Conflict, development and the Lome Convention

Abstract

This paper examines the idea of conflict prevention as a new theme in development theory. It analyses conflict and development in a variety of aspects and raises the question of whether international conflict prevention is merely a new fashion in development theory. Is conflict prevention, like the role of non-governmental organisations (NGO's) in the l980s, going to be a panacea or magic bullet for subSaharan Africa in particular? (Edwards and Hulme, l995) Will it be a panacea that fails? Should conflict prevention be added to the already extensive list of tasks for development aid or should it be a separate category? If conflict prevention is added to the list of tasks for development aid, but it fails [1] to be achieved, will conflict prevention bring development aid as a whole into disrepute? The European Union's Development Commissioner Pinheiro has stated his belief that conflict prevention and politics will figure 'most prominently' in the post Lome IV convention between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries (Pinheiro l998, 67). Is the EU thus admitting that its traditional development programmes have failed? But if conflict prevention is a risky, experimental new area for development cooperation, is the EU right to embrace it as a headline element of the post-Lome↵' agreement? The Lome Convention's image has already suffered badly from the failure of its flagship commodity stabilisation policy Stabex which is now likely to be abolished, largely unlamented, in the post-Lome negotiations.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.