Abstract

There are differing views on the strengths and weaknesses of faith-based organizations relative to secular international nongovernmental organizations. This article argues that the theory of comparative advantage and the theory of organizational alignment are inadequate in helping to assess these strengths and weaknesses. The article offers a different perspective, called conduit engagement theory. It holds that humanitarian organizations naturally have specific relationships, organizational linkages, affiliations, or shared philosophies (referred to in the article as conduits) that enable certain programmatic interventions. Maximum effectiveness within the humanitarian marketplace is a function of the robustness of engagement of conduits with high-priority initiatives that have adequate funding over the necessary length of time. A new kind of tool for strategic planning within specific countries and for auditing at an organizational level are proposed.

In: Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations

Abstract

This article argues that local religious leaders and particularly missionaries have an important role to play in preventing ethnic violence and that this role constitutes a new form of mission. The article first describes some of the theories of violence and explains how researchers are increasingly focusing on the role of human interpretation. Second, it reviews the etiology of ethnic riots and emphasizes in this etiology the key role of moral consensus in support of violence. Third, it argues that missionaries and other local religious leaders can be influential in questioning and contradicting rumors that exaggerate the threat posed by an incident that may precipitate ethnic violence by exercising moral authority, being timely in responding by virtue of working at a grassroots level, and by being assertive in standing up to bigotry. Fourth, the article outlines five approaches that religious leaders can use in circumventing the social construction towards risk taking and moral vindication that precedes violence. These approaches are gatekeeping, gatekeeping and nudging, theological dueling, relaying and advocating, and safeguarding. Finally, it raises some questions for future consideration in building lateral mission-a role the authors hope will become central for missionaries in the future. As the authors conclude: "We believe that missionaries have a unique contribution to make in the prevention of deadly violence in divided societies. In particular, missionaries have theological/doctrinal and moral authority, work at a grassroots level, and are outsiders. These traits enable them to intervene during a lull at the local level at which the social construction toward violence is developing."

In: Mission Studies