.
It seemed like such a simple question: “What is the most peaceful country in the world?” And yet very few people outside a rarified group of political scientists could answer that question in 2006. I remember the first launch of the Global Peace Index, where a certain sense of skepticism reigned. Experts questioned the indicators, poked holes in the methodology, and anxiously scanned the list to see where their own countries fell in the rankings. I remember my seatmates being outraged that the United States – THE UNITED STATES! – fell dangerously close to Iran and Israel in the rankings, far from the top tier of most peaceful nations.
The signal accomplishment of the Institute for Economics and Peace has been the creation of a framework flexible enough to encompass massive changes in the world – witnessing revolutions in politics and technology – and yet consistent enough to show real change over the course of ten years. The Global Peace Index and its sister indices have democratized the economic language of peace, allowing all of us – not just economists and political scientists -- to understand in harrowing detail both the costs of violence containment, and the potential dividends for peace.
As the leader of a network of 106 peacebuilding organizations working in 153 countries, I use elements of the Global Peace Index in every aspect of my advocacy for peace.
Intellectual Validation for an Entire Field
In 2006, when the GPI was born, peacebuilding risked becoming marginalized. Peacebuilding – despite very creative work in reconciliation and dialogue by brilliant practitioners and scholars – still carried a whiff of Birkenstocks and a thousand flowers blooming. Whereas other fields, such as education and public health took full advantage of the data revolution and developed metrics for measuring impact, peacebuilding lagged behind.
From the beginning, the Global Peace Index has provided important intellectual validation and ballast for the entire field of peacebuilding. The Global Peace Index was the first widely popular instrument to measure and quantify peacefulness across a wide range of conflict drivers, giving academics, practitioners and diplomats a numerical vocabulary for peace, and a compelling way to speak about the actual costs of violence. The 2015 Global Peace Index reported that the costs of violence make up a staggering 13.4% of global GDP. That number should make all of us take notice. To be effective advocates for peace, we must be conversant in these numbers! Purveyors of war are never called on to account for the true cost of violence – it is up to the peacebuilders to bring these figures to light, and to argue that peace is a far more cost-effective option.
These are the arguments that peacebuilders need to attract other donors to our space. For social change entrepreneurs who are drawn to fields like climate change or medical research because the rates of return are clearer, and the metrics are sexier, the Global Peace Index provides the kind of hard numbers that make investors take notice. The people who are skeptical that peace could yield outsized benefits only need to read the Global Peace Index to understand the deep impact of a dollar of conflict prevention, and the benefit of investing in a peace dividend.
Hard Truths and Inspiration
The Global Peace Index tells us hard truths about our world. It is a heartbreaking fact that – like income inequality – there is also peace inequality. The 2015 GPI highlighted a clear demarcation between the twenty least peaceful countries in the world and the other GPI nations, with 500 million people living in the twenty most peaceful countries, and 3 billion living in the twenty least peaceful.
However, the Global Peace Index also highlights hopeful models for peace. It is not only the Icelands and Denmarks of the world that provide models for peace and stability, but also the less-heralded Bhutan (18 in 2015), Poland (19 in 2015) and Mauritius (25 in 2015) that can serve as regional beacons, and repositories for creative experimentation in the elements that make up a peaceful society.
I work extensively on “fragile states,” partnering with citizens living in the most dire conflict regions, helping them imagine what a more peaceful future could look like. Being able to draw on the positive examples of countries in their own regions – and to learn from the negative trends, as well – gives citizens a language for negotiating with their own governments, a framework for attacking the most pressing peace and security problems in their countries, and a foundation for making difficult economic choices.
A Systems Approach to Peace
The Global Peace Index and the Positive Peace Index represent two sides of the peace coin – one “negative peace” (measuring violence, weapons, and the absence of peace) and the other “positive peace” (measuring the elements that create a healthy, peaceful society). Together, these two frameworks create a powerful systemic approach to peace. Peace is not simply the absence of war – it is the positive presence of good governance, economic opportunity, lack of corruption, civic voice, and human dignity. This is what we work for in peace – these are the pillars that STOP cycles of violence, put a brake on militarism, give voice and dignity to citizens, and build social cohesion. Conflict is development in reverse – positive peace gives us a new way of thinking about resilience.
I am convinced that the Global Peace Index, with its emphasis on quantifying peace, and its systemic approach to peacebuilding, made possible one of the greatest advocacy victories our field has been a part of – the inclusion of peace in the Sustainable Development Goals adopted by the United Nations in 2015. This framework, which will govern poverty reduction efforts globally for the next fifteen years – now has peace as a central pillar, encompassing peaceful, just and inclusive societies. Without the groundwork that the Global Peace Index laid in convincing the world that peace could be quantified, and the specific work that the Institute for Economics and Peace did in developing the indicators for peace in the Goal 16 process, we would never have reached his milestone.
I salute the creators of the Global Peace Index on the tenth anniversary, and feel confident that the GPI will rise to the challenges that a turbulent world continually puts before us.
About the author: Melanie Cohen Greenberg is President and CEO of the Alliance for Peacebuilding. She has spent her career strengthening the field of peacebuilding, with a special focus on empowering civil society level peace efforts.
The views presented in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent the views of any other organization.
a global affairs media network
A Simple Question for a Wicked Problem
World map painted on hands isolated on white
June 22, 2016
It seemed like such a simple question: “What is the most peaceful country in the world?” And yet very few people outside a rarified group of political scientists could answer that question in 2006. I remember the first launch of the Global Peace Index, where a certain sense of skepticism reigned. Experts questioned the indicators, poked holes in the methodology, and anxiously scanned the list to see where their own countries fell in the rankings. I remember my seatmates being outraged that the United States – THE UNITED STATES! – fell dangerously close to Iran and Israel in the rankings, far from the top tier of most peaceful nations.
The signal accomplishment of the Institute for Economics and Peace has been the creation of a framework flexible enough to encompass massive changes in the world – witnessing revolutions in politics and technology – and yet consistent enough to show real change over the course of ten years. The Global Peace Index and its sister indices have democratized the economic language of peace, allowing all of us – not just economists and political scientists -- to understand in harrowing detail both the costs of violence containment, and the potential dividends for peace.
As the leader of a network of 106 peacebuilding organizations working in 153 countries, I use elements of the Global Peace Index in every aspect of my advocacy for peace.
Intellectual Validation for an Entire Field
In 2006, when the GPI was born, peacebuilding risked becoming marginalized. Peacebuilding – despite very creative work in reconciliation and dialogue by brilliant practitioners and scholars – still carried a whiff of Birkenstocks and a thousand flowers blooming. Whereas other fields, such as education and public health took full advantage of the data revolution and developed metrics for measuring impact, peacebuilding lagged behind.
From the beginning, the Global Peace Index has provided important intellectual validation and ballast for the entire field of peacebuilding. The Global Peace Index was the first widely popular instrument to measure and quantify peacefulness across a wide range of conflict drivers, giving academics, practitioners and diplomats a numerical vocabulary for peace, and a compelling way to speak about the actual costs of violence. The 2015 Global Peace Index reported that the costs of violence make up a staggering 13.4% of global GDP. That number should make all of us take notice. To be effective advocates for peace, we must be conversant in these numbers! Purveyors of war are never called on to account for the true cost of violence – it is up to the peacebuilders to bring these figures to light, and to argue that peace is a far more cost-effective option.
These are the arguments that peacebuilders need to attract other donors to our space. For social change entrepreneurs who are drawn to fields like climate change or medical research because the rates of return are clearer, and the metrics are sexier, the Global Peace Index provides the kind of hard numbers that make investors take notice. The people who are skeptical that peace could yield outsized benefits only need to read the Global Peace Index to understand the deep impact of a dollar of conflict prevention, and the benefit of investing in a peace dividend.
Hard Truths and Inspiration
The Global Peace Index tells us hard truths about our world. It is a heartbreaking fact that – like income inequality – there is also peace inequality. The 2015 GPI highlighted a clear demarcation between the twenty least peaceful countries in the world and the other GPI nations, with 500 million people living in the twenty most peaceful countries, and 3 billion living in the twenty least peaceful.
However, the Global Peace Index also highlights hopeful models for peace. It is not only the Icelands and Denmarks of the world that provide models for peace and stability, but also the less-heralded Bhutan (18 in 2015), Poland (19 in 2015) and Mauritius (25 in 2015) that can serve as regional beacons, and repositories for creative experimentation in the elements that make up a peaceful society.
I work extensively on “fragile states,” partnering with citizens living in the most dire conflict regions, helping them imagine what a more peaceful future could look like. Being able to draw on the positive examples of countries in their own regions – and to learn from the negative trends, as well – gives citizens a language for negotiating with their own governments, a framework for attacking the most pressing peace and security problems in their countries, and a foundation for making difficult economic choices.
A Systems Approach to Peace
The Global Peace Index and the Positive Peace Index represent two sides of the peace coin – one “negative peace” (measuring violence, weapons, and the absence of peace) and the other “positive peace” (measuring the elements that create a healthy, peaceful society). Together, these two frameworks create a powerful systemic approach to peace. Peace is not simply the absence of war – it is the positive presence of good governance, economic opportunity, lack of corruption, civic voice, and human dignity. This is what we work for in peace – these are the pillars that STOP cycles of violence, put a brake on militarism, give voice and dignity to citizens, and build social cohesion. Conflict is development in reverse – positive peace gives us a new way of thinking about resilience.
I am convinced that the Global Peace Index, with its emphasis on quantifying peace, and its systemic approach to peacebuilding, made possible one of the greatest advocacy victories our field has been a part of – the inclusion of peace in the Sustainable Development Goals adopted by the United Nations in 2015. This framework, which will govern poverty reduction efforts globally for the next fifteen years – now has peace as a central pillar, encompassing peaceful, just and inclusive societies. Without the groundwork that the Global Peace Index laid in convincing the world that peace could be quantified, and the specific work that the Institute for Economics and Peace did in developing the indicators for peace in the Goal 16 process, we would never have reached his milestone.
I salute the creators of the Global Peace Index on the tenth anniversary, and feel confident that the GPI will rise to the challenges that a turbulent world continually puts before us.
About the author: Melanie Cohen Greenberg is President and CEO of the Alliance for Peacebuilding. She has spent her career strengthening the field of peacebuilding, with a special focus on empowering civil society level peace efforts.
The views presented in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent the views of any other organization.
