Short Abstract:

This paper identifies internal and external factors that influenced the individual reincorporation instead of collective path to the economic inclusion of the FARC-EP ex-combatants. We argue that the situation is partially explained by a group preference, caused by the emerging individual agency after demobilisation. Based on the ethnographic method, we address this empirical descriptive problem.

Long Abstract:

The collective approach was one of the original contributions to the economic inclusion of the FARC-EP ex-combatants. Based on collective capabilities building, solidarity economies were intended to become a sustainable and participatory alternative in rural areas. However, six years later, the path chosen was predominantly individual. This paper identifies internal and external factors that influenced this decision. We argue that the situation is partially explained by a group preference, caused by the emerging individual agency after demobilisation. Additionally, the design of the policy of disbursing money simply to the individual, rather than incentivizing the collective agency, could contributed to the results. Based on the ethnographic method in three reincorporation spaces, two rural and one urban, we address this empirical descriptive problem. Finally, we explain that individual capabilities are being developed simultaneously in various settings of a hybrid nature, formal and informal employment, individual-collective projects, and formalised and non-formalised cooperatives.

Given the novelty of the case in the country, we established two research questions. The first one was empirical-descriptive: How is setting the socio-economic reintegration process of the FARC-EP ex-combatants in one rural and one urban areas? The second question, an attempt of empirical-explanatory analysis in the cases studied: What factors could have influenced the ex-combatants' decision to choose an individual path over a collective one? To address these questions, we selected three case studies with collective and individual projects, two rural NAR, Mutatá and Venus, and the city of Medellín.

The fieldwork was based on the ethnographic method, while the discussion of results obeys to the capabilities approach, an interpretative framework for understanding how individuals build collective capabilities. This original research aims to contribute to fill the gap at the intersection between inclusive peacebuilding, collective development, and the institutional design of DDR programmes. Additionally, it contributes to the theoretical model of group and collective capabilities, which are instrumentally important for expanding individual capabilities. This research does not intend to generalise the results, but rather shed light on a poorly studied phenomenon of collective reincorporation devised on social and solidarity economies. We recognised the reincorporation areas and cities in Colombia are diverse in their spatial consolidation, in the externalities due to climate, geographic location, pre-existing and contiguous rural-urban population centres, and the illegal actors that circulate near these territories.

The paper presents a literature review, focusing mainly on three benchmark studies, one monitoring inform and two case studies focused on the FARC-EP cooperatives framework. Then, we explain the method, methodology, ethical considerations, and data management. The next two sections pick out the alternatives, firstly, collective productive projects, and the dynamic relationship between collective action and collective agency. Secondly, it unpacks individual productive projects, and showcases why, although individual, the projects build group capabilities. The third section discusses how the social and economic dimensions are embedded and, to some extent, how the institutional architecture has encouraged the individual over the collective path. The last section underlines the security and development nexus beyond the securitisation of development, and concludes with some policy and research tracks.

Finally, socioeconomic reincorporation is taking place in the midst of a renewed conflict in territories where development is incipient. Although the reintegration and reincorporation pathways have been highly successful, according to the ARN, the overall 75 per cent of individuals have remained in legality, recruitment by illegal groups does not end, and illicit economies are real options for people to combat their lack of capabilities. Like the mythical beast Hydra of Lerna, territorial conflicts persist and reproduce, creating a perpetual cycle of violence. The Colombian case underlines the great challenge of employ preventive actions to dissuade individuals from being forced to enlist in armed groups as their limited option for overcome poverty and exclusion. Delays in the implementation of the first point of the peace agreement, Comprehensive Rural Reform, means that the promise of rural development and territorial peace has yet to be fulfilled in many regions.

There are two tracks for future research regarding a collective approach. The first is the updating of the census of FARC-EP ex-combatants by the Colombian national government to scaling-up the productive projects. The missing unified and national data impedes to identify the factors of success or failure, which reduces empiric evidence –albeit valuable– to small case studies. The second is a comparative analysis of social and solidarity economies adopted in post-conflict recovery. This article contributes to filling the gap in the literature on peacebuilding, collective development, human capabilities, in both individual and group approaches, to collective action.