This article highlights the need for stronger collaboration across peace education, research, and practice. Despite their shared goals, these fields often operate in isolation.
“New Generation Wakes Up to a War” brought together youth workers, activists, and peace professionals in Finland, Poland, and Romania to develop nonviolent, local responses to the war. In this article a multi-occupational team from Finland connected the dots between education, youth work and peace work.
(reading time 17 minutes)
Text: Kerttu Auvinen, Marina Danoyan, Riikka Jalonen, Juulia Järvenpää, Eeva-Liisa Kiiskilä, Elina Lauttamäki, Liisa Mäkinen, Anush Petrosyan, Heli Pekkonen, Anu Railasto-Moran
The full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 made us face the new shocking realities in Europe. It was necessary to ask; What is the role and space of peace in Europe, where do we need to go and what is the role of a new generation and peace education in Europe at war? From these questions and realities rose project “New Generation Wakes Up to a War” (NewGen), a three-year project (1.9.2022–31.8.2025) co-funded by the European Union, where youth workers, young activists and peace professionals worked together to find non-violent social responses to the war in Ukraine on local levels in Finland, Poland and Romania. The main aim of the project was to return the focus on the importance of nonviolent social response to militant actions and reclaim the agency of activism and education in building positive peace that the outbreak of the war has taken away. This article focuses on summing up the most relevant remarks and conclusions of the mentoring process in Finland, inviting all practitioners interested in promoting peace to join shared peace initiatives.
Peace work encompasses a wide range of tasks, contexts, professional backgrounds and fields of research. Bridging peace education, peace research, and peace practice is essential for addressing the complex challenges that threaten sustainable peace. While these domains coexist in symbiosis, their collaboration often remains limited in practice. This is the peace map we started to clarify and draw in multi-occupational and -organizational cooperation, using mentoring as a tool for the work. The multi-occupational field of peace work forms an entity. But what is this entity? More visible and concrete contours and deeper understanding of the synergies are needed. The best way to build sustainable peace is to work even more tightly together in different peace work and educational contexts. The valuable insights and realizations need to be verbalized together as well as individually.
Connecting peace education, peace research, and peacebuilding practitioners is essential to addressing the complex challenges of conflict and insecurity. As a cycle or a loop, peace education and peace work can generate practical insights and data that inform peace and conflict research, while research provides evidence-based strategies for practitioners. Research not only provides the critical space to examine issues rigorously but also offers evidence-based remedies for advancing peace. Evidence based programming provides tools for planning for sustainable peace and helps to follow crucial principles such as do no harm. For instance, decolonial approaches and reflexive methodologies provide critical perspectives that help interrogate the underlying assumptions and power dynamics inherent in peace-related practices. It is highly important to be aware of the risk of perpetuating Eurocentric concepts of democracy, peace, conflict, development, and equality. These concepts, often uncritically reproduced, tend to reinforce colonial norms that prevent the dismantling of unjust structures.
Reflexivity in peace research offers a vital lens to critically examine how one’s privileges, positionalities, and internalized assumptions influence both scholarly inquiry and practical engagement. Similarly, in educational practices, it is necessary to reflect on the narratives that we transmit and to prioritize the co-creation, recognizing and supporting agency of young people. Young people define and address societal phenomena in their own terms as well as in cooperation with adult peace educators. Still, adult peace-educators do have meaningful and important roles, when they are working with young people and supporting the agency. For instance, professionals must evaluate the potential risks that getting involved with peace education might bring in certain environments. Especially when working with youth it must be reflected carefully and recognized, if the balance between youth empowerment and safety is sustainable in ever-changing societal and political landscapes. In some contexts eg. talking about peace might be dangerous politically and professionals must be aware of those risks and communicate them to young people when needed and guide towards recognizing these risks. It is also important to ask ourselves, are we able to recognize the safety issues and that our own positions may not enable us to see; the actual risks behind actions, activities and even thinking aloud.
Peace education and other forms of peace work share an aim: sustainable peace or sustainable peaces in plural. Sometimes the methods that are being used vary but other times even methods can be very similar. One could argue that peace education is always peace work, but all peace work is not peace education because in peace work there are as well other ways of working than education. There are many ways of doing peace work such as mediation, studying and writing about peace, humanitarian work etc. but we are all working for a shared aim. It is also usual to separate the educational professions from other professions in the peace field; some seem to think that peace educators are not peace workers. In some occasions and contexts that difference may be relevant. Peacebuilding, peace education and peace research all belong under the umbrella of peace work: all are directed towards building a more just, non-violent, and peaceful society in diverse settings to take action. Having the possibility to share spaces with different kinds of peace workers is not only necessary from the perspectives of peace, but also from the perspective of our professional growth and learning. Peace educator’s existence is thin and foggy without peace research, multi-occupational cooperation or the presence of different generations.
Practicing peace can take multiple forms in different contexts and times. Being a peace practitioner can be about being the kind of person who helps others come together, when things are tense or divided, with the aim of preventing, transforming or resolving conflicts. A peace practitioner doesn’t have the answers or try to “fix” everything, but instead walks alongside people in conflict—offering support, listening deeply, supporting coming up ways to continue discussion and creating safer spaces where interaction and dialogue can happen. It’s about building connections and trust, not necessarily agreement, and helping people find small ways to reconnect. At its heart, practicing peace is about making it possible for people to truly see, hear and trust each other.
As peace builders, we are working toward a vision that is still evolving—one that humanity has not yet fully realized. We have seen glimpses of peace and some kinds of temporarily peaceful communities, but a truly peaceful society or even world remains an aspiration. It can even be stated that there is no perfect or permanent peace: it is an ongoing and dynamic process. In any society, especially the one affected by the conflict, tensions, disagreements and competing interests are inevitable. The peacebuilders cannot eliminate all conflict, but they can transform the way it is expressed and managed. The gap between military actions and peace building efforts seem and feel large and fully contradicting, but in practice, the relationship is much more complex. Rather than existing in separate spheres, military and peace actions frequently coexist within the same societies. They might even have the same goal, peace, but with very different means. Even in countries involved in armed conflict, there are often actors, institutions, groups, and individuals actively striving for dialogue, justice, and long-term peace. Governments waging war may simultaneously invest in peace initiatives—whether to stabilize certain regions, maintain internal cohesion, or address the grievances of their own populations.
Peace workers often feel frustrated when they count how much money is spent on military resources. So much peace could be built with the same resources. Resources and power are too often disproportionately directed toward military solutions rather than meaningful investments in peace initiatives, military rhetoric dominating the space and sidelining the possibilities to promote peace. Advancing peace efforts in those circumstances is even more crucial to counterbalance the prevailing narratives and ensure long-term stability and resilience. Practical peace work and peace education can draw on the theoretical frameworks and methodologies developed within peace research. Together, these domains form an interconnected framework through which we can explore many pathways for comprehending, addressing, and transforming conflicts. Moreover, this synergy provides a foundation for intergenerational learning, equipping new cohorts with the tools and knowledge necessary to advance the principles of peace. By integrating critical theory with practice, we can collectively contribute to the creation of equitable and enduring societal structures, fostering a world that values inclusion, justice, and coexistence.
Peace processes are often long and complex, which likely contributes to their lack of attention in the media. However, the many steps they require and the countless individuals who contribute to achieving peace are essential and provide invaluable lessons that must not be ignored. History reminds us that democracy and peace are not lost overnight—they erode slowly. And that is why education isn’t just about stopping wars; it’s about preventing them. Peace is not merely an abstract concept or an endpoint but a dynamic reality that we produce and experience in our daily lives. Peace manifests in the mundane—through everyday interactions where individuals feel a sense of belonging and security. It can also appear amidst conflict, such as when one pauses to admire birds in flight or extends a helping hand to another. Peace is created every day through small actions, such as sharing common spaces and choosing kind words. We believe that everyday peace, dialogical interaction, and experiences of inclusion form the foundational pillars for building peaceful societies. Creating safer spaces —whether in peacebuilding efforts, education, research, or daily encounters—requires intentional effort, including the establishment of shared guidelines, the cultivation of trust, and the practice of empathetic listening.
Academic research is famous for being particular about definitions. We think that we need to have a common understanding about what we are talking about, when we talk about peace: we need to discuss the phenomena and ideas about what course of action we want and what kind of peace we are striving for and how we are about to do it. George Bernard Shaw quote fits well here: “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.” It is always important to define what peace means to us, personally and contextually in our specific circumstances. Finding shared views by parties helps build a consensus on what justice and peace might mean. (Webel & Kaba, 2019)
We can also rely on research to show us what else it can mean. In peace education, it is usual to strive for positive peace. Webel & Kaba (2019) refer to positive peace as a social condition in which exploitation is minimized or eliminated, with no overt violence or underlying structural violence, and there exists a continuous presence of justice, equity, as well as ecological harmony and a sustainable economy. The idea of positive peace is criticized for being naïve because the possibilities for the creation of peaceful social structures is both in theory and practice virtually impossible, since some type or degree of violence will always be present in a structure. Is the criticism a justifiable reason to give up working towards such a society? Absolutely not. We have to acknowledge the wrongs. Even if positive peace remains an aspirational ideal, it provides a vital ethical compass for peacebuilding efforts. Without a normative vision of the society we want to build, we risk normalizing injustice and sustaining systems of harm while claiming to be pragmatic. Ideas of justice and peace are aligned with morality, religion, normative values and ethical practices. Peace work (as a general term incorporating research, education and field work) is analytical and normative, and theoretical and applied. It involves value judgments. Cultural violence devalues some human identities and ways of life, through misogyny, homophobia, racism and colonialism, and any moral exclusion which rationalizes aggression, domination, inequity, and oppression (Council of Europe, 2023). We need ideals to envision a better future to combat these deeply rooted beliefs, the basis of cultural violence, which in turn promote direct and structural violence.
Education is a cornerstone for peace. Without education, how can we understand the root causes of conflict or learn from history to prevent future wars? Quality education fosters awareness, critical thinking, and empathy—qualities essential for building a peaceful society. Peace education is integral to peace work in all societies, regardless of their current state. Societies often embody elements of both peace and violence; everyday violence can exist in peaceful societies, just as everyday peace can be found in conflict zones. Peace education helps dismantle discriminatory structures and prevent everyday violence. In the midst of violent conflict, it offers a path towards peace. While it might be challenging to make profound changes in older generations, educating youth on the value of peace and how it is built in practice can pave the way for a more peaceful future. Peace is always possible—peace work, including peace research and peace education, supports nurturing it.
Peace education is education for peace, about peace and pedagogies promoting peace. The objective is to provide everyone with skills on how to make, keep and build peace. In order to be able to build sustainable peace, participants of peace education activities need knowledge and understanding of many forms of peace and appreciation of peace. Peace education strives to provide all these. Peace education can take many forms, but the larger objective is always to foster sustainable peace in individuals, in communities, in countries and on the whole planet. According to UNESCO (2023), Peace Education specifically:
… “strengthens and builds resilience and trust in society encouraging active and participatory citizenship and aiming to solve everyday life’s conflicts in a nonviolent manner. It calls for making power structures and privileges more visible, and recognizing, managing, and dismantling hate speech, racism, and exclusion in society.” (UNESCO, 2023)
Voices from youth must be heard, their potential nurtured, and their actions supported. When encountering children and young people in our work, they are acutely aware of ongoing wars and conflicts but know less about how peace has been achieved in the past. Why is that? We find this imbalance troubling. It also underlines the need to highlight peace as much as we discuss conflict.
The field of peace education has historically been shaped by gendered assumptions that continues to reproduce binary divisions between masculinity and femininity. To truly advance peace education, we need to actively question and dismantle the gendered norms embedded in our understandings of both conflict and peace. This also means creating space for non-binary and gender-diverse perspectives, which are still usually missing from mainstream peace education discourse. Currently, male voices are underrepresented in peace education and other visible peace work is masculine. We wonder, why is peace often labeled as “soft” while conflict is “serious”? This false dichotomy undermines progress. Violence and conflicts concerns all genders, so building peace concerns all genders and all should be part of all processes that are striving for peace – be it peacemaking, peace keeping or peace building.
Especially in environments where talking about, peace is not common or in conflict contexts where peace might be linked solely to the peace between warring parties (instead of “every day peace”), talking about peace can be difficult. We have learned that many adults have never thought about how a more peaceful world would look like, and what it requires to take steps towards a peaceful world. Steps, not even leaps. Sometimes faith in our willingness to promote peace must be dug deep. But there it is on almost everybody’s wish list. It just can be sunken deep under everyday hurries and responsibilities.
Carrying out peace education can feel challenging and even chaotic in an educator’s mind. Peace is such a vast phenomenon that it can feel overwhelming to educate anyone about and for peace. But we need to remember that every journey is taken one step at a time. We are going to fail, if we try to attain peace after one educational session. But slowly and patiently, we can build more peace through education than we would have had without peace education. If we want peace, we have to plan for it and make sure that we plan and carry out education that is giving participants tools for peace building in their lives as citizens, family members, professionals of any trade and as individuals. Peace education can be incorporated into youth work or other free time activities, such as sport. Anywhere where there is group work, co-operation, or negotiation going on, peace education suits well as part of the learning objectives. We can incorporate peace education into how we do things as well as what we talk about in our training sessions. And an educator can and should plan how they are teaching peace to participants. There are so many good ways to teach peace and everyone can pick what seems right to their working environment. We often hear that a group leader should trust the process but we think that it is much easier to trust the process once the sessions are planned very well and there is a conscious effort to build peace through education and the educator themselves know where, when and how they are fostering peace building. Peace rarely builds itself, as we can see when we read the newspapers or listen to the radio. Peace has to be built, made and kept, conscious effort. One can, of course, have fun and enjoy life at the same time, it even helps with learning.
More than words, we need action. Peace education empowers individuals to recognize and challenge direct, structural, and cultural violence in their personal and community contexts and prepares them to engage in active peace work by developing knowledge, values, attitudes and skills for addressing real-world conflicts.
Building peace is something we do for this day and future. If we are hopeful, it is a little bit easier to find the strength to pursue peace building efforts. Even if we are aware that hope is a necessary ingredient for working towards a better future, hope is something that cannot be forced. Hope is something that we simply cannot turn on when we wish to feel it. But it certainly can be nurtured. As peace educators, builders and practitioners, we have noticed that if we are able to be curious about what brings hope to ourselves, it is easier to choose activities and for instance reading that support experiences of hope. For many, getting together, working together and talking about peace together brings hope. Hope is like joy in a sense that it can be nurtured but not forced. And sometimes, if we ourselves feel hopeless, there is always somebody who is feeling hopeful. It can be seen as a shared task, carrying the torch of hope.
Peace education should nurture hope among participants. Shocking images or devastating facts may produce a lot of knowledge about conflict but little strength to do anything about it. We need to be truthful but also keep in mind that we need knowledge, tools and attitudes such as the belief in human capacity to build sustainable peace. We need to be truthful but also keep in mind that we need knowledge, tools and attitudes such as belief human capacity to build peace in order to be able to build sustainable peace.
Working with youth is essential as youth can play a pivotal role in advancing peace efforts. Engaging youth in peacebuilding creates a unique space where the efforts of researchers, peace practitioners and peace educators intersect: driving innovation, inclusivity and sustainable peace initiatives. Each group brings unique expertise and perspective that, if combined, can create a dynamic and sustainable approach to peacebuilding. By working together towards the common goal of supporting youth participation and leadership, ownership of youth, these fields can bridge theory and practice fostering innovations and leading to transformative change in conflict-affected societies.
However, it is important to recognize that youth are not a homogeneous group driven solely by a desire for peace or empowerment. In reality, some young people may be more vulnerable to extremist ideologies and radicalisation, particularly in contexts marked by exclusion, injustice or lack of opportunity. This underscores the need for diverse and context-sensitive approaches to youth engagement in peacebuilding. Simply offering platforms or knowledge is not enough—we must understand the different motivations, frustrations, and identities that shape young people’s attitudes and choices. Addressing these complexities can help us design more effective and attractive entry points for youth participation that channel their energy toward constructive change and resilience, rather than toward violence or disengagement.
Youth embody a powerful potential; they are our inspiration, our source of hope, and a reminder that a peaceful future is possible. We need these hopeful insights to continue our work, and it is through the energy and vision of young people that we find the strength to persevere. We are not dreamers- we are determined to advocate for lasting peace, building on research, education, and the collective will to transform conflict.
The NewGen-project consisted of two rounds of one year international training on peace education and peace work, national mentoring processes for participants, local peace initiatives and a final international seminar in Berlin.
The mentoring process implemented to NewGen-project (2nd cohort in Finland, 2024ー2025) aimed to identify and strengthen the links between a diversity of peace practitioners, new and more experienced in the field, especially peace education and youth work in focus. Making the network of peace workers more visible and fostering multidisciplinary and cross-generational collaboration provided gates to new approaches, networks and tools to peacebuilding. We need opportunities to engage in deeper analysis and reflection on peace as a phenomenon and through these understandings situate ourselves and our cooperation to the map of peace work. Creating spaces for dialogue among peace workers from various fields and contexts is crucial for advancing our collective understanding of peace and peace education and achieving our common goal: working towards sustainable peace in our societies and world.
This article opened insights to the mentoring process, that was implemented from fall 2024 to spring 2025 amongst 10 participants from 6 organizations from Finland (Peace Education Institute, CMI- Martti Ahtisaari Peace Foundation, Plan International Finland, Finn Church Aid/Network for Religious and Traditional Peacemakers, University of Helsinki and Tampere University Peace Research Institute) working in different areas of peace work and research interlinked with the focus and interest of youth work and peace education. We have shared 7 sessions (3 onsite and 4 online) and 3 international trainings together. Topics for the mentoring sessions were chosen according to the needs raised by the group. Altogether 27 topics were listed and during the process there was time to address 5 of them. In conclusion, there would have been many important topics to continue with. In addition, one session focused on the guidelines of the mentoring process ensuring responsible and safer settings for the cooperation. The 5 topics were:
The mentoring process has given us valuable possibilities to reflect together on timely topics that are tightly connected to organizations’ development work. In the hectic working environments, 90 minutes of concentrating on one topic, recognizing challenges, strengths and reflecting on solutions in cooperation and in support with colleagues, has offered meaningful and even innovative insights into the peace work that we do. It has been a space for learning and support.
Resources:
Council of Europe (2023). Peace and Violence. https://www.coe.int/en/web/compass/peace-and-violence Accessed 19.10.2023.
Webel, C. & Kaba, M. (2019). Definitions of Peace in the Modern Era since 1920. In A Cultural History of Peace: Volume 6 The Modern Era (2020). Bloomsbury Publishing. Also available as open access: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335740283_Definitions_of_Peace_in_the_Modern_Era_since_1920
UNESCO. 2023. Recommendation on Education for Peace and Human Rights, International Understanding, Cooperation, Fundamental Freedoms, Global Citizenship and Sustainable Development. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000391686_eng/PDF/391686eng.pdf.multi.page=3 Accessed 2.3.2025.
