While fostering human diversity is a principal goal of peace and development work, plurality has itself become an immense challenge. The practical reality of fragmentation is of concern to the international development community due to the risk of inefficiency and rupture that it implies. Rooted in the conflict transformation approach of Lederach and Dietrich, this article advances a transdisciplinary perspective for fostering an integrated plurality within development work. Grounded in a relational approach, this article explores (1) the conceptual frame of development cooperation and its challenges for integrating plurality; (2) key premises to consider when building structures of development cooperation; and (3) the method of Theme-Centred Interaction as a useful tool of humanistic psychology for addressing the challenge of plurality in development work. This transdisciplinary approach may usefully serve in the critical examination of current development projects and the initiation of new ones.
Amnesty International2011, Sacrificing Rights in the Name of Development: Indigenous Peoples under Threat in the Americas, London: Amnesty International Publications.
CohnR.C.1997, Von der Psychoanalyse zur themenzentrierten Interaktion: Von der Behandlung einzelner zu einer Pädagogik für alle, Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta Verlag.
5.
CohnR.C. & KleinI.1993, Großgruppen gestalten mit Themenzentrierter Interaktion: Ein Weg zur lebendigen Balance zwischen Einzelnen, Aufgaben und Gruppe, Mainz: Grünewald.
6.
DietrichW.2011, Variationen über die vielen Frieden, Vols 2 and 3. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
7.
EscobarA.2000, ‘Beyond the Search for a Paradigm? Post-Development and Beyond’ in Development43: 4: 11–14.
8.
EstevaG.2006 [1991], ‘Development’ in DietrichW., Echavarria AlvarezJ. & KoppensteinerN. eds, Schlüsseltexte der Friedensforschung: Key Texts of Peace Studies: Textos claves de la Investigación para la Paz, Vienna/Münster: LIT Verlag: 183 ff.
GhoshA.2013, ‘Embeddedness and the Dynamics of Growth: The Case of Amul Cooperative, India’, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD).
KapoorI.2004, ‘Hyper-Self-Reflexive Development? Spivak on Representing the Third World “Other”’ in Third World Quarterly25: 4: 627–647.
13.
KlingebielS.1998, ‘United Nations Development Cooperation. Challenges and reforms at the end of the 1990s’, Briefing Paper 2/1998, German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), Bonn.
Kranz-PloteJ.2006, ‘Chancen und Herausforderungen bei der operativen Umsetzung der Millennium-Entwicklungsziele: eine Innenperspektive’ in NuschelerF. & RothM. eds. Die Millennium-Entwicklungsziele: Entwicklungspolitischer Königsweg oder ein Irrweg?, Bonn: Dietz.
16.
LederachJ.P.1995, Preparing for Peace: Conflict Transformation Across Cultures. Syracuse Studies on Peace and Conflict Resolution, New York: Syracuse University Press.
17.
LederachJ.P.2004, Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18.
LederachJ.P. & LederachA.J.2011, When Blood and Bones Cry Out: Journeys through the Soundscape of Healing and Reconciliation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
19.
LemaireB.2007, ‘Beratung im Kontext von Ehrenamt, Freiwilligendiensten und bürgerschaftlichem Engagement’ in LotzW. & WagnerC. eds, Themenzentrierte Interaktion in der Beratung und in therapeutischen Prozessen, Ostfieldern: Grünewald: 162–173.
20.
LiebensH.2007, ‘Themenzentrierte Interaktion — Kompetenz bei der Beratung in Organisationen’ in LotzW. & WagnerC. eds, Themenzentrierte Interaktion in der Beratung und in therapeutischen Prozessen, Ostfieldern: Grünewald: 145–161.
21.
LyotardJ.-F.1984, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
22.
MandelbrotB.2004, Fractals and Chaos: The Mandelbrot Set and Beyond, München: Springer.
RyanJ.2012, ‘Infrastructures for Peace as a Path to Resilient Societies: An Institutional Perspective’ in Journal of Peacebuilding & Development7: 3: 14–24.
