Building Inclusive Communities Through Peaceful Play

Dean M. Ravizza, Ph.D.Dept. of Health & Sport Sciences/Center for Conflict Resolution

Salisbury University, Maryland USA

2012 AAHPERD National ConferenceBoston, MA

March 15, 2012

Overview

This presentation will include the following:Mini-cases of conflict in sportSummary of previous research Introduction to Peaceful PlayPilot program implementationSummary of key findings Implications for future programming

Overview of the Context• Nearly twenty-three years of conflict between the Lord’s

Resistance Army (LRA) and the Ugandan Government Forces (UPDF).

• An estimated 66,000 children and youth were abducted for various periods of time1.

• Approximately 2 million were placed in Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camps.

• The region is in transition from conflict to a focus on peace and stability.

• Low-intensity disputes (eg. land, domestic, petty crime) still remain potent at the community level2.

1SWAY(2006). Survey of War-Affected Youth. Retrieved from www.sway-uganda.org, October 15, 2009.2Pham, P. & Vinck, P. (2010). Transitioning to peace: A population-based survey on attitudes about social reconstruction and justice in northern Uganda.

Berkley, CA: Human Rights Center.

Research Model

Qualitative Observational

ResearchSelect Measures

Culturally –relevant

Intervention

Qualitative Follow Up

Adapted from Betantcourt, T.S. (2011). Presentation made at World Bank, Washington, DC.

What the Research Provided• Children and youth who engaged in sport most likely

do so at their schools.• Children and youth engaged in various levels of

conflict in sport from verbal to physical.• Children and youth resolved conflict in sport by both

peaceful and non-peaceful means.• Non-abductees were more likely to attempt to resolve

conflicts in sport by way of peaceful responses than their formerly abducted peers who engaged in more violent responses.

• Former abductees experienced varying degrees of social exclusion by peers and coaches.

See Ravizza, D.M. (2010a). The uses of sport for children in armed conflict. Journal of Sport Science and Physical Education, Sport and Globalization issue, 59, 14-18.

Ravizza, D.M. (2012). We don’t play war anymore: The role of sport in the reintegration and social inclusion of former child soldiers in northern Uganda. In W. Bennett & K. Gilbert (eds.), Sport for Peace and Development. Champaign, IL: Common Ground Publishers.

Theoretical Framework• Dugan (1996) - Sub-system approach to

rebuilding relationships.

• Web-approach to peacebuilding - Lederach (2005) – focus on strategic relationships or ‘web-making’.

• Lewin’s (1999) three-stage model of change – unfreezing/change/refreezing

Sport and Peacebuilding Efforts• Keim’s (2003, 2006) research in post-apartheid South

Africa focusing on sport and nation-building.• Sugden (2006) and Football for Peace – bridging

societal divides between Israeli Arab and Jewish youth.• Open Fun Football Schools – bridging divided

communities in post-conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina. • Peace Players International- utilizes basketball to

bridge divides.

Keim, M. (2003). Nation-building at play: Sport as a tool for social integration in post-apartheid South Africa. Oxford: Meyer & Meyer Sport. Keim, M. (2006). Sport as Opportunity for Community Development and Peace Building in South Africa. Accessed from www.sportanddev.org

. Sugden,J. (2006). Teaching and playing sport for conflict resolution and co-existence in Israel, International Review for the Sociology of Sport,

41(2), 221–240.

Levels of Conflict in Sport

  Disagreement

ArgumentArgument

PhysicalPhysical

HarmfulHarmful

Ravizza, D.M., & Matonak, E. (2011). Strategies for Resolution to Conflict in Sport. Center for Conflict Resolution: Salisbury University.

Levels of Conflict in Sport and Strategies for Resolution• Disagreement:

– Two different views about a particular play or call. – A decision is made directly for immediate resolution. 

• Argument:– Extension on a disagreement and beyond an immediate resolution. – A simple, “I’m sorry” or “it’s your team’s turn for the possession” will not settle

this situation.

• Physical– An instantaneous physical reaction to an event.– The physical aspect is often impulsive and is not always done with malicious

intent.

• Harmful– Includes deliberate retaliation. – This level may or may not be preceded by the physical level. – The player who seeks retaliation does not always seek resolution. – May be retaliation from a previous physical event or from a dispute originating

outside of the scope of the sport.

Resolutions to Conflict in Sport

• Disagreement:– Predetermined strategies

• Alternating possessions

– Spirit of the game• Play on• Forgiveness

• Argument:– Refer to existing rules– Seek outside help/observers

Resolutions to Conflict in Sport

• Physical– Temporary removal

from activity– Dialogue exchange

• Harmful– Remove from activity– Seek additional

counseling to resolve related issues

Pilot Program

• 6-month period (June – December 2011)• 10 coaches/sport teachers (9 males, 1 female)

from Gulu and Kitgum Districts• Sport teachers employed at local schools

(primary and secondary), coaches at community-based programs

• Participated in district workshops on sport and conflict resolution

• Monthly data collection

Data Collection Methods

Survey Findings

• As a result of participating in the pilot program:– 33% thought less of former abductees as

sources of conflict in sport.– 66% have a more positive opinion that former

abductees are capable of resolving their conflicts that arise during participation in sport activities.

– 33% moved in the direction of not excluding children and youth from participation in sport if they are perceived to be a source of conflict.

Qualitative Vignettes• “The new strategy that I learn was involving the children to

participate on their own in the way of solving conflict so it’s like empowering them to solve a conflict on their own because you will not always be there for them.” G-003

• “The strategies contributed to a more peaceful atmosphere in the sports program because I remember in October we had (volleyball) games here for all the secondary schools. Some of the teams were very harsh on our players. The next time, our players were organized for them and new how to talk to them and deal with conflict.” K-005

• “The new strategy that I learned was involving the children to participate on their own the way of resolving conflict so it’s like empowering the children to solve a conflict on their own because you will not always be there for them.” G-002

Conclusions and Pathways Forward

• The role of the coach/sport teacher/facilitator is critical to the peacebuilding process.

• Focus on building the capacity of youth to resolve conflict rather than being merely passive participants.

• Transfer strategies for resolution to conflicts outside of the sport context.

• Larger scale implementation throughout Northern Ugandan region – transfers to other contexts/regions of conflict.

Thank you!

For more information, please contact:

Dean M. Ravizza, Ph.D.Assistant ProfessorPhysical Education Program DirectorDept. of Health & Sport SciencesSenior Research Practitioner, Center for Conflict ResolutionSalisbury Universitydmravizza@salisbury.edu