Community from
the Upper Paleolithic to Glenorchy, New Zealand . . . . . . . . . . . . . 723
Leslie Van Gelder
39 The Rule of Benedict, Positive Peace, and “Place” . . . . . . . . . . . . . 737
Rosemarie Schade
40 Food Justice and Positive Peace in Waikatere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 749
Heather Tribe
Part XI Environmental Sustainability: National and Regional

Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 759
41 Resources, Climate Change, and Implications to Positive Peace

Among the Pastoral Communities in Kenya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 761
Wyclife Ong’eta Mose
42 Environmental Degradation and Conflict Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . 775
Engy Said
43 Water Abundance, Hydropolitical Disputes, and Their
Implications for Positive Peace in Aotearoa–New Zealand ...... 797
Adan E. Suazo
Contents xi
Part XII Environmental Sustainability: International

Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811
44 Regional Environmental Cooperation: The (Lost) Potential

for a Sustainable Future in the Arabian/Persian Gulf . . . . . . . . . . 813
Mohammad Al-Saidi
45 Collaborative Environmental Conflict Resolution Practices in
the North American Great Lakes Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833
Olga Skarlato
Part XIII Positive Relationships: Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853
46 Relational Ethics: The Possibility of a Caring Positive Peace .... 855

Reina C. Neufeldt
47 Social Capital and Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869
Walt Kilroy
48 Solidarity and Allyship: Engendering Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . . 889
Sorcha Tormey
49 Ethical Responsibility for the Other Arrested by Epistemic
Blindness, Deafness, and Muteness: An Ubuntu Perspective . . . . . 909
M. B. Ramose
50 Empathy and Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935
Daniel J. Christie and Daniel M. Morrison
51 Positive Peace in Political Reconciliation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 959
Hyukmin Kang
52 The Importance of Trust in Achieving Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . 979
Thia M. Sagherian-Dickey
53 From Liberal Peace to Positive Peace: Security Sector Reform
in Deeply Divided Societies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999
Alejandra Ortiz-Ayala
Part XIV Positive Relationships: Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031
54 Positive Peace Through Personal Friendship: Franco-German

Reconciliation (1974–1995) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033
Yuri van Hoef
55 Contact Programs and the Pursuit of Positive Peace:
Reframing Perceptions of Equality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1051
Rachel Nolte-Laird
xii Contents
56 Transforming the Way We Speak, Transforming the Way

We Listen: Dialogue and the Transformation of Relationships . . . 1069
Julia Chaitin
57 Education for Peaceful Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1085
Silvia Guetta
58 Weaving a Culture of Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101
Jacqueline Haessly
59 Restorative Justice as Restoration of Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127
Jeremy Simons
60 Generating Discursive Resources: Storytelling for
Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149
Jessica Senehi
61 Peace Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1169
Cécile Mouly
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1189
About the Editors
Katerina Standish
National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies
University of Otago
Dunedin, New Zealand
Dr. Katerina Standish the director of research and
senior lecturer at the National Centre for Peace and
Conflict Studies at the University of Otago,
New Zealand. Her research projects and scholarly pub-
lications include content related to COVID-19, suicide,
femicide, conflict transformation, decolonization, story,
humanistic sociology, hope, gender, social, cultural and
political violence, encounter theory, education and con-
flict, peace education, human rights, social justice, per-
sonal peacebuilding, principled/pragmatic nonviolence,
and academic research and writing. She is the author,
co-author, or co-editor of Suicide Through a
Peacebuilding lens, Yogic Peace Education, Cultural
Violence in the Classroom, Conflict Transformation,
Peacebuilding and Storytelling, and Expanding the
Edges of Narrative Enquiry: Research from the Mauro
Institute. Dr. Standish has published academic journal
articles in Peace Review, Peacebuilding, Journal of
Peace Education, Journal of Peace and Justice Studies,
In Factis Pax: Journal of Peace Education and Justice
Studies, Peace and Conflict Studies Journal, Peace
Research: The Canadian Journal of Peace and Conflict
Studies, Humanity & Society, Journal of Gender Stud-
ies, Diaspora, Indigenous, and Minority Education,
Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, Nordic Journal of
Studies in Educational Policy, Global Journal of
xiii
xiv About the Editors
Peace Research and Praxis, Peace Studies Journal,

Peace and Conflict Review, International Journal of
Development Education & Global Learning, Journal
of Intervention and Statebuilding, Journal of Human
Security, and Geopolitics. Dr. Standish is the editor-in-
chief of the Peace Review: A Journal of Social Justice,
senior editor of the Palgrave Handbook for Positive
Peace, and sits on the editorial boards of the Journal
of Peace Education, In Factis Pax: Journal of Peace
Education and Social Justice, International Journal of
Advanced Peace and Gandhian Studies, and Global
Journal of Peace Research and Praxis. Dr. Standish is
a community peacebuilder, certified conflict coach,
somatic trainer, and trauma informed instructor.
Heather Devere
University of Otago
Dr. Heather Devere is director of practice at the Te Ao
o Rongomaraeroa/National Centre for Peace and Con-
flict Studies at the University of Otago in Aotearoa,
New Zealand. She has completed her doctoral thesis is
in politics at the University of Auckland and examines
women’s attitudes to civil rights issues. She has taught at
several universities on topics such as conflict resolution,
indigenous peace traditions, ethics, social justice, and
politics, and acts as an advocate for mediations involv-
ing not-for-profit organizations. Dr. Devere is founding
co-editor of AMITY: The Journal of Friendship Studies
published by Leeds University. Some of Dr. Devere’s
publications include Friendship Studies: Practices
across Cultures (with Dr. Graham Smith and Professor
John von Heyking), Decolonising Peace and Conflict
Studies through Indigenous Research (with Dr. Kelli Te
Maihāroa and Dr. Michael Ligaliga), Peacebuilding and
the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples (with Dr. John
Synott and Dr. Kelli Te Maihāroa), and The Challenge
to Friendship Studies in Modernity (with Professor Pres-
ton King).
About the Editors xv
Dr. Adan E. Suazo

University of Otago
Dr. Adan E. Suazo is a senior policy analyst at the
Ministry for the Environment (New Zealand) and a
research associate at the National Centre for Peace and
Conflict Studies at the University of Otago (New Zealand).
His research examines the conditions that influence the
emergence and intensification of water disputes. He also
specializes in the design and implementation of stake-
holder identification and engagement strategies for
peacebuilding and policy development. As the founding
coordinator of the Loyola Sustainability Research Cen-
tre at Concordia University (Canada), he worked on
sustainability and peacebuilding projects with the Inter-
national Secretariat for the Convention on Biological
Diversity, the United Nations Environmental Education
and Training Unit, and Future Earth.
Rachel Rafferty
Department of Criminology and Social Sciences
University of Derby
Derby, UK
Dr. Rachel Rafferty works as a lecturer in sociology at
the University of Derby, United Kingdom. Before join-
ing the University of Derby, she worked as a lecturer in
peace and conflict studies at the National Centre for
Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Otago,
Aotearoa, New Zealand. Before Dr. Rafferty moved into
an academic career, she gained several years of work
experience in the charity sector. She worked for over
5 years coordinating community peacebuilding projects
in post-conflict Northern Ireland. This work involved
activities such as facilitating dialogues between different
religious groups, coordinating collaborative art projects,
and working with schools to promote peace education.
She has also previously worked with New Zealand Red
Cross coordinating youth humanitarian projects.
xvi About the Editors
Dr. Rafferty’s areas of expertise include collective mem-

ory in ethnic conflicts, peace activism, and refugee
resettlement. She has published a number of journal
articles and book chapters on topics such as post-conflict
peacebuilding, international conflict resolution, and ref-
ugee resettlement. Dr. Rafferty holds a PhD in peace and
conflict studies from the University of Otago.
Contributors
Rimona Afana Vulnerability and the Human Condition Initiative, Emory Univer-
sity School of Law, Atlanta, GA, USA
Pounamu Jade William Emery Aikman Wellington, New Zealand
Mohammad Al-Saidi Center for Sustainable Development, College of Arts and
Sciences, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar
Mahdis Azarmandi School of Education, Health, and Human Development,
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
Tatiyana Bastet Simmons University, Boston, MA, USA
Berit Bliesemann de Guevara Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, UK
Marty Branagan Peace Studies, University of New England, Armidale, Australia
Sean Byrne University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
James E. Caron University of Hawaiʽi at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI, USA
Penelope Carroll SHORE, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand
Julia Chaitin Sapir College, Doar Na Ashkelon, Israel
Daniel J. Christie Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
Heather Devere National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of
Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
Cheryl Lynn Duckworth Department of Conflict Resolution and Peace Education,
Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA
Ane Cristina Figueiredo University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
Sylvia C. Frain The Everyday Peace Initiative, Auckland, New Zealand
Roberta Francis Watene Donald Beasley Institute, Dunedin, New Zealand
Ellen Furnari Webster University, Webster Groves, MO, USA
Peter Grace University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
xvii
xviii Contributors
Shir Gruber Faculty of Science, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences,

McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
Silvia Guetta University of Florence, Florence, Italy
Jacqueline Haessly Peacemaking Associates, Milwaukee, WI, USA
Natasha Teresa Jolly Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Otago, Dunedin,
New Zealand
Rose Joudi Psychology, Mount Royal University, Calgary, AB, Canada
Rachel Julian Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK
Hyukmin Kang Kangwon Institute for Unification Studies/Kangwon National
University, Chuncheon, South Korea
Heather Kertyzia University for Peace, San Jose, Costa Rica
Walt Kilroy Institute for International Conflict Resolution and Reconstruction
(IICRR), Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
Michael Fusi Ligaliga Te Tumu School of Maori, Pacific and Indigenous Studies,
University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
Preston Lindsay University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
Joseph Llewellyn University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
Ann Macaskill Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
Daniel M. Morrison Bay Village, OH, USA
Cécile Mouly Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (FLACSO) Ecuador,
Quito, Ecuador
Reina C. Neufeldt Conrad Grebel University College, University of Waterloo,
Waterloo, ON, Canada
Rachel Nolte-Laird National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of
Wyclife Ong’eta Mose School of Security, Diplomacy and Peace Studies, Kenyatta
University, Nairobi, Kenya
Susan Opotow John Jay College of Criminal Justice and The Graduate Center, City
University of New York, New York, NY, USA
Alejandra Ortiz-Ayala University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
Robert G. Patman University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
Jonathan Pinckney United States Institute of Peace, Washington, DC, USA
Rachel Rafferty Department of Criminology and Social Sciences, University of
Derby, Derby, UK
Contributors xix
M. B. Ramose Department of Clinical Psychology, Sefako Makgatho Health

Sciences University, Ga-Rankuwa, South Africa
Laura E. Reimer University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
D. P. Rice Dawson College Peace Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
David Robie Pacific Media Centre, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland,
Aotearoa New Zealand
Thia M. Sagherian-Dickey Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands
Engy Said Jimmy and Rosslyn Carter School for Peace and Conflict Resolution,
George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA
Rosemarie Schade Environmental Sustainability, Loyola College for Diversity and
Sustainability, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada
Cathryne L. Schmitz University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, NC,
USA
Marianella Sclavi Milan’s Polytechnic, Rome, Italy
Jessica Senehi Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB,
Canada
Silviya Serafimova Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Bulgarian Academy of
Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria
Ayyoob Sharifi Network for Education and Research on Peace and Sustainability
and Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Hiroshima University,
Higashi Hiroshima, Japan
Dahlia Simangan Network for Education and Research on Peace and Sustainabil-
ity and Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Hiroshima University,
Higashi Hiroshima, Japan
Jeremy Simons University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
Olga Skarlato Peace Studies, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
Lacey M. Sloan University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA
Vicki A. Spencer Politics, School of Social Sciences, University of Otago, Dunedin,
New Zealand
Katerina Standish National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of
Adan E. Suazo National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of
Kelli Te Maihāroa Kaihautu Te Kahui Whetu, Otago Polytechnic, Dunedin, New
Zealand
xx Contributors
Sorcha Tormey Australian Catholic University, Lismore, Australia

Heather Tribe National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of
Leslie Van Gelder Richard W. Riley College of Education and Leadership, Walden
University, Minneapolis, MN, USA
Yuri van Hoef Department of History, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam,
The Netherlands
Part I
Introduction
Defining the Platform of Positive Peace
1
Katerina Standish, Heather Devere, Adan E. Suazo, and
Rachel Rafferty
Contents
Defining the Platform of Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Defining Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
The Multifarity of Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Overview of the Positive Peace Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Nonviolence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Social Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Environmental Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Positive Relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Positive Peace Quadrant Chapter Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Nonviolence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Social Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Environmental Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Positive Relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Concluding Remarks of Invitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Abstract
After a brief introduction of typical notions of peace, this chapter ventures to trace
the idea of positive peace in recent scholarship to establish how the term is
utilized in the PACS world. It then endeavors to introduce each editorial domain
within this handbook including a synopsis of each form of intervention theoret-
ically followed immediately by a summary of the chapters that inhabit the
PALGRAVE Handbook of Positive Peace.
K. Standish (*) · H. Devere · A. E. Suazo

National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
e-mail: Katerina.standish@otago.ac.nz
R. Rafferty
Department of Criminology and Social Sciences, University of Derby, Derby, UK
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022 3
K. Standish et al. (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Peace,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0969-5_1
4 K. Standish et al.
Keywords
Positive Peace · Peace and Conflict Studies · Social Justice · Nonviolence-
Environmental Sustainability · Positive Relationships · Positive Peace Quadrant
Defining the Platform of Positive Peace
Introduction
The following introductory section and the contributed chapters in the PALGRAVE
Handbook of Positive Peace seek to contribute a theoretical and practical appreci-
ation of the contemporary scope of research, scholarship, and practice into positive
peace. The authors of this handbook and its editors come from diverse and divergent
disciplines, fields, and endeavors and from a variety of perspectives ranging from
challenging to complementary. Despite the multiplicity of voices and vantages the
root of this theoretical pursuit emerges from what is often termed Peace Research,
Peace Studies, or Peace and Conflict Studies (the term Peace and Conflict Studies is
utilized to signify a pursuit explicitly concerned with both conflict (and violence)
and peace (or nonviolence)) because that is the field (the field encompasses many
disciplines as well as inter-disciplines) concerned with the construct and construc-
tion of building a peaceful world.
Peace and Conflict Studies (PACS) is a field that analyzes conflict and violence
and champions nonviolence. PACS has emerged since the 1960s as a distinct domain
of inquiry in the social sciences concerned with research, theory, and practices that
seek to transform conflict and foster peace. While first presented in 1954 by Quincy
Wright, the concept of a “positive peace” was amplified and “made more visible” by
Johan Galtung who is considered a prime mover in Peace Studies (Regan, 2014,
p. 346; Galtung, 1964, 1969). For much of that disciplinary history of the field, the
incarnation of “peace” considered, pursued, and attained is defined by most scholars
in the Galtungian sense as “negative”; negative peace is a peace achieved through
the cessation of direct violence.
“Techniqs” (Avruch, 2003) or practices of conflict transformation involve inter-
ventions termed “peacebuilding.” (Peacebuilding is distinguished from peacemak-
ing and peacekeeping as building peace involves a conflict intervention whereas
making peace and keeping peace refer, respectively, to acts of political treaty or
ceasefire creation or military (or civilian; see ▶ Chap. 15, “Unarmed Civilian
Peacekeeping” by Furnari et al. this volume) intervention to stop active conflict
and provide a period of support and “cooling off” of acute, often violent conflict.)
Negative peace peacebuilding typically includes a cease fire and demilitarization
(demobilization of weapons) following the establishment of a nonaggression
“peace” treaty. When overt violence is arrested, there is a return to “peace” but
this conceptualization narrowly defines peace as simply the absence of war (orga-
nized violent conflict) or militant antagonism of some sort. This dichotomous
perception of peace as the opposite of war also generally assumes that conflict is
between groups, at times symmetric and others asymmetric, and that groups exist in
1 Defining the Platform of Positive Peace 5
contestation with one another for a variety of reasons along a spectrum of conflict.
This spectrum concept includes a range of impact or interaction ranging from
assistance to full warfare. And, along this conflict spectrum various levels of
association are considered and referred to in three distinct but contiguous domains
of relationship: pre-conflict, conflict, and post-conflict. To negative peacebuild is to
aim intervention in such a way as to cease overt conflict and traverse to a post-
conflict (but possibly also pre-conflict) state. In this model, peace is simply not war.
While negative peace is the cessation of overt violence (termed direct violence in
Galtung (1969)), positive peace is far more encompassing, interconnected, and
elusive. Positive peace is not merely the cessation of direct violence but also
structural violence (termed indirect in Galtung (1969)) and incorporates “social
structures that deny individuals and groups the ability to satisfy human needs such
as survival, well-being, recognition and freedom” (Standish & Joyce, 2018, p. 30).
Although the binary of negative and positive peace insinuates “vacancies in
violence” where violence is absent it is important to remember the multiplicities of
violence, and that
Every culture holds some form of violence permissible. Whether it is racism, homophobia,
gendered constructs of power, just war doctrine, caste systems or ethnic prejudice, these
cultural forms of violence have physical and structural limbs that act to harm and marginalize
both individuals and groups. (Standish, 2015, p. 1)
Positive peace does not suggest a space completely free of violence but rather
envisages conflict (and also violence) in more comprehensive terms which leads to
greater awareness of its presence. In positive peace the aperture of conflict con-
sciousness (apparent, possible, or potential) is expanded, appreciated, and reflective,
and therefore it includes conflict that is latent, systemic, invisible, and prospective;
and as violence is connected and intersected so must be its remedy – a remedy that
begins with discernment, understanding, and inclusion. Negative peacebuilding
necessitates a halt to overt aggression whereas positive peacebuilding must be
holistic intervention; positive peacebuilding must be sustainable, legitimate,
far-reaching, and conceptually comprehensive so that conflict/violence interventions
do not create harm in one arena while seeking to decrease harm in another.
Positive peace acknowledges the continuum of human nonviolence that has
characterized much of our history (and prehistory) on this planet; a dynamic tapestry
of living that is upset and unsettled by the violence of colonization, contemporary
technological warfare, and the precarity of modern life (Fry, 2007). An alignment to
building positive peace is a return to an interconnected and networked perception of
life where peace may remain elusive in a “complete” sense but far more enveloping,
comprehensive, and emancipatory. Positive peace seeks to reimagine and
reincorporate fragmented humanity – to reconnect marginalized and collateral
aspects of ending aggression that incorporate the more-than-human world of nature.
Positive peace, as we imagine it, seeks to recognize the connection between
means and ends in order to foster peace practices that integrate nonviolence as a
first principle in intervention and to conceptualize humanity within an ecological
space of deep and critical meaningfulness. Positive peace perceives of the world as
natural and social systems of actions and interactions that emerge from cultural,
transactional, dynamic, and embedded relations. Positive peace acknowledges the

interconnection and enmeshment of the human and natural world and recognizes that
in order to maximize planetary well-being relationships need to be positive and just,
actions need to be nonviolent, and our worldviews and world visions need to
encompass more than tier one political and militaristic circumstances. It is not
enough to simply leave peace to politicians. Our global climate, poverty, insecurity,
and ideological crises are apparent to any who care to look. As a solution to these
problems is not singular our perception(s) and agency(s) must be multifactorial,
multifaceted, and multifocal.
To live in a world of violence(s) is to live in a state of deprivation and suffering
but the first step in rising to the challenge of transforming violence is to begin to
“see” violence and potential violence transformation with new eyes. So we thank the
readers of this work for looking and hopefully seeing and then, with any luck, joining
us in the work of building positive peace together.
The purpose of this handbook is to clearly expand and demarcate the positive
peace platform in social scientific and humanities academic disciplines and to
demonstrate the inherent multifactorial, multifaceted, and multifocal interdisciplin-
arity of positive peace. The Handbook of Positive Peace brings together diverse
contemporary contributions from four domains of inquiry and intervention to expand
and interconnect the work of building positive peace in the twenty-first century.
Defining Positive Peace
There are many diverse and divergent conceptualizations of peace and this handbook
seeks to recognize different definitions of “peace” to then distinguish and theoreti-
cally corral positive peace as a nexus of four distinct but interconnected domains of
intervention: nonviolence, social justice, environmental sustainability, and positive
relationships. After a brief introduction of typical notions of peace this chapter will
venture to trace the idea of positive peace in recent scholarship to establish how the
term is utilized in the PACS world. It will then endeavor to introduce each editorial
domain within this handbook including a synopsis of each form of intervention
theoretically followed immediately by a summary of the chapters that inhabit the
PALGRAVE Handbook of Positive Peace.
The Multifarity of Peace
Peace (pax in the original Latin) used to be a treaty that ended a war. In the modern
world, peace has a far greater and at times ethereal sense: peace refers to circum-
stances, predispositions, relational bonds, and levels of discord; things can be
peaceful, one can be at peace or peace can be yearned for yet absent. Peace is a
place (without violence), a time (before or after conflict), or a feeling (give me
peace!), and like many terms with both tangible and intangible aspects, peace means
many things to many people.
Today, peace has many conceptions globally and has definitions that are both
relational and mental, encompassing interactions as much as temperaments. Peace
has behaviors and dispositions; peace has prohibitions that “secure” peace and
taboos that “break” it – peace can be fragile, breakable, or enduring and peace can
be fleeting, inauthentic, limited overdue, in dispute, or denied. Peace in PACS
(to name but a few) has been termed sustainable (Lederach, 1997), as stable
(Boulding, 1978), as just (Annan, 2005), as perpetual (Kant, 1903), encompassing
the whole world (Walker, 1988), and durable (Wagner & Druckman, 2017). And
although there have been calls to widen and expand the notion of peace as more than
“in a non-war state” in the PACS world, peace has largely emerged as a contrast of
negative (absence of direct violence) or positive (absence of indirect violence) peace.
And when “peace” was uttered in much of the last century of PACS scholarship and
research, it has largely been negative peace and concerned with peace between
nations and groups within nations. There is no edge to what bounds peace concep-
tually but its articulation as “positive” is a brief and identifiable chronicle.
Political philosopher, friendship expert and indigenous peacebuilding scholar
Heather Devere (2018) traced the Western twentieth-century disciplinary roots of
positive peace back to Jane Addams who first expanded the threshold of peace away
from simply an absence of war to “positive ideals of peace” (1907, p. xvii). Devere
identified the call from Martin Luther King (1964) for “love and justice” and Galtung
(1969) encapsulated positive peace as “the presence of symbiosis and equity in human
relations” (Galtung, 1969, p. 14). All of these calls for a “positive peace” expanded the
landscape of “peace” but also, crucially, began to identify positive peace as relational.
Later research echo’s Galtung’s “symbiosis and equity” in aspects of social justice
that seek to eradicate “exploitation” (Bockarie, 2002), institute more “comprehensive”
peacebuilding (Newsom & Lee, 2009), and see building peace as a process of “social
justice, social equity, cooperation, community engagement, collaboration, effective-
governance and democracy” (Shields & Soeters, 2017, p. 324). Peace educator Ian
Harris (2004) spoke of peace in broad and multifaceted terms:
Inner peace concerns a state of being and thinking about others, e.g. holding them in reverence,
while outer peace processes apply to the natural environment, the culture, international
relations, civic communities, families and individuals. Within each one of these spheres it
can have different meanings. Within the international sphere it can be construed as a peace
treaty, a ceasefire or a balance of power. Sociologists study cultural norms that legitimize
non-violence and condemn violence. Intercultural peace implies interfaith dialogue, multicul-
tural communication and so forth. Peace within civic society depends upon full employment,
affordable housing, ready access to health care, quality educational opportunities and fair legal
proceedings. Psychologists concerned with interpersonal conflict provide awareness of positive
interpersonal communication skills used to resolve differences. Environmentalists point to
sustainable practices used by native cultures for thousands of years. (2004, p. 7)
This disciplinary expansion of “peace” and recognition of peace as much more than
an inter- or intrastate condition of nonaggression (at least militarily) also expanded
the work to include building peace between humans, the self, and the natural world.
This embracing peace both enlarged the pool of peacebuilders and magnifies the
aims of building peace in the world.
And Western notions of positive peace owe much to the writings and work of
Gandhi whose revolutionary nonviolent resistance to the British occupation of India
included the notion of satyagraha or love as a force of peace. In Gandhi’s work he
saw the transformation of violence within acts of patience and compassion for one’s
opponent making the “work” of building peace nonviolent, an act of social justice
and relational. And Gandhi was aware of the suffering an individual undergoes
when in the process of facing violence and the temptation to reflect violence with
violence so he made certain that the work of resistance was via peace, by nonvio-
lence and therefore in accord with the ends desired in overthrowing a violent regime.
Termed satya (truth) graha (force) Gandhi believed that we must begin by transforming our
own inner violence before we can use compassion and patience to change the hearts of our
opponents. For Gandhi, violence was proof that we perceived of the “other” as separate from
ourselves. If we perceive of the unity of all life then violence is no longer an option.
Gandhian ahimsā affirms the unity of all sentient beings is both a restraint (from violence)
and an observance (of love). (Standish & Joyce, 2018, p. 18)
To Gandhi, the act of gaining “peace” must be peaceful (nonviolent) and this
all-encompassing view of peace as an act of nonviolence infuses positive peace
with an understanding that you cannot use violence to build peace – something
completely legitimate when working toward negative peace.
Galtung views positive peace as the absence of structural violence, Gandhi sees
positive peace as a nonviolent interrelationship to bring justice (Bharadwaj, 1998),
and Harris and Morrison (2013) see positive peace in a triad of nonviolence, social
justice, and environmental sustainability. This handbook combines all three plat-
forms (Galtung, Gandhi, and Harris and Morrison) into a quadrant of positive peace
(see Table 1) to purposefully include non-harming life affirmation, justness, sup-
portive, caring, and equitable relationships within a holisticism that incorporates and
encompasses the human and the more-than-human world.
Nonviolence is an action, a system, or an inner state of non-harming. The premise
of nonviolence expresses the Gandhian precept of “ends and means thinking,” which
intones that we may not be able to control the outcome of our endeavors (ends) but
we can control how we behave (means). To attain positive peace, we need to
recognize violence but respond nonviolently.
Social Justice is the advancement of the concept of inherent human worth and
dignity and interactions that seek to recognize and respect humans, groups, and the
natural world. The construct of social justice includes three facets: justice, rights, and
freedoms. Socially just societies are a key component of positive peace.
Environmental sustainability begins with an introspective exploration of the
human bond with nature. The rhythm of resource consumption to which societies
have been accustomed since the Industrial Revolution is no longer sustainable.
Table 1 The positive peace quadrant (Standish, Devere, Suazo, and Rafferty this publication)
Nonviolence Social justice
Environmental sustainability Positive relationship
Positive peace requires prioritizing the survival of all living systems in human and
natural worlds.
Overview of the Positive Peace Quadrant
Nonviolence
Nonviolence can be separated into principled and pragmatic forms (Weber, 2003).
Principled nonviolence, including pacifism, comes in a variety of intensities that
espouse everything from living so as to minimize personal harm done to other living
beings to refusing to participate in certain forms of organized violence (such as
military service). Pragmatic nonviolence encompasses dozens of separate and
targeted methods to bring about political and social change and includes acts of
civil resistance, civil disobedience, nonviolent defense, and noncooperation (Sharp,
2005; Weber, 2003). What both strands – principled and pragmatic nonviolence –
share is an orientation and commitment to address violence with nonviolence
(Firchow & Anastasiou, 2016).
Standish and Joyce summarize the nonviolence thusly:
Pacifism is a refusal to participate in violence (especially state organized violence), prag-

matic nonviolence is a strategic discipline that works to change society or obtain a political
outcome whereas principled nonviolence contains an internal dimension that comprises an
ethical restraint on expressions of any form of violence for any reason. Simply put, a
principled nonviolence advocate never feels that violence is permissible where a pragmatic
nonviolence advocate feels that nonviolence is more successful when working toward social
transformation. What all of these nonviolent traditions share is a sense that violence is
unacceptable and an unacceptable action, even in response to violence. While some consider
violence discretely, others include all acts that have the potential to cause harm. (2018, p. 19)
While nonviolence is often approached as a mindset it is also frequently considered a

strategy of conflict transformation (Stephan & Chenoweth, 2008) whether one
considered it an ideological stance or behavioral predisposition a key appreciation
of nonviolence is where it “sits” in terms of our cultural and interactional landscapes
as humans. To “sit” in a space of violence lies within the Paradigm of Violence,
whereas to “sit” in a space of nonviolence places one firmly within the Paradigm of
Nonviolence (also termed the Paradigm of Peace) (Table 2).
Table 2 Paradigms of violence/nonviolence

Paradigm of violence Paradigm of nonviolence (peace)
Is the understanding that violence is an Is the understanding that nonviolence is the only
acceptable instrument to manage conflicts acceptable instrument to manage conflicts
between individuals, within society and between individuals, within society, and
between states for the purpose of bringing between states for the purpose of bringing about
about change. change.
Violent conflict is natural, normal, and Violence is not natural; it is cultural and it is
necessary. unnecessary.
While the ideas and actions encompassed by nonviolence ascribe to an intention

and impact that does not result in harm, nonviolence is clearly based on the
awareness that violence is a choice and therefore, by the same logic, nonviolence
is also a choice. Not something passive or not-doing, nonviolence is a comprehen-
sion and accomplishment of deliberate humanization. Undergirding the nonviolence
mandate (to do no harm, no hurt, and no violence) is the deeply held belief in the
unity of life, a belief that both acknowledges the connectivity of thought and
experience but further, that nothing done to others as an act of dehumanization
does not also affect the perpetrator. Martin Buber’s theory of connectivity captured
the arc of dehumanization as the perception of another as an it (1970). This perception
of another human as an object (not a subject) makes permissible numerous thoughts,
beliefs, and actions that negate the human propensity for consideration, care, and
compassion. To consider another person an it is to deny them full humanity – to
dehumanize them – to turn them into an object to which one holds no duty of care.
And in addition, the reflection of the act of objectification firmly returns to its
sender. This was the what Gandhi considered in the unity of life mandate; there is no
thought, word, or action that does not also affect the instigator – to do harm to
another is to harm the self. Double the violence, double the harm. To embrace and
practice nonviolence is to understand this connection and to refuse to dehumanize
others. As a foundational pillar of positive peace, nonviolence not only acknowl-
edges violence but acts to actively transform violence.
Social Justice
Social justice is a necessary component of peace. The terms “justice” and “social
justice” are used often interchangeably in any context as related to positive peace
(Lambourne & Rodriguez Carreon, 2016). As defined by Caritas, social justice “is
the promotion of just societies and treatment of individuals and communities based
on the belief that we each possess an innate human dignity” (2020, para. 1). Peace
education scholar, Betty Reardon (1995), also emphasizes universal human dignity
but adds in the environment, claiming that social justice can be realized fully “only
under the conditions of a positive peace based on the respect for individual persons,
social groups, human cultures, and the natural environment” (p. 7).
In this handbook, we are considering positive peace within the framework of a
quadrant that comprises nonviolence, social justice, environmental sustainability,
and positive relationships. We focus in this section on the social justice part of the
quadrant but acknowledge the interlinking of the four parts of the quadrant as
essential to fostering positive peace. Not only is social justice a vital aspect of
peace but it requires conditions of positive peace including a sustainable environ-
ment, nonviolent responses to challenges, and just relationships.
As with other complex concepts, there is no one definition of social justice.
Injustice is more easily recognizable. Strier refers to social injustice as the “systemic
subordination of specific social groups through the institutionalized use of unjust
power and authority” (2007, p. 860). Essentially institutional and structural social
justice is not necessarily present even in societies that are ostensibly peaceful, so
while it is essential for positive, sustainable peace, there can be situations where
injustice is present, but there is no overt conflict. This points to the importance of
addressing structural violence. Injustice can be present particularly in situations
where a focus on harmony can disguise underlying, or even overt, discrimination,
and oppression. Often so-called justice systems, even in peaceful democracies, are
themselves inherently unjust and unequal. These situations are examples of negative
rather than positive peace.
Chizhik and Chizhik (2002) explore the concepts of privilege and oppression in
the language of social justice where there is social structural inequality based on
race, social class, gender, and disability, as well as “other discriminatory practices
that involve unequal power distributions” (e.g., age, language, immigrant status,
land) (p. 792). Social justice therefore requires the redistribution of power between
those with power (the privileged) and those without (the oppressed). There are
international studies that make the link between disparity gaps showing that coloni-
zation has determined social [in]justice, resulting particularly in inequitable access to
health, housing, and education (see, e.g., Griffiths et al., 2016). Justice systems in
Western nations often continue to fail to prevent racial injustices that prevent human
equality (Randle, 2016).
The language and conceptions of justice and human rights, while claiming to be
universal, are part of a Western construct and philosophy that often ignores the
cultural differences that exist between and within societies across the globe.
What types of justice are needed to ensure peace? Justice comes in a number of
forms. Retributive justice, a system of criminal justice that uses punishment, has been
found wanting, for not focusing on rehabilitation, so how effective is it? Restorative
justice that focuses on reconciliation between offender and victim is meant to put
things right again, but is it able to do that? Transitional justice aims to redress abuses
in countries emerging from conflict, but is it enough? Relational justice that focuses
on processes of cooperative behavior, agreement, negotiation, and dialogue recog-
nizes the importance of getting relationships right, but does it address everything that
is necessary? Distributive justice which provides moral guidance about the distribu-
tion of benefits and burdens can address some of the inequalities to bring about a fairer
society, but does it work? And how does Transformative Justice fit in?
In terms of human rights, the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR) stated that “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights”
(Article 1). However, despite “everyone” being entitled to the rights and freedoms as
set out in the Declaration, many people are unable to access these and live in states
who do little to address such insufficiency. There have been attempts over the
subsequent 80 years since the creation of the UDHR to address some of these
inequalities. There are obviously gaps and attempts to fill such gaps with the passing
of multiple “instruments” of Human Rights in various “declarations” for women,
children, the disabled, the Indigenous, etc. but how does the discourse of Human
Rights relate to building positive peace? How have declarations that support and
enshrine women and gender rights contributed to positive peace? To what extent
have disability rights been addressed? Have the rights of Indigenous peoples
improved? Are children seen as having separate rights to those of their parents?
Many questions remain as does the question of rights vs freedoms.
A society where there is positive peace includes some basic freedoms. What
sorts of freedoms would be needed? How fundamental is freedom of religion?
Should there be any restriction on the freedom of movement? How much freedom
to protest or resist should be allowed? How essential is freedom for the media?
How can we ensure freedom from violence? How would it be possible to have
freedom from poverty, from fear and insecurity. Would rights include the right to
self-destruction?
We engage with this debate as we seek to understand some of the different types
of justice that impact peace; and the rights and freedoms that need to be upheld in
order to establish and maintain positive peace.
Environmental Sustainability
Modern human systems are intrinsically dependent on a properly functioning and

stable natural environment. Yet as Golden points out in a 2016 editorial, humans and
their environment have grown increasingly apart through decades of urbanization,
increasing commodification, and through departures from agricultural practices and
subsistence patterns of living (Golden, 2016). As population growth influences an
increase in natural resource demands, questions emerge in terms of how human
infrastructures can endure in the face of the breaching of the so-called Planetary
Boundaries of Earth (Steffen et al., 2015). Simply put: Humankind needs to rethink
its current relationship with its Planet if it wishes to stand a chance of survival.
As it currently stands, peace and conflict literature shows striking asymmetries
with how environmental and human systems are studied, and understood: Human
systems tend to take priority over their nonhuman counterparts. Reconceptualizing a
new Human-Nature contract entails revising one’s own relationship with the natural
environment, an exploration that inevitably leads to a disruption of humankind’s
ongoing and self-centered domination of Nature. A human-centric mind frame, or
anthropocentric thinking, is defined as an act or thought, which is inherently at odds
with Nature and nonhuman animals (Boddice, 2011). Transcending anthropocen-
trism requires more than just a peripheral interest in environmental systems: it
requires a profound infusion of environmentalism in any human-conceived system,
process, or relationship. This section is a collection of deep reflections of how this
infusion can occur and at what operational levels.
Positive Relationship
Relationships are intrinsic to human social life. The basic dictionary definition of a
relationship is “the way in which two things are connected” (Cambridge Dictionary,
n.d.). This definition provides a starting point for further conceptualizing how the
parties in a relationship respond to that connectedness, and what role relationships
play in constituting society. Examining how human beings relate to one another is an
essential element in understanding why societies take different forms, with some
characterized by domination and violence while others exhibit high levels of equity
and peacefulness.
Relationships can be said to have perceptual and behavioral components. Where
the other party is perceived as our equal in dignity and rights, to paraphrase the UN
declaration of human rights, where they are viewed positively, we will most likely
act benevolently towards them; we will include them in decision-making, will
cooperate with them in the pursuit of shared goals, and will act in solidarity with
them when they seek to redress injustice. Conversely, if the other party is perceived
as less-than-fully-human, as alien and separate to us, we are much more likely to
ignore their suffering when they are impacted by direct or structural violence, and if
we perceive them as our enemy, we may even engage in actively harming them.
Relationships, then, develop out of how we view self and other, and these percep-
tions shape everyday behaviors at the individual level and the development of a
system of laws and institutions at the societal level.
A number of social theories call attention to the importance of the relational in
both our everyday lives and in the constitution of our societies. These include social
capital as a means of understanding the extent and quality of interactions in a society
(Bhandari & Yasunobu, 2009), social cohesion as a conceptualization of the degree
to which society members perceive themselves as part of a whole (Manca, 2014),
and relational ethics as a philosophical framework for exploring our ethical respon-
sibility toward others in our environment (Austin, 2012).
However, there is space for much more conceptual development in this area. We
can benefit from deepening our understanding of how to define and examine the
quality of relationships in a society. The extent and quality of connections between
individuals and between groups can have important implications for democracy,
collective action, and social inclusion. In particular, understanding how relationships
guide social behavior is particularly relevant to exploring how violence emerges in
our societies, and may give insight into how violent societies might be transformed
in the direction of positive peace.
The Role of Relationships in Positive Peacebuilding

While relationships were not directly examined by Galtung (1969) in his original
conceptualization of positive peace, in his more recent “mini theory of peace”
(Galtung, 2014) he describes peace as a state of relationship:
Peace is a relation, between two or more parties. The parties may be inside a person, a state
or nation, a region or civilization, pulling in different directions. Peace is not a property of
one party alone, but a property of the relation between parties. (para. 1)
In this work, Galtung goes on to elaborate that there can be three basic qualities of
a relationship: negative, indifferent, or positive. He equates a positive quality of
relationship to a state of harmony and asserts that harmonious relationships are
central to a state of positive peace.
However, an important distinction needs to be made between harmony as an end

goal that results from positive peace, and harmonious relationships as a means to
achieve positive peace. As a number of authors in this handbook explore, challeng-
ing negative relationships characterized by domination and violence can require an
assertive approach, while developing harmonious relationships when social injustice
remains unaddressed risks embedding structural violence. As a result, the role of
relationships in both enabling violence and in motivating collective action in pursuit
of positive peace must be examined with careful attention to the nuances of different
contexts and to the consequences of particular forms of relationship for those who
are most vulnerable in our societies.
It is not surprising, then, that while a number of scholars working in peace and
conflict studies and adjacent fields have developed conceptual frameworks that
recognize the role of relationships in building peace, these scholars do not always
agree on what form these relationships need to take in order to achieve peace. The
divergence seems to be closely related to whether scholars are focused on reducing
direct violence in the short-term, such as ending a cycle of violent conflict, or on
reducing structural violence over the long-term, pursuing a more just and inclusive
society by surfacing latent conflicts and confronting powerful interest groups
(Lederach, 1997).
Hence, for example, conceptualizations of reconciliation tend to center on the (re)
establishment of a positive relationship between former antagonists, with a focus on
apology and forgiveness (Bloomfield et al., 2003). Taking a more holistic view of the
social changes required to bring about sustainable peace after armed conflict, conflict
transformation theory recognizes that reestablishing positive relationships must
occur alongside meaningful institutional changes (Lederach, 1997). Alternatively,
scholars working in societies where mass direct violence is rare but structural
violence remains high, understandably tend to focus more heavily on how relation-
ships of solidarity can be established in order to challenge social, political and
economic injustices (e.g., hooks 1986, 2013). One challenge for the field of peace
and conflict studies, then, going forward, is to further conceptualize the particular
forms of relationship required to overcome both direct and structural violence across
a variety of contexts. It is in this area that the “Positive Relationships” section of the
Handbook of Positive Peace seeks to contribute.
Conceptualizing Positive Relationships

Philosophers from both Africa and Europe have argued that the relationship between
self and other is central to our humanity (Levinas, 1978; Ramose, 2001). From this
perspective, to dehumanize another is an act of self-harm that leaves us isolated and
self-absorbed, incapable of realizing our full potential as ethical beings. Similarly, an
“ethics of care” rooted in feminist scholarship has emerged to articulate how
deciding on an ethical course of action can only take place within a comprehensive
understanding of our relatedness to others (Gilligan, 1982). This scholarship signals
the importance of understanding what ethical, humanizing relationships look like in
practice, as well as of identifying the transformative potential of such relationships at
the societal level.
As developed in this handbook, the concept of “positive relationships” refers to

those relationships that have the potential to support the development of positive
peace. However, the precise nature of such relationships deserves careful consider-
ation. A nuanced conceptualization of the varying nature of social relationships is
necessary for identifying which relationships in a given society can be understood as
positive, meaning that they enable both direct and structural violence to be reduced
and hence can contribute to achieving positive peace. While there is more fulsome
development of the nature of positive relationships in the relevant section in this
handbook, as a first step three aspects of relationships can be identified as having the
potential to contribute to positive peace.
The first aspect is whether a relationship is engaged or disengaged. An engaged
relationship is one where both parties recognize their interdependence and direct
efforts into their behavior toward one another. Conversely, a disengaged relationship
can be understood as one where the parties do not recognize their interdependence,
where the other is ignored or seen as unimportant, and behavior is characterized by
avoidance rather than engaged activity.
The second aspect of a relationship that is relevant to positive peace is whether the
relationship involves vertical or horizontal power relations. In other words, is the
relationship one where one party is treated as superior and the other as inferior, or is
the relationship characterized by equity and mutual respect?
The third aspect to consider is whether the relationship is characterized by care
and concern for the other, or whether it is characterized by a desire to dominate and
harm the other for selfish gain. This quality of care can be exhibited by one or both
parties, but it is likely that, in time, consistent behavior by one party will be mirrored
by the other.
It is important to consider how each aspect relates to the other two, in order to
arrive a more comprehensive understanding of a “positive relationship.” For
example, a relationship could be engaged and caring but also vertical leading to
situation that is patronizing and disempowering for the party viewed as inferior.
This would represent a relationship that does not have the capacity to support the
development of positive peace unless the power imbalance is equalized. Similarly,
while a disengaged relationship would often be destructive through a process of
neglect, it could have some positive potential if the disengagement was founded in
a degree of respect and care, recognizing perhaps that a minority group needs to be
left alone to determine its own destiny. There is value then, in attending to which
aspects of relationships can best contribute to positive peace in a given set of
social circumstances.
That said, broadly speaking, the relationships that are most likely to support
the development of positive peace are those where both parties are actively
engaged in maintaining a relationship characterized by equitable power relations,
and by a genuine concern for the well-being of one another. These are relation-
ships where the other is humanized, recognized as having equal intrinsic value,
and equal right to contribute to collective decision-making. It is difficult to
conceive how violence can be tolerated, let alone committed, where such rela-
tionships are present. Hence, violence is rare in healthy families and
communities, but it is much more common between nations that view themselves
as entirely separate from one another, and as entitled to dominate one another in
the pursuit of the national self-interest.
Positive relationships can be found at multiple levels of analysis; between
individuals, between social groups, and between nation states on the global stage.
The chapters in the positive relationships section of this handbook provide a valuable
starting point for defining and conceptualizing how different aspects of relationships,
and different relationship-building practices, can contribute to the development of
positive peace across a variety of contexts.
They provide a conceptual foundation for future research that could empirically
explore the links between the quality of relationships and the degree of violence
parties exhibit toward one another. Moreover, the transformative capacity of
relationships deserves to be examined in depth in future scholarship, with a
focus on how changes in the quality of relationships may motivate and support
social change.
Positive Peace Quadrant Chapter Contributions
Nonviolence
In the nonviolence section of the handbook 17 scholars have crafted pieces relating
to building positive peace that include personal nonviolence, interpersonal nonvio-
lence, social nonviolence, and international nonviolence.
Personal Nonviolence
Personal nonviolence relates to both an inner and outer dimension of building peace
that centers on the thoughts and actions of the individual. In the first chapter Tatiyana
Bastet engages with the notion and practice of reflective choice via yoga as a fulcrum
of building positive peace. In chapter two, Katerina Standish presents a conceptual
platform for personal peacebuilding utilizing the COVID-19 global pandemic as a
hypothetical context. The next chapter, by Marianella Sclavi, looks at the role of
humor and listening in dealing with the unpredictable, the surprising and the
unexpected in life. In chapter four Joe Llewellyn engages with the role of contem-
plative practices in contributing to positive peace, and in the fifth chapter Lacey
Sloan and Cathryne Schmitz examine the act of “claiming voice” in marginalized
communities to foster resilience.
Interpersonal Nonviolence
Two facets of interactional nonviolence are examined in this part: communication
and forgiveness. In the first chapter, Tatiyana Bastet explores the role of cultural
nonviolence communication in the workplace as a vehicle for positive peace and in
the second chapter, Ann Macaskill investigates the fulcrum and function of the
human practice of forgiveness.
Social Nonviolence
Social nonviolence relates to aspects of deliberate non-harming among and between
groups. In this part the first chapter looks at peace education as a vehicle of positive
peace as contributed by Heather Kertyzia. The second chapter, by Cheryl
Duckworth, looks at peace education as a site of resistance during authoritarianism.
This is followed by Jonathan Pinckney’s exploration of the role of nonviolent
resistance in achieving positive peace. The next chapter, by Joe Llewellyn looks at
the role of pragmatic violence and positive peace. Marty Branagan contributes a
chapter on the work of women in nonviolent environmental action in Australia, and
James Caron provides us with an avenue to appreciate the role of satire in the public
sphere.
International Nonviolence
Nonviolence in the international realm concerns nations and groups globally work-
ing towards positive peace. This part begins with a chapter from Ellen Furnari, Berit
Bliesemann de Guevara, and Rachel Julian on unarmed civilian defense. The next
chapter examines the role of diplomacy as envisaged by Robert Patman and Peter
Grace. The third chapter, by Laura Reimer and Cathryne Schmitz looks at conflict
transformation in the international arena, while Engy Said contributes a chapter on
conflict transformation in the Arab World. The final chapter in this part looks at the
possibility of “measuring” positive peace in a framework for analysis offered by
Sean Byrne, Preston Lindsay, and Ane Cristina Figueiredo.
Social Justice
This part of the handbook explores the social justice quadrant of positive peace. The
13 chapters range from a discussion of different types of justice, to some of the rights
that are important for positive peace, and some of the freedoms that are needed to
ensure societies can operate in positive peace. Each chapter refers to aspects of social
justice that are not sufficient on their own, but need to be interwoven with other
aspects of positive peace for sustainable peaceful societies.
Types of Justice
The first chapter by Vicki Spencer looks at Retributive Justice that is often criticized
for being a “primitive form of retaliation.” Spencer argues that while retribution has
its limits, this form of justice remains crucial as a contribution to positive peace as it
helps to restore balance to transitional societies that have suffered from unjust
governments or war atrocities.
Restorative Justice is discussed in the chapter by Heather Devere and Kelli Te
Maihāroa as a form of justice where the main purpose is reconciliation rather than
punishment. Aotearoa New Zealand is used as a case study to explore the influence
of Māori principles and values on restorative justice practices, and the authors argue
that a focus on human worth, dignity, responsibility, acknowledgement of the other,
inclusion and tolerance contribute to the maintenance of a peaceful society.
Susan Opotow in her chapter describes Inclusionary Justice as “a foundation for

building and sustaining peace drawing on psychological scholarship on justice,
conflict, and peace.” Opotow focuses particularly on the scope of justice, demon-
strating that moral exclusion can gain momentum quickly producing a “spiral of hate
and destructive conflict and harmful behavior,” whereas moral inclusion that can
operationalize peaceful change in society, is a “more fraught and fragile process that
is slow and subject to setback.” Opotow recognizes that transforming an exclusion-
ary dynamic into an inclusionary one is “a daunting challenge,” nevertheless it is
possible and can “mobilize cross-group collaborations for social justice.”
The last chapter on types of justice focuses on Transformative Justice. Natasha
Jolly advocates including the concept of the relational in transformative justice
processes in peacebuilding for societies that have experienced extraordinary abuses.
In this chapter Jolly examines the power dynamics and privilege that result in gender
disparity in traditional processes that have ignored gender-based violence. She
describes this as the crisis of gender relationality in social conflict. Drawing on
peacemaking criminology, Jolly advocates a “non-violent and compassionate social
justice plus a positive peace ideal that promotes equity and harmony, alongside
accessible procedural justice.”
Rights and Responsibilities

International human rights law, developed with the purported intention of facili-
tating social justice within and across different nations, has been accompanied by
critiques the claim that rights can be universal. The chapters in this part disclose
some of these debates in so far as they relate to the importance of human rights for
positive peace, and the responsibilities of the governments and authorities to
ensure those rights.
It is only very recently that there has been a formal Right to Peace. The first
chapter in this part by Heather Devere traces the development within Western
philosophy of moral principles starting with Christian pacifism through justifications
for war, to fighting a “just” war, to the right to peace expressed in the UN Declaration
on the Right to Peace. In Devere’s chapter, the link between negative and positive
rights and negative and positive peace is also explored.
Next, this handbook turns to the unmet rights of specific groups of people or
sectors of society. Sylvia Frain’s chapter on Womxn’s Rights uses the United States as
a case study to ask what are the barriers to positive peace, and how Black, Indige-
nous, and womxn of color contribute to positive peace. This chapter conceptualizes
white feminism as false feminism and argues that there is a significant lack of
positive peace in white feminism that impacts Indigenous and womxn of color
negatively.
Disability Rights are discussed by Roberta Francis Watene in her chapter that
looks at positive peace through a disability lens. Francis Watene provides a platform
where discussion about the role of disabled people “within positive peace research,
literature and practice can take place” to makes some practical suggestions and
express a call to action to include those with disabilities when building cultures of
positive peace.
Millions of people become displaced as a result of conflict and their status as

refugees entitles them to protection as expressed in United Nations instruments. In
the chapter on Refugee Rights, Rose Joudi demonstrates that often these rights are
not met, vulnerable displaced groups are not protected, and they are also subjected to
discrimination. She argues that, until there are durable solutions put in place for
refugees and displaced individuals, lasting positive peace will not endure.
The two final chapters in this part take Aotearoa New Zealand as their case study
for discussing rights unmet. The chapter on Indigenous Rights by Pounamu Aikman
argues that positive peace can only be an illusion in the settler colonial context unless
the dispossession of Indigenous lands is meaningfully addressed. Aikman provides
evidence not only of structural violence, which is largely invisible to the privileged,
but also the very obvious physical violence perpetrated against Māori – the Indig-
enous people of Aotearoa New Zealand. Aikman alerts us that negative peace for
Māori is a persistent reality in what is often considered to be a peaceful country.
Penelope Carroll points out that children, while they are undoubtedly human, are
not often included in universal rights instruments that presume adulthood. Carroll
looks specifically at Children’s Rights and the protections available to children to
examine the tensions between protection and participation of children as citizens. In
this chapter two projects with children in Auckland, Aotearoa New Zealand are
referenced to explore children’s rights and to advocate for children’s participation in
the public realm.
Freedoms
The other side of justice is freedom, where negative freedom is the freedom to be
able to do something with no or minimal interference, and positive freedom requires
facilitating that freedom.
Fundamental to social justice is freedom of the media to investigate, challenge,
and question. In his chapter on Media Freedom, David Robie investigates the case
study of human rights journalism reporting on West Papua, arguing that media
freedom is essential for positive peace. Peace journalism or human rights journalism
challenges the propaganda and prejudice of war journalism that can fuel the fires of
conflict. Exposing systemic human rights violations and repressive structures, such
as those of the Indonesian authorities in West Papua, can be dangerous for journal-
ists, but gives hope to the West Papuans, builds global coalitions, and leaves open the
possibility for eventual positive peace.
The fundamental Freedom from Violence is analyzed by Michael Ligaliga who
incorporates peace and conflict theory and an Indigenous perspective to examine the
situation in the Pacific and Samoa in particular where levels of domestic violence
have been rising in the last decade. Ligaliga demonstrates that taking account of the
cultural aspect of domestic violence is essential for positive peace.
In Freedom from Discrimination, Mahdis Azarmandi unpacks the concept of
positive peace in the light of colonization. Azarmandi argues that although positive
peace “acknowledges multiple layers of violence” and offers a transformation of
society where structures of oppression and exploitation are removed, the concept is
intrinsically aligned with western thought, and risks reproducing “the very many
violences(s) positive peace seeks to overcome.” In this chapter Azarmandi focuses

on colonialism and the examination of racial justice to query the term of “positive
peace,” and concludes that what is needed is decolonial, inter- and transdisciplinary
peace research that challenges coloniality and the epistemic violence(s) it produces.
Environmental Sustainability
In this part of the Handbook, 14 authors consider how environmental sustainability

is conceptually considered and is followed by ruminations that look at this facet of
positive peace from local, national/regional, and international perspectives.
Conceptual Approaches
This part starts with an analytical overview of Nature’s past and current commod-
ification process. In this chapter, Silvija Serafimova argues that a feasible Positive
Peace framework is inherently dependent on the undoing of what she calls “Cheap
Nature.” This chapter is followed by Rimona Afana’s exploration of speciesism,
the dominance of the Human sphere on Earth, and its impacts on socio-
environmental fragilities. Building on these concepts, Ayyoob Sharifi examines
the interconnections between the concepts of sustainable development and Positive
Peace, and offers a vision of how such connections can become materialized.
Lastly, this part presents Shir Gruber’s work on environmental activism within
the context of student politics, and argues that university policies and processes
with greater environmental content and youth involvement are vessels for the
implementation of Positive Peace.
Local Perspectives
Building on some of the theoretical explorations above, academics and practitioners
highlight how the nexus between environmental sustainability and Positive Peace is
experienced and implemented by local communities. To this end, Diana Rice lays
out an exposition of environmental sustainability as the prescriptive tool for Positive
Peace and community-building. Similarly, Leslie Van Gelder adopts an archaeolog-
ical approach, and analyzes how the questions of self, community, and environment
(space) intersect in the small New Zealand town of Glenorchy to advance a local-
made version of Positive Peace. By examining religious communal living in Ger-
many, Rosemarie Schade sheds important light on the concepts of spirituality, space,
and environmental sustainability in order to build conceptual and practical connec-
tions between the old and the new. Heather Tribe develops an examination of how
the concepts of food security and positive peace intersect in the local community of
Waikatere, New Zealand.
National and Regional Perspectives

Beyond perspectives of Positive Peace within local settings, authors also examine
other national and regional perspectives of Positive Peace. For instance, Wyclife
Ong’eta Mose explores how climate change and resource scarcity impose significant
challenges for Positive Peace within pastoral communities in Kenya. Lastly, Engy
Said devotes his efforts to the study of environmental degradation in the Middle
Eastern-North African region, and focuses on how environmental decay contributes
to a diminished state of Positive Peace in the context of Syria.
International Perspectives
As economic and political decision-making become increasingly interwoven,
important questions emerge with regard to how the international system can
contribute to the betterment of environmental and human systems. To this end,
Mohammad al-Saidi examines the question of interstate relations within the
context of environmental cooperation in the Persian Gulf. He argues that chal-
lenges exist in the area that impedes the flourishing of Positive Peace within its
states. Also examining the question of international cooperation, Olga Skarlato
provides an account of how inter-state cooperation mechanisms can open impor-
tant avenues for community-level Positive Peace. She does so by examining
environmental resource sharing along the US-Canada border, and by outlining
the different actors involved in the development and sustainment of mutually
beneficial relationships.
Positive Relationship
The positive relationships part takes a relational perspective on understanding how

certain forms of relationships can contribute to the development of positive peace.
Taken together, these 15 chapters highlight the multiple dimensions of social
relationships and expand our understanding of the many ways in which the achieve-
ment of positive peace in our world requires the establishment of positive relation-
ships between individuals, social groups, and nation states.
Relational Concepts
The chapters in the first subsection engage with a range of relational concepts,
outlining their relevance to positive peacebuilding. The first chapter by Reina
Neufeldt explores the importance of developing our peacebuilding practices in
light of an ethics of care that is rooted in a specific cultural context. The second
chapter is authored by Walt Kilroy and uses a social capital lens to consider the
importance of relationship-building for developing a sustainable peace in post-
conflict societies. This is followed by a chapter from Sorcha Tormey that elaborates
how the concepts of solidarity and allyship are essential to confronting structural
violence in our societies. Next, there is a chapter from Mogobote Bertrand Ramose
on how the African philosophy of Ubuntu can be mobilized as a challenge to the
direct, structural, and epistemic violence of colonialism and its ongoing legacies.
This is followed by a chapter by Daniel Christie and Daniel Morrison taking a peace
psychology perspective on how empathy is a precursor to challenging both
direct and structural violence, nationally and internationally. Next is a chapter
from Hyuk-Min Kang exploring the potential of various theories of political recon-
ciliation to contribute to the development of positive peace in post-conflict societies.
This is followed by a chapter by Thia Saghery-Dickey examining the concept of trust
and its potential role in achieving positive peace. Yuri van Hoef examines how
personal friendships between state leaders have an under-recognized potential to
contribute to developing positive peace at the international level and in the final
chapter in this part Alejandra Ortiz-Ayala offers a rumination on security sector
reform from Liberal Peace to Positive Peace.
Relational Practices
Meanwhile the chapters in the second subsection examine a range of relational
peacebuilding practices and explore how these can be mobilized to support the
development of positive peace. The first chapter by Rachel Laird critically
reexamines intergroup contact practices and argues for the need to recognize
and address intersectional disadvantage within these spaces if they are to con-
tribute to achieving positive peace. The second chapter is authored by Julia
Chaitin and explores the potential of intergroup dialogue to awaken concern
and respect for the other, as precursor to developing more peaceful relationships
between social groups. This is followed by a chapter from Silvia Guetta that
elaborates how education can develop students’ relational competences in ways
that are important for achieving a more peaceful world. Next, there is chapter by
Jacqueline Haessley that outlines the elements necessary for weaving a culture of
peace in our world, founded in a cultural paradigm that rejects domination and
war. This is followed by a chapter from Jeremy Simons that explores restorative
justice as a relationship-building practice with the potential to contribute to
developing positive peace at the level of local communities and national socie-
ties. Next, there follows a chapter by Jessica Senehi that examines the potential
of storytelling practices to contribute to achieving positive peace. Finally, the
part concludes with a chapter authored by Cecile Mouly that introduces the
practices of peace communities in Colombia and examines the multiple ways
in which these communities support the development of positive peace in their
region, in the face of both direct and structural violence.
Concluding Remarks of Invitation
This volume of work progresses from the perspective that there cannot be “peace” as
long as environmental degradation, social injustice, targeted, structural and cultural
violence, and negative relationships persist. The quadrant of Positive Peace indicates
an interrelationship and enmeshment among the four aspirational and operational
domains of nonviolence, social justice, environmental sustainability, and positive
relationships. It is hoped that the establishment and consolidation of this quadrant
will form a formidable foundation or platform for future visions and manifestations
of building a more peaceful and peace filled world.
References
Addams, J. (1907). Newer ideals of peace. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Annan, K. A. (2005). In larger freedom: Towards development, security and human rights for all:
Report of the Secretary-General. United Nations.
Austin, W. J. (2012). Relational ethics. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative
research methods (pp. 749–753). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Avruch, K. (2003). Does our field have a centre? Thoughts from the academy. International Journal
of Conflict Engagement and Resolution, 1(1), 10–31.
Bhandari, H., & Yasunobu, K. (2009). What is social capital? A comprehensive review of the
concept. Asian Journal of Social Science, 37(3), 480–510.
Bharadwaj, L. K. (1998). Principled versus pragmatic nonviolence. Peace Review, 10(1), 79–81.
Bloomfield, D., Barnes, T., & Huyse, L. (Eds.). (2003). Reconciliation after violent conflict: A
handbook. International Idea. Retrieved from http://www.idea.int/conflict/reconciliation/
reconciliation_full.pdf
Bockarie, A. (2002). Peace education in a war-torn small state: The case of Sierra Leone. Peace
Research, 34(2), 117–128.
Boddice, R. (2011). Human-animal studies. In R. Boddice (Ed.), Anthropocentrism – Humans,
animals, environments. Boston: Brill.
Boulding, K. (1978). Stable peace. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Buber, M. (1970). I and Thou (W. Kaufmann, Trans.). New York: Scribner.
Cambridge Dictionary. (n.d.). Relationship. In Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved March 10, 2020,
from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/relationship
Chizhik, E. W., & Chizhik, A. W. (2002). Decoding the language of social justice: What do privilege
and oppression really mean? Journal of College Student Development, 43(6), 792–808.
Devere, H. (2018). Exploring relationships for positive peace. Factis Pax: Journal of Peace
Education and Social Justice, 12(1), 59–79.
Firchow, P., & Anastasiou, H. (2016). Practical approaches to peacebuilding: Putting theory to
work: Putting theory to work. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Fry, D. P. (2007). Beyond war: The human potential for peace. London: Oxford University Press.
Galtung, J. (1964). An editorial. Journal of Peace Research, 1(1), 1–4.
Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of Peace Research, 6(3), 167–191.
Galtung, J. (2014). A mini theory of peace. Galtung Institute. Retrieved March 10, 2020, from
https://www.galtung-institut.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Mini-Theory-of-Peace.pdf
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Golden, M. (2016). Opinion: Detached animals; humans growing away from nature – Western
Herald: Opinion. Retrieved March 31, 2017, from http://www.westernherald.com/opinion/
article_ebed082c-4d53-11e6-a7fd-d3f1267d0c5a.html
Griffiths, K., Coleman, C., Lee, V., & Madden, R. (2016). How colonisation determines social
justice and Indigenous health – A review. Journal of Population Research, 33, 9–30.
Harris, I. (2004). Peace education theory. Journal of Peace Education, 1(1), 5–20.
Harris, I. M., & Morrison, M. L. (2013). Peace education (3rd ed.). Jefferson: McFarland and
Company.
hooks, b. (1986). Sisterhood: Political solidarity between women. Feminist Review, 23, 125–138.
hooks, b. (2013). Writing beyond race: Living theory and practice. New York: Routledge.
Kant, I. (1903). Perpetual peace; a philosophical essay, 1795. London: S. Sonnenschein.
King, M. L. (1964/2009). The Nobel Peace Prize 1964 Nobel Lecture, December 11. The Nobel
Foundation. Retrieved from http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1964/king-lec
ture.html
Lambourne, W., & Rodriguez Carreon, V. (2016). Engendering transitional justice: A transforma-
tive approach to building peace and attaining human rights for women. Human Rights Review:
Dordrecht, 17(1), 71–93.
Lederach, J. P. (1997). Building peace: Sustainable reconciliation in divided societies. Washington,

DC: United States Institute of Peace.
Levinas, E. (1978). Otherwise than being or beyond essence (A. Lingis, Trans.). Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers. (Original work published 1974)
Manca, A. R. (2014). Social cohesion. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of quality of life and
well-being research (pp. 6626–6628). Dordrecht: Springer.
N. A. (2020). What is social justice? Caritas Aotearoa New Zealand-The Catholic Agency for
Justice, Peace and Development. Retrieved March 29, 2020, from https://caritas.org.nz/what-
social-justice
Newsom, V. A., & Lee, W. (2009). On nourishing peace: The performativity of activism through the
Nobel Peace Prize. Global Media Journal, 8(5), 1–16.
Ramose, M. B. (2001). An African perspective on justice and race. Polylog: Forum for Intercultural
Philosophy. Retrieved March 10, 2020, from https://them.polylog.org/3/frm-en.htm#s7
Randle, B. A. (2016). Liberty and justice for all, but what if I’m black? Race, Gender and Class,
23(1), 166–171.
Reardon, B. A. (1995). Educating for human dignity: Learning about rights and responsibilities.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Regan, P. M. (2014). Bringing peace back in: Presidential address to the Peace Science Society,
2013. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 31(4), 345–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0738894214530852
Sharp, G. (2005). Waging non-violent struggle. Boston: Hardy Merriman.
Shields, P. M., & Soeters, J. (2017). Peaceweaving: Jane Addams, positive peace and public
administration. American Review of Public Administration, 47(3), 323–339.
Standish, K. (2015). Cultural violence in the classroom: Peace, conflict and education in Israel.
Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Standish, K., & Joyce, J. (2018). Yogic peace education. Jefferson: McFarland & Company.
Steffen, W., Broadgate, W., Deutsch, L., Gaffney, O., & Ludwig, C. (2015). The trajectory of the
anthropocene: The great acceleration. The Anthropocene Review, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/
2053019614564785
Stephan, M. J., & Chenoweth, E. (2008). Why civil resistance works: The strategic logic of
nonviolent conflict. International Security, 33(1), 7–44.
Strier, R. (2007). Anti-oppressive research in social work: A preliminary definition. British Journal
of Social Work., 37, 857–871.
Wagner, L., & Druckman, D. (2017). Drivers of durable peace: The role of justice in negotiating
civil war termination. Group Decision and Negotiation, 26, 45–67.
Walker, R. B. J. (1988). One world, many worlds: Struggles for a just world peace. Boulder: Lynne
Rienner Publishers.
Weber, T. (2003). Nonviolence is who? Gene Sharp and Gandhi. Peace & Change, 28(2), 250–270.
Wright, Q. (1954). Criteria for judging the relevance of researches on the problems of peace. In
Research for peace (pp. 3–98). Oslo: Institute for Social Research.
Part II
Personal Nonviolence
The Nature of Reflective Choice
and Nonviolence as a Personal Practice 2
of Yoga
Tatiyana Bastet
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
An Understanding of Yoga: Philosophy and Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
An Understanding of Emotion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
An Understanding of Mind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
The Nature of Sacrifice and Power of Choice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Abstract
Personal discord, anxiety, and suffering are all too often viewed as resulting from
a lack of choice. These feelings may be exacerbated by the contemporary notion
of sacrifice as actively giving up that which brings pleasure and nourishment.
How then, do we recognize choice, both passive and active? How does our
understanding of sacrifice inform choice? Examining Vedic and pre-Vedic phi-
losophy and practices, including yoga and the concept of ahiṃsā (nonviolence),
facilitates not only an exploration of choice, but of the understanding of sacrifice;
noting that we can choose to sacrifice that which no longer serves us. The
sacrificial act is then transformed into a practice of self-reflection, active choice,
and self-nourishment, creating an internal cycle of positive peace.
Keywords
Personal choice · Self-sacrifice · Sacrifice · Yoga · Nonviolence · Indian
mythology · Indian philosophy · Reflective choice · Syncretic practices
T. Bastet (*)
Simmons University, Boston, MA, USA
e-mail: Tatiyana.bastet@oilofantimony.com
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022 27
K. Standish et al. (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Peace,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0969-5_2
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
objects whose names occur in ancient literature, we lose half the
pleasure of reading it. In reading the New Testament, I can
certainly say for myself, that I derive more pleasure from the
narrative of the woman who poured the contents of the alabaster
box over the head of Jesus, now that I know what an alabastron
is, and how its contents would be extracted; and in the same way
I appreciate the remark made by the silversmith in the Acts, that
all Asia and the world worshipped the Ephesian Diana, now that I
know her image to be stamped not on the coins of Ephesus only,
but on many other cities throughout Asia also. Here, I think, we
have pleasure and profit combined in one. Instances are
abundant where monuments illustrate profane authors. The
reader of Aristophanes will be pleased to recognise among the
earliest figures on vases that of the ἱππαλεκτρυών, the cock-
horse, or horse-cock, which cost Bacchus a sleepless night to
conceive what manner of fowl it might be. “The Homeric scholar
again,” it has been said, “must contemplate with interest the
ancient pictures of Trojan scenes on the vases, and can hardly
fail to derive some assistance in picturing them to his own
imagination, by seeing how they were reproduced in that of the
Greeks themselves in the days of Æschylus and Pindar[25].”
24. Figrelius, quoted in the Museum of Classical Antiquities, Vol. I. p. 4.
25. Edinburgh Review, u. s.
Further, not only is ancient literature, but also modern art,

aided by archæology. It is well known how, in the early part of the
thirteenth century, Niccola Pisano was so attracted by a bas-
relief of Meleager, which had been lying in Pisa for ages
unheeded, “that it became the basis of his studies and the germ
of true taste in Italy.” In the Academy of St Luke at Rome, and in
the schools established shortly afterwards at Florence by
Lorenzo de’ Medici, the professors were required to point out to
the students the beauty and excellence of the works of ancient
art, before they were allowed to exercise their own skill and
imagination. Under the fostering patronage of this illustrious man
and of his not less illustrious son a galaxy of great artists lighted
up all Europe with their splendour. Leon Batista Alberti, one of
the greatest men of his age, and especially great in architecture,
was most influential in bringing back his countrymen to the study
of the monuments of antiquity. He travelled to explore such as
were then known, and tells us that he shed tears on beholding
the state of desolation in which many of them lay. The prince of
painters, Raffaelle,
timuit quo sospite vinci

Rerum magna parens et moriente mori,
and the prince of sculptors, Michael Angelo, both drew their

inspiration from the contemplation of the art-works of antiquity.
The former was led to improve the art of painting by the frescoes
of the baths of Titus, the latter by the sight of a mere torso
imbibed the principles of proportion and effect which were so
admirably developed in that fragment[26]. And not only the arts of
sculpture and painting, but those which enter into our daily life,
are furthered by the wise consideration of the past. Who can
have witnessed the noble exhibitions in Hyde Park or at
Kensington without feeling how much the objects displayed were
indebted to Hellenic art? In reference to the former of these Mr
Wornum says: “Repudiate the idea of copying as we will, all our
vagaries end in a recurrence to Greek shapes; all the most
beautiful forms in the Exhibition, (whether in silver, in bronze, in
earthenware, or in glass,) are Greek shapes; it is true often
disfigured by the accessory decorations of the modern styles, but
still Greek in their essential form[27].”
26. For this and the preceding facts see the Museum of Classical Antiquities, Vol. I.
pp. 13-15. The frescoes of the baths of Titus have subsequently lost their
brilliancy. See Quatremère de Quincy’s Life of Raphael, p. 263. Hazlitt’s
Translation. (Bogue’s European Library).
27. The Exhibition as a Lesson in Taste, p. xvii.*** (Printed at the end of the Art-
Journal Illustrated Catalogue, 1851).
And yet I must, in concluding this Introductory Lecture, most

strongly recommend to you the study of archæology, not only for
its illustration of ancient literature, not only for its furtherance of
modern art, but also, and even principally, for its own sake. “Hæc
studia adolescentiam alunt, senectutem oblectant, secundas res
ornant, adversis perfugium ac solatium præbent; delectant domi,
non impediunt foris, pernoctant nobiscum, peregrinantur,
rusticantur[28].” Every one who follows a pursuit in addition to the
routine duties of life has, by so doing, a happiness and an
advantage of which others know little. The more elevated the
pursuit, the more exquisite the happiness and the more solid the
advantage. Now if
The proper study of mankind is man,
then most assuredly archæology is one of the most proper

pursuits which man can follow. For she is the interpreter of the
remains which man in former ages has left behind him. By her
we read his history, his arts, his civilisation; by her magical
charms the past rises up again and becomes a present; the tide
of time flows back with us in imagination; the power of
association transports us from place to place, from age to age,
suddenly and in a moment. Again the glories of the nations of the
old world shine forth;
Again their godlike heroes rise to view,

And all their faded garlands bloom anew.
28. Cicero pro Archia poeta, c. vii.
To adopt and adapt the words of one who is both a learned

archæologist and a learned astronomer of this University, I feel
that I may, under any and all circumstances, impress upon your
minds the utility and pleasure of “every species and every
degree of archæological enquiry.” For “history must be looked
upon as the great instructive school in the philosophical
regulation of human conduct,” as well as the teacher “of moral
precepts” for all ages to come; and no “better aid can be
appealed to for” the discovery, for “the confirmation, and for the
demonstration of the facts of history, than the energetic pursuit of
archæology”[29].
29. See an address delivered at an Archæological meeting at Leicester, by John Lee,
Esq., LL.D. (Journal of Archæol. Association for 1863, p. 37).
NOTES.
Pp. 15-20. Nearly everything contained in the text relating to

pre-historic Europe will be found in the Revue Archéologique for
1864, and in Sir C. Lyell’s Antiquity of Man, London, 1863; see
also for Thetford, Antiq. Commun. Vol. I. pp. 339-341, (Cambr.
Antiq. Soc. 1859); but the following recent works (as I learn from
Mr Bonney, who is very familiar with this class of antiquities) will
also be found useful to the student:
Prehistoric Times. By John Lubbock, F.R.S. London, 1865.
8vo.
The Primeval Antiquities of Denmark. By Prof. Worsäe.
London, 1849. 8vo. (Engl. Transl.).
Les Habitations Lacustres. Par F. Troyon. Lausanne, 1860.
Les Constructions Lacustres du Lac de Neufchâtel. Par E.
Desor. Neufchâtel, 1864.
Antiquités Celtiques et Antédiluviennes. Par Boucher de
Perthes. Paris, 1847.
Die Pfahlbauten. Von Dr Ferd. Keller. Ber. I-V. (Mittheilungen
der Antiquarischen Gesellschaft in Zurich). 1854, sqq. 4to.
Die Pfahlbauten in den Schweizer-Seeen. Von I. Staub. Zurich,
1864. 8vo.
Besides these there are several valuable papers in the
Transactions of the Royal, Geological, and Antiquarian Societies
(by Messrs John Evans, Prestwich, and others), the Natural
History Review, and other Periodicals.
p. 26. For the literature relating to ancient Egypt see Mr R. S.
Poole’s article on Egypt, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. I.
p. 512.
pp. 29-31. Besides the works of Robinson, De Saulcy, Lewin,
Thrupp, and others, the following books may be mentioned as
more especially devoted to the archæology of Jerusalem:
The Holy City. By George Williams, B.D. (Second edition,
including an architectural History of the Church of the Holy
Sepulchre by the Rev. Robert Willis, M.A., F.R.S. 1849.)
Jerusalem Explored. By Ermete Pierotti. Translated by T. G.
Bonney, M.A. 1864.
Le Temple de Jérusalem. Par le Comte Melchior de Vogüé,
1865. The Count considers none of the present remains of the
Temple to be earlier than the time of Herod.
To these I should add Mr Williams’ and Mr Bonney’s tracts,
directed against the views of Mr Fergusson, in justification of
those of Dr Pierotti.
p. 31, l. 20. From some remarks made to me by my learned
friend, Count de Vogüé, I fear that this is not so certain a
characteristic of Phœnician architecture as has been commonly
supposed. He assigns some of the bevelled stones which occur
in Phœnicia to the age of the Crusades.
p. 31, last line. For the very remarkable Phœnician
sarcophagus discovered in 1855, and for various references to
authorities on Phœnician antiquities, see Smith’s Dict. of the
Bible, Vol. II. p. 868, and Vol. III. p. 1850.
p. 36. As a general work on Greek and Roman Coins Eckhel’s
Doctrina Numorum Veterum (Vindobonæ, 1792-1828, with
Steinbuchel’s Addenda, 8 Vols. 4to.) still remains the standard,
though now getting a little out of date.
The same remark must be made of Mionnet’s great work,
Description de Médailles Antiques, Grecques et Romaines,
Paris, 1806-1813 (7 Vols.), with a supplement of 9 Vols. Paris,
1818-1837, giving a very useful Bibliothèque Numismatique at
the end; to which must be added his Poids des Médailles
Grecques, Paris, 1839. These seventeen volumes comprise the
Greek coins: the other part of his work, De la Rareté et du Prix
des Médailles Romaines, Paris, 1827, in two volumes, is now
superseded.
Since Mionnet’s time certain departments of Greek and other
ancient numismatics have been much more fully worked out,
especially by the following authors:
De Luynes (coins of Satraps; also of Cyprus); L. Müller (coins
of Philip and Alexander; of Lysimachus; also of Ancient Africa);
Pinder (Cistophori); Beulé (Athenian coins); Lindsay (Parthian
coins); Longpérier, and more recently Mordtmann (coins of the
Sassanidæ); Carelli’s plates described by Cavedoni (coins of
Magna Græcia, &c.); other works of Cavedoni (Various coins);
Friedländer (Oscan coins); Sambon (coins of South Italy); De
Saulcy, Levy, Madden (Jewish coins); V. Langlois (Armenian,
also early Arabian coins); J. L. Warren (Greek Federal coins;
also more recently, copper coins of Achæan League); R. S.
Poole (coins of the Ptolemies); Waddington (Unedited coins of
Asia Minor).
For Roman and Byzantine coins (including Æs grave and
Contorniates) see the works of Marchi and Tessieri, Cohen,
Sabatier, and De Saulcy.
Others, as Prokesch-Osten, Leake, Smyth, Hobler, and Fox,
have published their collections or the unedited coins of them;
and all the numismatic periodicals contain various previously
unedited Greek and Roman and other ancient coins.
p. 40. Fabretti’s work is entitled, Glossarium Italicum in quo
omnia vocabula continentur ex Umbricis, Sabinis, Oscis, Volscis,
Etruscis, cæterisque monumentis collecta, et cum
interpretationibus variorum explicantur (Turin, 1858-1864). Many
figures of the antiquities, on which the words occur, are given in
their places.
p. 43. Cromlechs in some, if not in all cases, appear to be the
skeletons of barrows.
p. 44. The following works will be found useful for the student
of early British antiquities:
Pictorial History of England, Vol. I. Lond. 1838.
Archæological Index to remains of Antiquity of the Celtic,
Romano-British, and Anglo-Saxon periods. By J. Y. Akerman,
F.S.A. London, 1847 (with a classified index of the Papers in the
Archæologia, Vols. I-XXXI.).
Ten years’ diggings in Celtic and Saxon Grave Hills in the
Counties of Derby, Stafford, and York, from 1848-1858. By
Thomas Bateman. London, 1861. A most useful work, which will
indicate the existence of many others. In connection with this see
Dr Thurnam’s paper on British and Gaulish skulls in Memoirs of
Anthropological Soc. Vol. I. p. 120.
The Land’s End District, its Antiquities, Natural History, &c. By
Richard Edmonds. London, 1862.
Catalogue of the Antiquities of Stone, Earthen, and Vegetable
Materials, in the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy. By W. B.
Wilde, M.R.I.A. Dublin, 1857.
The Coins of the Ancient Britons. By John Evans, F.S.A. The
plates by F. W. Fairholt, F.S.A. London, 1864. By far the best and
most complete work hitherto published on the subject.
Also, the Transactions of various learned Societies in Great
Britain and Ireland, among which the Archæologia Cambrensis is
deserving of special mention.
For the Romano-British Antiquities may be added Horsley’s
Britannia Romana, 1732; Roy’s Military Antiquities of the
Romans in Britain, 1793; Lysons’ Relliquiæ Britannico-Romanæ.
London, 1813, 4 Vols. fol.
Monographs on York, by Mr Wellbeloved; on Richborough and
other towns, by Mr C. R. Smith; on Aldborough, by Mr H. E.
Smith; on Wroxeter, by Mr Wright; on Caerleon, by Mr Lee; on
Cirencester, by Messrs Buckman and Newmarch; on Hadrian’s
wall, by Dr Bruce; on various excavations in Cambridgeshire, by
the Hon. R. C. Neville.
p. 45. For the Roman Roads, &c. in Cambridgeshire, see Prof.
Charles C. Babington’s Ancient Cambridgeshire, Cambr. 1853
(Cambr. Ant. Soc).
— No doubt need have been expressed about Wroxeter, which
should hardly have been called ‘our little Pompeii’; the area of
Wroxeter being greater, however less considerable the remains.
See Wright’s Guide to Uriconium, p. 88. Shrewsbury, 1860. For
various examples of Roman wall-painting in Britain see Reliq.
Isur. by H. E. Smith, p. 18, 1852.
p. 46. For Romano-British coins see
Coins of the Romans relating to Britain, described and
illustrated. By J. Y. Akerman, F.S.A. London, 1844.
Petrie’s Monumenta Historica Britannica, Pl. I-XVII. London,
1848 (for beautiful figures).
Others, published by Mr C. R. Smith in his valuable
Collectanea Antiqua; also by Mr Hobler, in his Records of Roman
History, exhibited on Coins. London, 1860. Others in the
Numismatic Chronicle, in the Transactions of the Cambridge
Antiquarian Society, and perhaps elsewhere.
For medieval and modern numismatics in general we may
soon, I trust, have a valuable manual (the MS. of which I have
seen) from the pen of my learned friend, the Rev. W. G. Searle.
He has favoured me with the following notes:
On medieval and modern coins generally we have
Appel, Repertorium zur Münzkunde des Mittelalters und der
neuern Zeit, 6 Vols. 8vo. Pesth, 1820-1829.
Barthélémy, Manuel de Numismatique du moyen âge et
moderne. Paris, 1851. 12mo.
The bibliography up to 1840 we get in
Lipsius, Biblioth. Numaria, Leipz. 1801 (2 Vols.) 8vo., and in
Leitzmann, Verzeichniss aller seit 1800 erschienenen Numism.
Werke, Weissensee, 1841, 8vo.
On medieval coins, their types and geography, we have
J. Lelewel, La Numismatique du Moyen-âge, considérée sous
le rapport du type. Paris, 1835, 2 vols. 8vo. Atlas 4to.
Then there are the great Numismatic Periodicals:
Revue Numism. 8vo. Paris, 1836.
Revue de la Num. Belge, 8vo. Brussels, 1841.
Leitzmann, Numismatische Zeitung, 4to. Weissensee, 1834.
On Bracteates:
Mader, Versuch über die Bracteaten. Prague, 1797, 4to.
And the great Coin Catalogues of
Welzl v. Wellenheim. 3 vols. 8vo. Vienna, 1844 ff. (c. 40,000
coins).
v. Reichel at St Petersburgh, in at least 9 parts.
On current coins we have
Lud. Fort, Neueste Münzkunde, engravings and descr. 8vo.
Leipzig, 1851 ff.
p. 45. For almost everything relating to ivories and for a great
deal on the subjects which follow, see Handbook of the Arts of
the Middle Ages and Renaissance, Translated from the French
of M. Jules Labarte, with notes, and copiously illustrated,
London, 1855, which will lead the student to the great authorities
for medieval art, as Du Sommerard, &c. I have also examined
and freely used Histoire des Arts industriels au moyen âge et à
l’époque de la Renaissance, Par Jules Labarte. Paris, 1864, 8vo.
2 volumes; accompanied by an album in quarto with descriptions
of the plates, also in two volumes.
p. 47. For examples of medieval calligraphy and illuminations
see Mr Westwood’s Palæographia Sacra Pictoria, (Lond. 1845),
and his Illuminated Illustrations of the Bible, (London, 1846).
p. 48. A good deal of information about Celtic, Romano-British,
and medieval pottery will be found in Mr Jewitt’s Life of
Wedgwood, London, 1865. For ancient pottery in general
(excluding however the medieval) see Dr Birch’s Ancient Pottery
and Porcelain, London, 1858, which will conduct the student to
the most authentic sources of information. In connection with this
should be studied Mr Bunbury’s article in the Edinburgh Review
for 1858, to which Mr Oldfield’s paper on Sir W. Temple’s vases
in the Transactions of the Royal Soc. of Lit. Vol. VI. pp. 130-149
(1859), may be added.
—— For medieval sculpture see Flaxman’s Lectures. The
‘horrible and burlesque’ style of the earlier ages was discarded in
the thirteenth century, when the art revived in Italy. Italian artists
executed various sepulchral statues in this country, which
possess considerable merit, as do others by native artists, but
the great beauty of our sepulchral monuments consists in their
architectural decorations.
p. 49. For the coinage of the British Islands see the works of
Ruding, Hawkins, and Lindsay, also for the Saxon coins found in
great numbers in Scandinavia, Hildebrand and Schröder.
Humphreys’ popular work on the coinage of the British Empire,
so far as the plates are concerned, is useful, but the author is
deficient in scholarship.
p. 52. For the statements here made on oil-painting see
Bryan’s Dict. of Painters and Engravers, by Stanley, (London,
1849), under Van Eyck, and Sir C. L. Eastlake’s Materials for a
History of Oil-painting. (London 1847.)
p. 53. For medieval brasses, see
Bowtell, Monumental Brasses and Slabs. London, 1847, 8vo.
——— Monumental Brasses of England, a Series of
engravings in wood. London, 1849.
Haines, Manual of Monumental Brasses. 2 parts. London,
1861, 8vo. This contains also a list of all the brasses known to
him as existing in the British Isles. Mr Way has given an account
of foreign sepulchral brasses in Archæol. Journ., Vol. VII.
p. 56. Several English frescoes are described and figured in
the Journal of the Archæological Association, passim.
p. 62, l. 13. The omission of ancient costume has been pointed
out to me. The actually existing specimens however are mostly
very late; with the exception of a few articles of dress found in
Danish sepulchres of the bronze period, or in Irish peat bogs of
uncertain date, the episcopal vestments of Becket now
preserved at Sens are the earliest which occur to my
recollection; and there are few articles of dress, I believe, so
early as these. However both ancient and medieval costume is
well known from the representations on monuments of various
kinds. See inter alia Hope’s Costume of the Ancients; Becker’s
Gallus and Charicles; Strutt’s Dress of the English People, edited
by Planché, (Lond. 1842); Shaw’s Dresses and Decorations of
the Middle Ages.
p. 67. The statement about Patin is made on the authority of a
note in Warton’s edition of Pope’s Works, Vol. III. p. 306. (London
1797.)
p. 68. The remark about the crab was made to me by the late
Mr Burgon, and I do not know whether it has ever been printed;
its truth seems pretty certain. For the Rhodian symbol see my
paper in the Numismatic Chronicle for 1864, pp. 1-6.
PREPARING FOR PUBLICATION,

An Introduction to the Study of Greek Fictile Vases; their
Classification, Subjects, and Nomenclature. Being the
substance of the Disney Professor’s Lectures for 1865, and
of those which he purposes to deliver in 1866.
CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
Transcriber’s Notes:
Missing or obscured punctuation was
silently corrected.
Typographical errors were silently
corrected.
Inconsistent spelling and
hyphenation were made consistent
only when a predominant form was
found in this book.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AN
INTRODUCTORY LECTURE ON ARCHÆOLOGY ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

will be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright
in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and
distribute it in the United States without permission and without
paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General
Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if
you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the
trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the
Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such
as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and
printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in
the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright
law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to
abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using
and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms
of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with
its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg
License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute
this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information

The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Peace Katerina Standish Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Peace Katerina Standish Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Palgrave Handbook of Positive

Peace Katerina Standish

The Palgrave Handbook of

With 28 Figures and 24 Tables

Adan E. Suazo Rachel Rafferty

ISBN 978-981-16-0968-8 ISBN 978-981-16-0969-5 (eBook)

Part I Introduction ....................................... 1

1 Deﬁning the Platform of Positive Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Part II Personal Nonviolence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

2 The Nature of Reﬂective Choice and Nonviolence as a Personal

3 Personal Peacebuilding and COVID-19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

4 Humor as a Major Intellectual Device for Thriving in

5 Contemplative Practices and Nonviolence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

6 Resilience and the Claiming of Voice by Marginalized

Part III Interpersonal Nonviolence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

7 True Colors: Nonviolent Communication in the Postcolonial

8 Forgiveness: A Nonviolent Resolution of Interpersonal

Part IV Social Nonviolence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

9 Peace Education ....................................... 167

Part V International Nonviolence .......................... 293

15 Unarmed Civilian Peacekeeping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295

Part VI Social Justice: Types of Justice ...................... 415

20 Retributive Justice: The Restoration of Balance .............. 417

21 Restorative Justice: Blending Western and Indigenous

22 Promoting Peace via Inclusionary Justice ................... 441

23 Transformative Justice: Exploring the “Relational” in

Part VII Social Justice: Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473

24 The Right to Peace: From Just War to Just Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . 475

25 Women’s Rights/Gender Rights: Positive Peace as Indigenous

26 Disability Rights: Positive Peace Through a Disability Lens . . . . . 501

27 Indigenous Rights: Colonial Chimera? The Illusion of Positive

28 Refugee Rights: Essential for Positive Peace ................. 531

29 The Rights of Children: Tensions Between Protection and

Part VIII Social Justice: Freedoms .......................... 557

30 Media Freedom: A West Papuan Human Rights Journalism

31 Freedom from Violence: A Samoan Perspective on Addressing

32 Freedom from Discrimination: On the Coloniality of Positive

Part IX Environmental Sustainability: Conceptual

33 Ecocide, Speciesism, Vulnerability: Revisiting Positive Peace

Part X Environmental Sustainability: Local Perspectives . . . . . . . . 703

37 Decentralizing Consumption to Recenter the Land . . . . . . . . . . . . 705

Part XI Environmental Sustainability: National and Regional

41 Resources, Climate Change, and Implications to Positive Peace

Part XII Environmental Sustainability: International

44 Regional Environmental Cooperation: The (Lost) Potential

Part XIII Positive Relationships: Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853

46 Relational Ethics: The Possibility of a Caring Positive Peace .... 855

Part XIV Positive Relationships: Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031

54 Positive Peace Through Personal Friendship: Franco-German

56 Transforming the Way We Speak, Transforming the Way

Peace Research and Praxis, Peace Studies Journal,

Dr. Adan E. Suazo

Dr. Rafferty’s areas of expertise include collective mem-

Shir Gruber Faculty of Science, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences,

M. B. Ramose Department of Clinical Psychology, Sefako Makgatho Health

Sorcha Tormey Australian Catholic University, Lismore, Australia

K. Standish (*) · H. Devere · A. E. Suazo

Defining the Platform of Positive Peace

transactional, dynamic, and embedded relations. Positive peace acknowledges the

Defining Positive Peace

The Multifarity of Peace

Overview of the Positive Peace Quadrant

Paciﬁsm is a refusal to participate in violence (especially state organized violence), prag-