Paper short abstract:

Political settlements have taken center-stage for addressing conflict and fragility. Yet, it remains unclear what kinds of settlements are constitutive of forging peace and stability. This paper argues to look beyond elite individuals, taking elite networks and coalitions into account.

Paper long abstract:

The concept of political settlements has risen to prominence among researchers and policymakers working on state fragility and peace-building. In light of a long-lasting focus on structural explanations, this paper welcomes the renewed attention granted to agency, and explores avenues and benefits of such approaches. At the same time, it takes issue with the analytical ambiguity of the concept of 'political settlements' and scrutinizes its focus on a handful of elite actors. Aiming at enhancing the analytical purchase of this concept, this paper argues for the need to put elite networks and coalitions center-stage when aiming to better understand the role and effects of political settlements on trajectories of peace and stability. Consequently, this paper proposes that the interdisciplinary method of social network analysis can contribute much to providing more nuanced answers to the question under what conditions and what kinds of political settlements are constitutive of peace-building and state-making.