THE PRAGMORA PROCESS

The Pragmora Process is a rigorous method for identifying and selecting the conflict resolution and prevention measures that Pragmora advocates. Through this systematic process, we compile an inventory of all suggested nonviolent options, and then vet each one internally and with diverse international experts using three specific criteria by diverse experts internationally.

Pragmora's advocacy campaigns for conflict prevention and resolution are at the very heart of our organisation. They are the unique contribution we make to peace – putting realistic advocacy measures into the hands of activists globally. It is imperative that we get these measures right. What we ask decision-makers to do must be right.

Each proposed measure is weighed against specific evaluation criteria and selection considerations. The ideal process that we endeavour to adhere to is described below.

1. Preliminary Inventory. We undertake extensive research to prepare a preliminary inventory of suggestions for non-violent measures to help resolve/prevent the specific conflict. Our research sources are extensive and diverse. They may include articles and reports from academia, the media, NGO websites, international organizations, policy institutes; books, videos and documentaries; and one-on-one interviews.

2. Final Inventory. In the conflict region, a senior Pragmora analyst conducts in-person interviews with diverse individuals and diverse organizations to solicit additional suggestions for non-violent solutions. On-the-ground interviewees may include local and international NGO staff, policy experts, academics, government officials, UN officials, church leaders, business people, development consultants, media, and community groups.

3. Vet Inventory Internally. Pragmora conducts additional research, as required, to confirm key facts pertaining to each conflict prevention/resolution option in the Final Inventory. Each option is then vetted internally at Pragmora using three criteria.

The outcome of this internal vetting process is a short list of 4–10 possible options for a Pragmora campaign. This short list of options is determined not only by how well an option has fared in against the evaluation criteria, but also its potential as a component of an international advocacy campaign. (For example, if there is a good conflict prevention option, but it would be complex to explain to non-experts, this option may not make the short list.)

4. Vet Short List with External Experts. Each of the options on the short list is formally vetted with diverse experts internationally. This second round of vetting includes many of the experts who participated in the Preliminary Vetting, but also includes additional experts in order to get more points of view and to get 'fresh eyes' on the potential advocacy actions. Again, they employ the three vetting criteria.

5. Create an Action Campaign. Based on the feedback from the second round of vetting, we conduct any required additional research and intelligence gathering, weigh the remaining options again the and selection considerations, and then create a set of 3-5 advocacy actions that together we believe would substantially help prevent or resolve a conflict. Launch the campaign online.

Evaluation Criteria for Vetting

1. Could advocating this measure do harm?
   Is there any way that an international advocacy campaign for this measure or the actual implementation of this measure could exacerbate a conflict, destabilize a situation, put lives at risk, or otherwise do harm?

2. Is there a possibility of success?
   What is the likelihood that an international advocacy campaign could successfully influence or pressure decision-makers to implement the measure?

3. If implemented, to what extent would it foster peace? Would it have a notable impact in helping to resolve the conflict and/or foster a stable peace?

Considerations for Selection of Advocacy Actions

Don't duplicate efforts. If there is already a strong international lobby for this measure, endorse it.

Support existing small or modest efforts. If there is already some degree of advocacy on this measure, it may be efficient for Pragmora to supplement and magnify this voice with its own advocacy campaign and network.

Choose diverse options. Do not focus all efforts on civil society, legalities, development aid, etc.

Target diverse sets of decision-makers. We do not want to be writing letters to the same individuals making three or four different sets of demands. Campaign targets may include national governments outside the conflict area, governments directly involved in the conflict, international organizations, businesses, media, other NGOs, or even an influential individual.

Clarity. Is the advocacy measure easily understandable? That is, can we give one sentence and a person can immediately see why this measure would help resolve a conflict or stabilize peace? If the measure requires a lot of explanation, then it is less likely that individuals will take action. An exception would be if we would like to educate the public about this option and its link to peace-building.