Integrating peace: how to work in fragile and conflict-affected settings

The world faces a set of deeply interconnected crises.

Climate shocks, economic fragility and record levels of displacement are increasingly intertwined.

The consequences are especially acute for the more than two billion people living in fragile and conflict-affected settings. Yet these communities remain systematically under-served by international investment, overseas development assistance and –  crucially – climate finance.

Conflict is now one of the biggest obstacles to sustainable development and humanitarian progress. In 2022, 87% of people  in need of humanitarian assistance lived in countries experiencing high-intensity conflict. Violence damages infrastructure, restricts access for aid organisations and puts humanitarian workers at risk, making it harder to reach the communities most in need.

Communities’ ability to cope with climate shocks, from extreme weather events to rising temperatures, is weakened by protracted conflict, fragile governance systems and social divisions. Climate risks interact with existing drivers of instability, such as poverty, political exclusion and weak institutions, and this increases tensions and the likelihood of violence. Even well-funded and well-intentioned interventions remain poorly adapted to fragile contexts. They struggle to deliver lasting results when they don’t take conflict dynamics into account.

Humanitarian assistance, climate adaptation and development programming often operate in silos, guided by short-term project cycles and rigid funding models. As global aid budgets tighten, continuing with approaches that do not work in fragile and conflict-affected settings is no longer sustainable.

When peace enables climate and humanitarian action

International Alert’s experience in Nigeria illustrates how conflict dynamics can undermine climate adaptation and humanitarian outcomes, and how peacebuilding approaches can help impacted communities drive sustainable and inclusive change.

Climate pressures in Benue and Sokoto states have intensified tensions between farmers and pastoralists. Local governance mechanisms have struggled to manage disputes over land and water effectively and peacefully. As mistrust deepens, cooperation between groups breaks down, making collective responses to climate challenges extremely difficult.

These divisions also complicate humanitarian and development efforts. When communities are in conflict, aid delivery can become politicised or contested. This undermines trust and limits the effectiveness of interventions. Technical solutions for climate adaptation have faced serious barriers because of these tensions and the challenges of weak governance.

We have worked with local civil society partners to integrate dialogue and peacebuilding processes into their climate work. They have jointly analysed conflict drivers, co-developed local peace and climate adaptation plans, and ensured that women and young people were involved in decision making. We engaged local and state authorities to make climate policies more inclusive and responsive to climate conflict dynamics.

The result was a ‘peace dividend’. Communities that had previously clashed over natural resources began cooperating to protect them and share the economic benefits. By addressing conflict dynamics directly, the programme enabled climate adaptation efforts to move forward.

Rethinking how aid works in fragile contexts

If humanitarian, development and climate interventions are to succeed in fragile contexts, peace cannot remain a separate agenda. Donors and implementing organisations must instead integrate peace-positive approaches into how programmes are designed and delivered.

• Support locally led solutions

Sustainable peace and development must be grounded in local ownership. Programmes become more relevant, legitimate and sustainable when communities affected by conflict can define priorities and shape interventions. Community actors are best placed to plan across conflict divides and ensure the participation of marginalised groups, including women and young people.

• Embed conflict and context analysis

Effective interventions in fragile and conflict-affected settings must begin with a strong understanding of local dynamics. Conflict and context analysis helps humanitarian and climate actors identify the economic, political and social drivers of tensions, as well as relationships between communities, authorities and other stakeholders.

Conflict analysis can also inform investment decisions. For example, our work supporting the European Investment Bank’s conflict sensitivity helpdesk has shown how analysing fragility and resilience can help institutions design projects that minimise risks while contributing to positive peace outcomes.

• Use dialogue to build trust

Dialogue is a powerful tool for peacefully resolving conflicts and strengthening cooperation in divided communities. When shaped and led by those directly affected by conflict, dialogue processes can help rebuild trust, reduce tensions and improve relationships between communities, authorities and service providers. For humanitarian actors working in contested environments, this trust can be essential to delivering effective assistance.

• Adopt gender-sensitive and inclusive approaches

Gender inequality and social exclusion often lie at the heart of conflict dynamics and hamper communities’ ability to respond effectively to humanitarian crises. Inclusive approaches that recognise how social norms shape community responses ensure that programmes meet the needs of diverse groups. Evidence shows that addressing harmful power dynamics can reduce violence, improve economic wellbeing and strengthen resilience.

• Align climate and humanitarian action with peacebuilding

Climate action in fragile settings must go beyond technical solutions. When climate programmes ignore conflict dynamics, they risk reinforcing inequalities, deepening divisions and fuelling further violence.

Conflict sensitive approaches ensure interventions ‘do no harm’, while ‘peace-positive’ strategies go further by fostering inclusive governance, cooperation and trust. Integrating dialogue, participatory decision making and local knowledge into climate adaptation can strengthen both social cohesion and environmental resilience.

The need for conflict sensitivity and a peace-positive approach

Fragile and conflict-affected settings are at the epicentre of today’s humanitarian, development and climate challenges. A time of rising need is also a time of constrained budgets. Yet the systems designed to address these challenges still haven’t adapted to deliver sustainable impacts in these environments.

For policymakers, donors and humanitarian organisations, including those in the UK, the message is clear. Development interventions cannot afford to be ineffective in the places where they are needed most.

Integrating conflict sensitivity and peace-positive approaches across humanitarian, climate and development programming offers a path forward. Peace is not an optional add-on to aid and climate action. It is the condition that allows communities to thrive, institutions to function and interventions to deliver lasting impact.