Evaluation of the Civil Peace Service (CPS)

Wars and other forms of violent conflict frequently occur in contexts marked by fragile state structures. Such conflicts not only threaten lives, but also pose major obstacles to sustainable development in the countries concerned. Increasing environmental degradation, climate change and resource scarcity are recognised as drivers of conflict, as they often exacerbate food insecurity, weaken health systems and deepen poverty. In turn, this heightens the risk of environmental conflicts and competition over resources. Violent conflicts can lead to flight, displacement and migration, thereby affecting also other (neighbouring) countries and regions. 

Recognising the urgency of preventing or overcoming violent conflicts and consolidating peace in the long term, the international community has responded with a range of commitments, including the “Agenda for Peace” and various resolutions. These commitments often focus on the affected civilian population, in particular vulnerable groups such as young people and women, and encourage them to participate in peace processes. 

The German Federal Government also recognises the need to prevent crises, manage acute conflicts and support sustainable peace frameworks. The BMZ emphasises that crisis management and stabilisation are important development policy tasks. To promote peace and resolve conflicts, the BMZ supports the Civil Peace Service (CPS). 

Established in 1999 as a result of civil society and church peace work, the CPS is now a cooperative framework for governmental and non-governmental organisations involved in development and peacebuilding. The nine organisations implementing the CPS are united in the Civil Peace Service Consortium. The seconded international CPS peace experts work with partner organisations in all three phases of violent conflicts: from prevention before the outbreak of violence, as part of conflict transformation during acts of violence and as post-conflict rehabilitation after the conflict has ended.   

Up to now, the effectiveness of civil conflict management has been analysed less systematically than other development policy issues. However, evaluations of German development cooperation measures have already shown that they need to be more effective in fragile contexts. Although they have been successful to a certain extent in the short and medium term, they have rarely delivered structural contributions to sustainable development. 

This background, together with the significance of fragility and violent conflicts for development cooperation, underscores the importance of conducting an evidence-based evaluation of the CPS to better understand to what extent it is an instrument of civil conflict management.

Development cooperation has a wide range of instruments to contribute to civil conflict management. At the same time, it faces various challenges, as violent conflicts make the success of development interventions more difficult. The effective use of resources, particularly in fragile contexts, requires strong strategic and operational approaches as well as special efforts in measuring impact and evidence-based policy making. Up to now, the impact of (civil) peace work in development cooperation has been less systematically analysed than other areas of development cooperation. This makes a strategic evaluation of the CPS all the more relevant. The evaluation’s overarching objective is therefore to provide a systematic, evidence-based assessment of the CPS as an instrument of civil conflict management.  

To this end, the CPS will be systematically examined in accordance with the OECD evaluation criteria and assessed based on the evidence found. With regard to the objectives of the CPS and their achievement, the evaluation will pay particular attention to relevance, coherence and effectiveness. Based on the findings, conclusions and recommendations for the CPS Consortium and the BMZ will be developed to make the CPS more effective. 

The evaluation is intended to help close existing evidence gaps regarding the effectiveness of peacebuilding interventions, especially in fragile contexts. It is also intended to generate insights to what extent the stakeholders involved in the CPS can act in an evidence-based manner in the areas of peace, conflict and fragility and further develop their strategies. A further objective is to clarify the extent to which the CPS is an instrument of civil conflict management that complements the BMZ’s mix of peacebuilding instruments. In addition, the results of the evaluation are intended to be the subject of political debate, ultimately contributing to academic discussion on the effectiveness of peacebuilding interventions in fragile contexts and how their impact can be measured.

A qualitative methodological design with quantitative elements will be used for the evaluation. To develop an overall understanding of the CPS, the evaluation team will begin with a descriptive stocktaking exercise using the CPS portfolio and an assessment of country-specific (conflict) indices. These will form the basis for a criteria-based selection of country case studies. In the context of these desk studies and on-site case studies, qualitative content analyses of relevant documents and qualitative interviews with stakeholders involved in the CPS will be conducted for the selected countries. These analyses will provide insights into complex social dynamics and local contexts in which civil conflict management measures take place. They will also examine the extent to which the CPS achieves its objectives, such as influencing attitudes and behaviour, and contributes effectively to peacebuilding. In conjunction with qualitative interviews with stakeholders involved in the CPS’s strategic direction, it will also be possible to establish whether the CPS is a strategic instrument of civil conflict management and assess the suitability and efficiency of its institutional and procedural design.