Leon Miller[1]Leon Miller is a research fellow affiliated with the Network of Religious and Traditional Peacemakers and Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia. He has a background in teaching Corporate Social … Continue a ler


In contexts where the socially deprived, ethnic minorities, and indigenous cultural groups struggle for human rights, greater self-determination, and/or autonomy there is often some type of confrontational relationship with government and public authorities, which also usually involves a dispute over public policy. This article explains a model for offsetting the conflict and promoting peacebuilding by implementing a peace education strategy for aligning the aim of local governance activities and practices with those of the civil body.

The article argues that the problems can be solved in a way compatible with micro level cultural values and in a way that aligns with the aims of the local, regional, and national government by integrating the goal for human, social, and sustainable development (which is shared by all the social stakeholders at all levels) with a state-of-the-art strategy for realizing the goal that human social action aims to achieve.

Keywords: Peace Education; Self-determination; Human Development; Social Development; Governance.


Em contextos onde os socialmente desfavorecidos, as minorias étnicas e os grupos culturais indígenas lutam por direitos humanos, maior autodeterminação e/ou autonomia, muitas vezes há algum tipo de relação de confronto com o governo e as autoridades públicas, envolvendo geralmente questões de políticas públicas. Este artigo explica um modelo para tentar obviar o conflito e promover a construção da paz, implementando uma estratégia de educação para a paz de forma a alinhar o objetivo das atividades e práticas de governo local com as da sociedade civil.

O artigo argumenta que os problemas podem ser resolvidos de forma compatível com os valores culturais ao nível micro e de forma alinhada com os objetivos do governo local, regional e nacional, integrando as metas de desenvolvimento humano, social e sustentável (que é compartilhado por todos os setores sociais interessados) com uma estratégia fundamentada para atingir o objetivo que a ação social humana visa alcançar.

Palavras-chave: Educação para a Paz; Autodeterminação; Desenvolvimento Humano; Desenvolvimento Social; Governança.


En contextos donde las personas socialmente desfavorecidas, las minorías étnicas y los grupos culturales indígenas luchan por los derechos humanos, una mayor autodeterminación y/o autonomía, a menudo existe algún tipo de relación de confrontación con el gobierno y las autoridades públicas, que también suele implicar cuestiones de políticas públicas. Este artículo explica un modelo para intentar resolver el conflicto y promover la consolidación de la paz mediante la implementación de una estrategia de educación para la paz para alinear el objetivo de las actividades y prácticas de gobierno local con las de la sociedad civil.

El artículo argumenta que los problemas pueden resolverse de una manera compatible con los valores culturales a nivel micro y de una manera que se alinee con los objetivos del gobierno local, regional y nacional, al integrar la meta del desarrollo humano, social y sostenible (que es compartida por todos los actores sociales) con una estrategia razonada para la realización de la meta que la acción social humana pretende alcanzar.

Palabras clave: Educación para la Paz; Autodeterminación; Desarrollo Humano; Desarrollo Social; Gobernanza.

Concordia receives the cords of harmony from the scales of Justice and hands them to the citizen-representatives, who in turn deliver them to the people, a process which forms the embodiment of the idea of good government (Jansen, 2018, p. 204).

1. Introduction

This article explains an approach to human, social, and sustainable development that integrates the principles of peace education, social justice, and governance to promote the right of individuals and social groups to live in accordance with what they value doing and/or being. In other words, the article explains a peace education approach to promoting both human rights and the right of individuals, socio-cultural groups, and indigenous peoples to greater self-determination. The model is based on a peace education strategy for integrating human, social, and sustainable development with good governance. Thus, the article explains why integrating peace education with human, social, and sustainable development and good governance improves the quality of life in contexts where it is applied. This includes improving relationships between the members of society, between micro-level social stakeholders and their public officials, between the public and government, and between society and the natural environment.

The integrative model is applied as a strategy for addressing the plight of the indigenous people in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh – where there have been persistent and unsolved conflicts over their endeavor to live in accordance with their cultural and ethnic identity and heritage while at the same time identifying themselves as Bangladesh nationals who contribute to the human, social, economic, and sustainable development of the nation. The article explains an approach to resolving the conflict and promoting peacebuilding by implementing an integrative model that establishes congruence between the aims, values, and convictions of the micro-level, regional, national, and global stakeholders. The article argues that the problems in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh can be managed effectively by collaborating with the local, national, and international stakeholders to fulfill the UN’s Human Development Agenda and achieve its Sustainable Development Goals. This involves a switch from the prior approach to social and economic development, which came in conflict with the local social aim for inclusiveness of culture, identity, and self-determination (Zhang, 2003, p. 3; & Ahmed and Biswas, 2004, p. 5). “The failure to include the relationship between the local people’s cultural heritage, their identity and their relationship with their environment resulted in developmental strategies that promised independence and prosperity, often causing conflict” (Miller, 2019, p. 28).

That is to say, the solution involves empowering individuals and social groups “To lead the kind of life they have reason to value” as well as living in accordance with what they believe will enhance their well-being and flourishing (Sen, 1999, p. 87). The principles of peace education explain that it is possible to increase positive social outcomes by employing fundamental principles of political philosophy: i.e., for example, the principle “concordia”, which is a fundamental political concept used to establish stable relations between citizens, social order, solidarity, harmony, goodwill, and peace, plus, in particular, an approach to governance that reconciles the difference in interests and values between the various social groups of a nation (Cornwell, 2017, pp. 15-20). Concordia is defined as concord, agreement between people or groups, accord, to be harmonious with or consistent with, creating a balance between two or more inequalities, and governance that creates harmony (Cicero, 1999, p. 57). In other words, fundamental to political philosophy, thinking, and practice is the idea that a basic function of governance is to establish the common good, which makes peacebuilding a fundamental aspect of political activity. Peaceful coexistence in fragile contexts occurs when there are common goals, shared values, and agreement to cooperate in implementing factors that create human development, social development, and good governance (International Labor Organization, 2021, p. 9).

The article proceeds as follows: section two of the article explains the challenges of the indigenous population in Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh. Section three explains a peace education strategy for integrating the endeavors of the micro-level indigenous population with the endeavor of the local and national authorities to comply with the UN’s agendas. In other words, how the pursuit of the indigenous population for self-determination can be reconciled with the interests of the multi-level stakeholders by integrating strategies for good governance with those for a sustainable approach to growth and a peaceful future. Section four summarizes the article by explaining the connection between political philosophy and the peace education approach; its applicability to the literature on good governance, a peace education approach to co-creating social reality, co-creating an increase in public value and social capital; and how to integrate the interests of various multi-level stakeholders.

2. The Challenge in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh

“The Chittagong Hill Tracts have rich natural and environmental resources with hills, forests, rivers, and lakes, diverse flora and fauna, and areas of outstanding scenic beauty” (Rasul, 2016, p. viii). The region is the home of several indigenous groups who are also collectively known as the “Jummas”, the “Adivasi”, or the “Pahari”. During the earliest stages of the post-war break away from India, the indigenous people comprised 97.5 percent of the total population living in the region. There are differences among the people of the Chittagong Hill Tracks regarding language, ethnic identity, religious practices, and social organization. However, what is common is that for the indigenous population as a whole, their relationship with the environment is the source of their identity, socio-cultural practices, their religious practices and traditions, and a mythical space that provides a sense of the connection between themselves and the forces shaping the nature of existence. “Although internally diversified through cultural attributes (e.g., dress, language, and religion), the indigenous groups are collectively called the hill people (the Pahari). The Pahari differ markedly with the mainstream Bengali in terms of race, language, religion, economy and other socio-cultural aspects” (Udin, 2015, p. 60). In addition, the indigenous people share a common material culture based on a traditional form of subsistence food production called Jum.

Since commercial and chemical-intensive farming, mono-cropping, and industry were considered the basis of modernization, development experts regarded Jum as inefficient, hence not fitting into the approach to economic development that was prescribed by national and international experts. Thus, there were sociocultural disruptions resulting from attempts to replace the traditional subsistence approach to land-use and community-environment relationships with a more commercially profitable and productive approach to land and resource use. In addition, large tracks of land previously available to the indigenous peoples to sustain their subsistence lifestyle were subsequently designated as under the protection of the state, which meant that indigenous practices became illegal. The problems were also heightened due to an increase in migrants attempting to enjoy the benefits of the new economic growth schemes, which ended up intensifying conflicts over the rights to, use of, and fair distribution of resources, and over fair power distribution (Wallerstein, 2007, pp. 434-435; Mirovitskaya & Ascher, 2014, p. 1; Redclift, 1993, p. 3; & Costanza et al., 2007, p. 268).

The Chittagong Hill Tracts region of Bangladesh forms a junction that connects with both India and Myanmar, which adds an additional international dimension to the reason why the region is a particularly crucial and sensitive issue for the state of Bangladesh and, as well, for the international community. Because “The languages, material culture, beliefs, and rituals of the indigenous people of the region are distinctly different from that of the majority Bengalis; their identity of often linked to the hill people of Assam in India and upper Myanmar, and many people consider them to be of ‘Southeast Asian’ ancestry” (Uddin, 2019, p. 71). Therefore, the indigenous people of the region are clearly ethnically, religiously, and culturally distinct from the Bengalis of the plains. In fact, it is recognition of their distinct identity and rights as an indigenous population, that is one of the main sources of the current contention with the government of Bangladesh. The Bangladesh government attempted to implement a socio-political ideal as part of an endeavor to establish national unity or, in other words, a unified national identity. They envisioned implementing an identity ideal that they believed/hoped would promote equal respect. The equal respect envisioned is that of a purely equal status – a citizen of Bangladesh. Therefore, the constitution of Bangladesh states that “The people of Bangladesh shall be known as Bengalis as a nation and the citizens of Bangladesh shall be known as Bangladeshis” (Article 6). In response to this claim, Manobendra Narayan Larma – president of The Parbatya Chattagram Jana Samhati Samiti (The United People’s Party of the Chittagong Hill Tracts) – spoke on behalf of the sentiments of the people of the region when he responded to the constitutional statement by stating “You cannot impose your national identity on others. I am a Chakma not a Bengali. I am also a citizen of Bangladesh thus, I am indeed Bangladeshi. You are also a Bangladeshi, and your national identity is Bengali. But we, The Hill People, can never become Bengali.” (Parliamentary Debates of the Government of Bangladesh, 1972). This remains a source of ongoing contention between the government and the region’s people.

The indigenous peoples constituted the majority population in the region until the migration of landless Bengalis, encouraged by national and international projects for economic development as well as attempts to implement modernization plans and to make the resources of the region available to the national and international value chain, which changed the demographics of the region. After the influx of Bengali migrants into the region, the indigenous tribal cultures were increasingly threatened with becoming the minority population in the region. The Bengali migrants believed they were not only contributing to the social and economic development and modernization of the region but to that of the nation, which they, being members of the majority population, regarded as not only their right but their responsibility. In contrast, the indigenous population regards the intrusion as a threat to their cultural traditions, heritage, and identity. They considered themselves to be powerless in the face of regional, national, and international pressures to transform traditional practices into those that are more commercial and economically profitable.

On the one hand, the central issue of the indigenous people of the region could be summarized as “Their search for identity; their desire to be recognized as responsible agents whose acts, hopes, and opinions matter; and the demand that their identity be publicly acknowledged” (Geertz, 1973, p. 258). This tension takes a peculiarly severe form in Southeast Bangladesh because their distinct sense of self does not seem to fit into the state’s effort to establish a positive instrument for realizing collective aims. For example, the various indigenous cultures of the region feel a lack of respect for their unique identities when they are referred to in terms that imply “the people holding back modernization and development”. One of the common terms used to describe the region’s people is Adivasi. Although this does designate them as the aboriginal people of the region, it is a term widely used in India and Bangladesh to lump all the groups into one category – tribal. Thus, “In Bangladesh, the majoritarian framework of nation-building and state formation based on Bengali nationalism has created serious identity issues for the Indigenous Peoples, whose activists and organizations are still struggling for legal recognition” (Uddin, 2019, p. 69).

However, on the other hand, the issue is an example of the typical problem occurring when newly independent states initiated national plans for transforming traditional practices into more modern, market-oriented approaches to development, which had a detrimental impact on indigenous life, their culture, and their environments. The problem was heightened because of their endeavor to continue practicing traditional communal approaches to social and economic existence. The problem stems from a perspective on governance, politics, power, and authority prevalent with the rise of the modernization economic development theory and more recently with the Neoliberal development theory (Miller, 2019, p. 29). The problem with the prior paradigm can be described as confusing means and ends. In the prior paradigm, the domination of nature and the application of industry and technology toward generating wealth were regarded as the end within itself, not as a strategy for improving the well-being of the local people. For the indigenous people of southeast Bangladesh, “Economic prosperity is no more than one of the means to enrich their lives. It is a foundational confusion to give it the status of an end. Secondly, even as a means, merely enhancing average economic opulence can be inefficient in pursuing the really valuable ends” (Sen, 1989, p. 42).

The unresolved issues are the cause of the Chittagong Hill Tracts being one of the most prominent conflict-ridden regions in South Asia. The challenges imposed by such conflicts are complex. “The complexity is because they persist, are protracted, because such conflicts involve the structural inadequacies of political systems, they include power confrontations and clashes of interests, and are rooted in a clash of identity, values, and ethnicity” (Miller, 2017, p. 167). An effective resolution requires the application of a fuller range of strategies for generating settlement, which includes meta-theoretical, integrative, and interdisciplinary approaches (Lederach, 1999, pp. 19-21). A solution to the problems requires recognizing that they are not exclusively created by the indigenous people. There are external factors that are shaping the crisis. If the problem involves external imposition on indigenous populations, it is necessary to address the external factors to remove the constraints on them living in accordance with what they aspire most to do and/or be (Yunus, 2005, pp. 1-2).

3. A Peace Education Strategy for Establishing Shared Values and Common Goals

The Chittagong Hill Tracts are a significant case in point for peace education because they exemplify the significance of aligning pedagogical and socio-political philosophy to establish a means of integrating the aims of the state with those of indigenous peoples. In other words, the challenge of the Chittagong Hill Tracts is how to align the interests of an indigenous minority with that of the larger national population. There are three reasons why peace education is effective for addressing and resolving problems in the southeast of Bangladesh. First, peace education is effective for realizing the goals that human social action aims to achieve. Second, peace education is rooted in principles fundamental to political philosophy and good governance. In this respect, it must be kept in mind that the principles underlying the ideals of political philosophy align with those of peace education (e.g., social cohesion, order, justice, harmony, solidarity, prosperity, and sustainable peace). And third, peace education is an effective strategy for realizing the intention of Bangladesh to achieve the UN aims of human development, improving the quality of life, and sustainability. Thus, peace education offers a new dimension to Bangladesh endeavors to establish itself as a republic that ensures human rights, develops its human resources, ensures environmental security, and promotes peacebuilding.

3.1. Peace Education Approach to Achieving the Political Aims of Bangladesh

Bangladesh is founded on the conviction that the country’s practice of governance and its social activities will reflect a “Complete allegiance to peace. This allegiance emanates from the realization that only in a peaceful environment will we be able to enjoy the fruits of the hard-earned national independence. So, we welcome all efforts aimed at reducing tensions and strengthening peaceful coexistence policies” (Rahman, 1974, p. 160). The current leadership of Bangladesh shares the vision of the founding father. Thus, the current leadership endeavors to establish governance processes that promote human rights, social justice, emancipation, and sustainable peace. The current leadership also shares the commitment to using peace education as a tool for elevating the lives of the people and creating social cohesion. The issue is how to implement an approach to future development that fulfills that vision and, as well, is a complementary strategy with the interest of the indigenous population.

The processes and activities operationalized by the peace education approach contribute to fulfilling the vision of the founding father of Bangladesh, which the current leadership endeavors to bring forth. The peace education model does this by improving the relationship between the indigenous population and public authorities at every level, which results in reversing the notion that the indigenous population is involved in an oppositional relationship with the government. Peace education achieves this by indicating that they and the public officials are mutually engaged in a common struggle to resist oppression, domination, gender discrimination, injustice, and a denial of human rights. This means that in this context, peace education emphasizes that conflict resolution occurs when the emphasis is shifted away from conflicting interests toward mutually agreed upon sustainability goals. Peace education in the Chittagong Hill Tract is a process of engaging “Conflicting parties in a collaborative process that establishes an agreement to work on achieving goals that strengthen a common sense of what contributes best to Bangladesh and a more effective form of Bangladesh political communication” (Miller et al., 2020, p. 12). Peace education presents a common denominator upon which a consensus may be built regarding how to realize the values envisioned in establishing Bangladesh as a republic – given the nature of the diversity in society.

3.2. Peace Education and the Principles of Political Philosophy and Governance

Political philosophy in the major centers of civilization explains how the fundamental principles of governance apply to human and social development. In the Far East, this is evident in the influence that the ancient Chinese commitment to self-cultivation and harmony had on Confucius’ idea that there is a connection between the cultivation of individuals, social harmony, and good governance. In South Asia, this is evident in the belief that there is a connection between harmony with the forces shaping the natural order, self-actualization, and social development (this idea relates to the concept of Dharma, which has also influenced Southeast Asia and the Far East). In the West, this played a role in the transition from natural philosophy (or what is referred to as Frist Principles – i.e., a study of the laws of nature, the forces shaping the natural order, or the forces shaping the nature of existence) to a study of how the First Principles apply to human activity, social action, ethics, and political philosophy (Plato, 2005, p. 331-347). In fact, political philosophy proposes that governance involves developing the capabilities of individuals so that they give their best, which contributes to developing the best society possible. Ultimately, it evolved into the idea that in a republic, governance organizes the type of social activities and relations that lend to achieving the social ideals proposed by political philosophy – e.g., social cohesion and stability, prosperity, perpetual peace, and achieving the highest good humanly possible by organized social action.

The fundamental principles of political philosophy explain how governance activities and processes promote equal respect, social justice, and lasting peace. The principles state that a failure to establish peace by means of “concordia” results in discord, social fragmentation, and strife. “Thus, the main question for political philosophers is how faction and discord can be avoided and peace secured. Or, in other words, how is a unity between the good of society and the good of its individual citizens, in practice, to be established” (Skinner, 1978, pp. 58-59). The answer is that the common good and the rule of peace are based on republican self-government. In a republic, political authority can only be derived from the people. This means that the practices and activities of the elected representatives of the people are only legitimate when based on governance processes that aim to enact the will of the people. A peaceful, stable, and harmonious political association is possible when justice is ensured, and the members of society commit to relating based on the principles upon which a republic is formed. When individuals and social groups are denied the right to pursue what they believe is in their best interest, it is tantamount to a violation of the principles of a republic and a violation of human rights. At the very least, in a republic, to maintain peace, decisions about what is best for individuals must be grounded upon public participation and deliberation.

3.3. Peace Education and the Intention of Bangladesh to Achieve the Aims of the UN

The traditional ecological knowledge of the tribal cultures of the Chittagong Hill Tracts – that has proven for centuries to be successful as a model of sustainability – could be a viable basis for establishing an effective approach to social and economic growth in the region as well as greater cooperation with national and international agendas. “Such knowledge is often intimately tied to local social organization, economic goals, religious beliefs, aesthetics, ritual observances, and material culture. In addition, to resource appropriation and management, environmental impacts, variety and distribution of natural species, the structure and functioning of biotic communities and long-term landscape modifications” (UNESCO, 2009, p. 40). In fact, indigenous cultures are structured to maximize the benefits and enjoyment individual members of the social group experience in their relationships with each other and the environment. It is in this respect that sustainability – as an aspect of their culture and economic practices – models a preferable way to shape the future. The problem is that in a nation-state, the practices should also contribute to the wider value chain, which could be regional, national, and international. However, remember that the operative word here is “value”. The concept of value chain supersedes the former term supply chain, which was more prevalent during the prior economic development paradigm. Value is intentionally used to denote what enriches and elevates the human experience, what contributes to holistic well-being, and what increases social flourishing – which includes wealth generation. Thus, establishing a progressive sustainability model in the Bangladesh context is a matter of collaborating to determine how its inherent sustainability knowledge (i.e., its inherent indigenous knowledge) can contribute value to local, regional, national, and possibly international stakeholders.

By embracing its inherent indigenous knowledge, Bangladesh has the potential to become a model of a futuristic approach to improving its social and economic conditions. In other words, Bangladesh has the potential to establish a unique futuristic model of growth that balances material prosperity with harmonious and beneficial nature-human interactions, and a model of a harmonious blend of human artifacts and nature. This approach to integrating human and social development with good governance and sustainability is a model of growth that connects indigenous peoples with their cultural values, identity, and heritage, and establishes Bangladesh as the model of eco-leadership. It is in this respect that peace education demonstrates a strategy for not only improving the quality of life materialistically but as well in terms of sustainable value that enriches the human experience.

This way, Bangladesh economists and authorities will partner with indigenous peoples to co-create constructively disruptive sustainability-type innovations that provide social economic benefit by converting imperfections in performance and practice into wealth-generating opportunities. The social entrepreneurial and sustainability-type innovations will have positive social, economic, and environmental benefits, increase partnership between the authorities and the indigenous population, and improve the image of the indigenous community in the eyes of the overall population. Such an approach represents a progressive step forward for the overall social economic system. Bangladesh would then implement a peace education strategy for integrating the stakeholders’ interests at various levels to co-create the sustainability and eco-aesthetic features of the same ecosystem that their social and economic flourishing is dependent on. Consequently, the stakeholders will be planning the type of value transformation that will sustain the future well-being and prosperity of their overall social economic system (The World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987, p. 51).

4. Conclusion: A Framework for Improving Human and Social Conditions

Peace Education is a means of establishing the conditions whereby social agents learn to generate the knowledge needed to solve social problems and implement that knowledge by co-creating desired social transformations (Freire, 2000, pp. 125-130).

The basic system of formal education in the Chittagong Hill Tracts has been disrupted due to prolonged conflict in the region, the closure of schools, the displacement and relocation of segments of the population, and other pressing survival demands. The peace education approach is especially beneficial given such conditions in that it could have a positive influence on both the stability of the region and the quality of education. The model of peace education proposed in this article is especially beneficial to the educational, social development, economic prosperity, and peace of the region because it includes a sensitivity to the cultural identity and needs of the context and, in addition, applies an educational model for meeting the economic needs of the region in a way that is in line with the cultural values and traditions. In addition, by implementing the peace education model proposed in this article, the stakeholders would undertake processes and activities that contribute to the human, social, and sustainable development of the region. In that respect, what is significant about the peace education approach is that it is an integrative strategy that includes formal education, informal learning possibilities, personal development opportunities, alternative approaches to education, and a strategy for improving the relationship between the public authorities and the general public.

The formal approach to education proposed by this model focuses on training young learners in the relationship between their personal growth and development, being empowered to live in accordance with what they, as individuals and as a social group, have reason to value and what they aspire to do or be. In addition, the formal approach to education emphasizes the relationship between self-cultivation, citizenship, and civic virtue. The informal approach to education is aimed at training civil bodies in the benefits of establishing social entrepreneurial-type eco-innovations as a means of co-creating an increase in public value and, equally important, making a significant contribution to the value chain of the region. The alternative approach to education is aimed at establishing Constructivist-type engagements between the local, regional, and national public authorities and the indigenous population. The aim is to collaboratively generate the knowledge needed to find mutually beneficial and satisfactory solutions to the issues that would otherwise cause conflict. Thus, this approach is believed to be effective in the Chittagong Hill Tracts because it demonstrates a model compatible with the principles, values, and socio-political ideals that shaped the Bangladesh Republic. This model is applied to the Chittagong Hill Tracts because it has strong emancipatory aspects, it is value-based (which aligns with the endeavor of tribal cultures to live in accordance with their cultural heritage and values), because it reduces conflict and contributes to peacebuilding, and it establishes a complementary relationship between the aims of the general public and those of the local public authorities.

Freedom – for individuals, social groups, and indigenous peoples – is the ability to live in accordance with their cultural values, identity, and heritage. The freedom and power to realize this goal is achieved by integrating the endeavor of the people of the Chittagong Hill Tracts to live in accordance with their traditions with the aim of the government to realize the goal which human social action aims to achieve, the government’s conviction to be a republic, and the government’s intention to fulfill the aim of the UN’s Human Development Agenda, and to realize the UN’s Sustainable Development Goal. By doing so, the public authorities of Bangladesh partner with the local indigenous people to establish a futuristic-type model of a peace zone that is exempt from conflict, operates based on public policy and authority, is compatible with a state-of-the-art model of good governance, and resolves what heretofore was the seeming incompatibility of the interests of the multi-level stakeholders.

The integrative approach proposed in this article resolves the dichotomy between a perspective on the quality of life based on traditional cultural values and one based on improving social economic conditions (i.e., the difference between complying with local traditions as opposed to complying with the approach to progress proposed by national and international development experts – which was the emphasis of the prior approach to economic development). The article stresses that an integrative approach “Offers a strategy for reconciling the difference between competing notions of growth, social development, and governance (which is a major concern where there are multi-levels of conceptualizations of justice, rights, and governance)” (Miller, 2019, p. 31). The integrative model also enhances cooperation, establishing shared values, and common goals. The common goal is to integrate all the natural, social, and economic resources to create benefits for all the multi-level stakeholders. This is effective for satisfying the endeavor of indigenous populations for greater self-determination because it enables them to live in accordance with what they have reason to value, and it is simultaneously a sustainability strategy that works to establish the foundations of peaceful cooperation between the indigenous culture, the government, and the overall population.

The strategic partnership is an effective model for sustainability because it resolves the prior dichotomy between creating value in sociocultural terms and value strictly in economic terms (i.e., the prior economic development emphasis on GDP and the interests of the international corporations, which did not take traditional values into consideration). The model offers the possibility of shaping the features of the landscape of the southeast region of Bangladesh based on the sustainability values that are inherent in the heritage of Bangladesh. This results in shaping the eco-system that Bangladesh society relies on for prosperity into the type of eco-aesthetic characteristics that are sustainable, profitable, and display a model of eco-leadership. In addition, it inclines the majority population of Bangladesh to embrace a part of its own heritage and identity that it heretofore had difficulty identifying with. Thus, the strategy establishes an infrastructure for peace by implementing a means for co-creating multi-level public value. This peace education model is based on the claim that “Resources (focused via signification and legitimation) are structured properties of social systems, which can drawn upon and reproduced by knowledgeable agents in the course of interaction” (Giddens, 1984, pp. 4 & 15-16).

However, the article also emphasizes that fundamental to the principles of political philosophy is an explanation of how to establish peaceful coexistence. Peace is emphasized as the basic principle that shapes interactions, the way we communicate with other members of society, and a basic principle of pedagogy. Peace education is important because it provides a state-of-the-art account of how to co-create the elevation of the individual and social condition. Peace education explains how governance activities and processes align the interests of micro-level stakeholders with those of the greater public and with public authorities. By making the aim of peaceful coexistence an important aspect of pedagogy and the basis of strategies for both human and social development, we can thwart socially destructive conditions that could otherwise beset society. Therefore, peace is a constitutive ethic, which means that by basing social interactions and communications based on these principles, the positive benefits we hope for are realized. Thus, it is from the fundamental principles of political philosophy that we get the concepts ‘public peace’, ‘perpetual peace’, and ‘supreme concord’. That is to say that the constitutive impact of the peace ethic ensures the right of individuals and social groups to realize the things they aspire to and to develop their full potential for a good life.


  • Ahmed, R. and Prasenjit, B. (2004) Political Economy of Underdevelopment of northeast India. New Delhi: Akansha Publishing House.
  • Cicero (1999) On the Commonwealth and On the Laws. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Cornwell, H. (2017) Pax and the Politics of Peace. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Geertz, C. (1973) The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.
  • Costanza, R. et al. (2007) Quality of Life: An Approach Integrating Opportunities, Human Needs, and Subjective Well-Being. Ecological Economics. Volume 61, Issue 2-3, 267–276.
  • Giddens, A. (1984) The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  • Freire, P. (2000) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. (4th ed.). New York: Continuum.
  • International Labor Organization (2021) Promoting Social Cohesion and Peaceful Coexistence in Fragile Contexts. Geneva, Switzerland: Published by the International Labor Organization.
  • Jansen, K. (2018) Peace and Penance in Late Medieval Italy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  • Lederach, J. (1999) Building Peace. Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Washington D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press.
  • Miller, L. (2017) Creating Public Value in the Shillong Region of Meghalaya. Journal of Northeast India Studies. Volume 7, Issue1, 1-15.
  • Miller, L. (2019) Northeast Cultural Values and Principles, Good Governance and Conflict Reduction: A Bodo Socio-Cultural Framework. The Journal of Development Practice. Volume 5, (Annual), 28-38.
  • Miller, L.; Babatunde, A.; Ersoy, M. & Thiel. S. (2020) Creating Sustainable Peace in Nigeria. International Journal on World Peace. Volume 37, Number 2, 11-36.
  • Mirovitskaya, N. & Ascher, W. (2014) Development Strategies, Identities, and Conflict in Asia. The World Financial Review. Asia – Pacific, Global Economy, International Relations (May 28).
  • Parliamentary Debates of the Government of Bangladesh (1972) Dhaka: The Government of Bangladesh.
  • Plato (2005) Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo, and Phaedrus. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  • Rahman, S. (1974) The Struggle for Peace and Justice. The United Nations Speech of September 25, 1974. New York: United Nations General Assembly Twenty-ninth Session Official Records, 159-161.
  • Rasul, G. (2016) Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in Chittagong: Challenges and Opportunities. Kathmandu, Nepal: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development.
  • Redclift, M. (1993) Sustainable Development: Needs, Values, Rights. Environmental Values. Volume 2, Number 1, 3-20.
  • Sen, A. (1989) Development as Capability Expansion. Journal of Development Planning. 19, 41– 58.
  • Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Skinner, Q. (1978) The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, Vol. 1. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • The World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987) Our Common Future: The Brundtland Report. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Uddin, A. (2015) Education in Peacebuilding: The Case of Post-Conflict Chittagong Hill Tracts in Bangladesh. The Oriental Anthropologist. Vol. 15, No.1, 59.76.
  • Uddin, N. (2019) The local translation of global indigeneity: A case of the Chittagong Hill Tracts. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies. Volume 50, Number 1, 68-85.
  • UNESCO (2009) Learning and societies today. Paris: UNESCO.
  • Wallerstein, I. (2007) Sociology in America. (Calhoun, Craig. Edit.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Yunus, M. (2005) Eliminating Poverty Through Market-Based Social Entrepreneurship. Global Urban Development. Volume 1 Issue 1, 1-10.
  • Zhang, Y. (2003) Pacific Asia: The politics of development. London: Routledge Publications.

1 Leon Miller is a research fellow affiliated with the Network of Religious and Traditional Peacemakers and Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia. He has a background in teaching Corporate Social Responsibility, Comparative Religion, Intercultural Communications, and Intercultural Relations. Contact: leonmonroemiller@yahoo.com.
[1]Leon Miller is a research fellow affiliated with the Network of Religious and Traditional Peacemakers and Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia. He has a background in teaching Corporate Social … Continue a ler Abstract: In contexts where the socially" data-link="https://sinergiased.org/applying-the-principles-of-peace-education-toward-realizing-the-goal-human-social-action-aims-to-achieve/">

Compartilhe nas suas redes

1 Leon Miller is a research fellow affiliated with the Network of Religious and Traditional Peacemakers and Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia. He has a background in teaching Corporate Social Responsibility, Comparative Religion, Intercultural Communications, and Intercultural Relations. Contact: leonmonroemiller@yahoo.com.