Neil Funk-Unrau , Assistant Professor of Conflict
Resolution (Transformation) Studies, Menno Simons College and CMU firstname.lastname@example.org
Naomi Levine,Human Rights and Harassment Officer, Red River
College and U of Winnipeg email@example.com
By Telephone for part during the afternoon:
1. Introduction and approval of the agenda
The meeting commenced at 8:30 am. Larry Fisk (Canadian Peace Research
and Education Association or "CPREA" and Menno Simons College)
greeted the participants. Canadian Mennonite University President
George Rickhard (sp?) also visited briefly and welcomed the participants. The
agenda was approved as circulated with no further additions. Bob Stewart
facilitated the meeting. The purpose of the meeting was to build on
the work done in Hamilton and Vancouver to create a Canadian Peace
Initiative and Institute. Bob Stewart gave a summary of the
proceedings of the Hamilton and Vancouver meetings.
2. The Programs of the Canadian Peace Institute
- Bob Stewart gave a presentation of 3 overheads (a conceptual map)
addressing the current gap in "macro-peace education" (i.e.
emphasizing the understanding of the 'big picture', and how the 'micro-peace
thematic issues" fit in), in order to enable the "binding" of
peace groups to pull in one common, supportive direction to achieve a common
mission/vision. A presentation on Macropeace is available online at http://www.peace.ca/macropeace.htm
- program structure/visions/issues has been the subject of a Programs
Sub-committee, and Noemi Gal-Or tabled a document entitled "CPI -
Programs & Accreditation Proposal" attached as Appendix 1
- Bob Stewart provided a very brief update on the results of
the Peace Studies Survey: only 4 responses were received from Royal Roads
University, University of Regina, Dalhousie University, University of
Calgary, and University of Prince Edward Island. These will be added
to the existing inventory at http://www.peace.ca/univandcollegespeacestudiesprog.htm
- "going around the table", we obtained the following responses:
- possibly CPI should be a "coagulant" (this term
evolved to a better descriptive: "yeast for peace")
- programs should be proactive
- if CPREA was vibrant then they would be doing this; rather
than reinventing CPREA (which can be more difficult) we are inventing a new
CPI (can be easier); does CPI have a better chance of success than CPREA?
we have a powerful mission statement
- an Action Research School, where practitioners are
driving as much as academics, interfacing with cutting edge new peace
initiatives in the world
- not just another academic program (the "unschool")
- Menno Simons College is employing "service
- to accredit CPI programs can be very time consuming, with a
lot of energy expended, and not sure that is where we should be spending our
- we need to be an "Amway for peace" (i.e.
pyramiding the education to the masses) - how do we capture the people
(versus just impacting 30 students a year - it is the 30,000,000 people in
Canada we want to impact)
- maybe a key role for CPI is connecting with all that is
happening in peace education in Canada
- CPI role: transdisciplinary connectors; providing an
umbrella approach to transcend the "stovepipe effects" (i.e.
individual programs not conversant with each other)
- we are Peace Education Leaders; we want a "real good
holistic peace education in Canada"; we have identified lots of gaps;
as Leaders we have to have a vision and get on with it; today maybe none of
us knows exactly what that looks like but we have to have a vision of how to
get to it and it will continue to become clearer over the years
- Paul Redekop visited for a half hour and told the group how
there is a growing demand for peace education from practitioners and a
potential for a broader range of peace studies
- fill the informal education box; how we build peace education into the
- Dave Hubert read a quotation with respect to applied peace education and
a vision for Canada in global leadership in peace
- Noemi Gal-Or stressed the need to produce results and show advancement
with our CPI work
- Lowell Ewert stressed the need for a "Centre for
Applied Peace Studies", focusing far more on practice than academics;
there are 175,000 NGOs in Canada, and we should research the cumulative
impact of these groups on social development in Canada and what their peace
education needs are (what is missing in Canada?); CPI's first job is to meet
the incredible opportunity to provide the venue to help them get
together within the next 2 or 3 years
- Anne Adelson indicated that we are talking about
foundational work that CPI should be doing, and promoting the synergy (of
human security in Canada)
- Liz Hoffman indicated that there are academic approaches,
social activist approaches, and a combination of both
- Margaret Maier indicated that we have to work for peace on
many fronts (eg. media, play, etc.)
- Esther Epp-Tiessen sought clarification that CPI is a
partnership versus a program
- Larry Fisk indicated that CPI should be a celebration of a
counter culture (reminiscent of the 1960's)
- Rachel Goodman assured us that things will become clearer
as we work on them and bring everyone together
- Lowell Ewert suggested that we take the following to the
1. encouragement for further exploration of the Program
Subcommittee document, further exploration how it relates to other peace
studies programs in Canada (there has been a significant change in the past
2. a program plan to find funding for someone to summarize
the impact and peace education needs of the 175,000 NGOs in Canada
3. someone start articulating gaps between cross sector
discussions (eg. between peace officers, healthy communities people, etc.)
- everyone agreed that CPI should carry on, wholeheartedly,
inclusively, bridging between building peace at home and abroad
3. Resource Issues of CPI
- Bob Stewart indicated that CPI needed some seed capital,
referenced the creation of a Canadian Peace foundation, Resource
Subcommittee terms of reference and one example suggestion of a
video for fund raising.
- Dave Hubert was participating as a representative of
the Alberta Society known as the Canadian Peace Foundation indicating that
he has broached his Board on the possibility of us working together or
letting us use the name. Their next meeting is April 27 and he will
report back at that time (and they want to be accommodating as our agendas
are very complimentary). He also cautioned us that they were unable to
get charitable status because "peace is a political activity"
- Anne Adelson felt there were examples of how we can get
around this problem
- Lowell Ewert informed us that 4 Kitchener Waterloo peace
organizations are working towards a new building (Project Ploughshares, the
Conflict Resolution Network/Family Mediation Canada, Centre for Family
Business, and Conrad Grabel College); this represents quite a critical mass
of peace organizations, and may be a complimentary opportunity for CPI
to do something with them (the planned building is 10,000 square feet, about
- Liz Hoffman indicated that there are different approaches
to attract big money, and small money; one input that would be helpful is
how much violence costs Canadians (military, hospitals, justice and
- everyone agreed that money was needed, and deferred to the
Resource Subcommittee to work on that
4. Governance Issues of CPI
- Anne Adelson indicated the importance of structures for
decision making, accountability and transparency
- Bob Stewart recapped previous meeting discussions which
leaned strongly to a horizontal system. Most of the peace people
involved with CPI are peak performers, need little direction and support,
are self-directed/supported, and hence a hierarchical system would be
difficult to apply and probably makes less sense than horizontal. All
that is needed is a little facilitation to maintain focus (they might need a
little more facilitation when they are doing new things they are not
familiar with or used to). I imagine all decisions would be by
consensus (this may not mean 100% consensus, but as close as you can get).
Individuals can form teams to get tasks done, or do them individually, and
- Lowell Ewert suggested a proposal be made to the CPREA AGM;
you can never get it right the first time, mistakes will happen and you
- Esther Epp-Tiessen suggested different categories of
membership (individuals and institutions); see who joins and that will
separate the "wheat from the chaff"
- people would have to be volunteers until such time as we have some
- how do we focus and get going? = that is the Leadership challenge
- a diagram of a structure was discussed and seemed suitable (modified
that the structure would be expected to be fairly "flat" or
(responsive to needs)
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
I---------------------------BOARD OF ADVISORS (high profile)
ADMINISTRATION (subcommittees or
(responsible to deliver)
MENTORS ACROSS CANADA
- Anne Adelson discussed the Greenham Common model of
'modified' consensus used by Voice of Women, as an example to consider, with
education on how to make it work properly
- Liz Hoffman suggested getting the top 6 or 7 governance
models, to help guide us
- discussion was deferred on the development of a Memorandum
of Understanding as it is premature to consider relationship issues among
institutions, and we are not ready yet
- Dave Rushton had prepared a draft paper on how CPI
credibility might be built with government partners (Appendix 2); this
discussion was deferred again that it might be premature before Kingston;
there was general agreement that government funding would be sought, but not
to the detriment of CPI independence of thought and action
5. Action Plan
- Larry Fisk will prepare a brief CPI Summary and Proposal to introduce
at the CPREA AGM workshop ("Re-envisioning Peace Education in
Canada"), starting with the Summary prepared following the
Hamilton meeting (reference http://www.peace.ca/summarydec15.htm )
and evolving with the benefit of the Vancouver and Winnipeg meetings.
Larry will bounce this off Dean Peachey and Paul Redekop, prior to asking
Anne Adelson to critique it. Then Bob Stewart and possibly other
meeting participants will be consulted prior to June 2. It should be
circulated in advance of the CPREA workshop for advance reading
- Larry Fisk, Ann Adelson, Liz Hoffman and Bob Stewart met on
Saturday to assimilate the results of the meeting and the following more
detailed Action Plan Steps to be undertaken:
(1) CPI to act as a "yeast for peace" (it may sound corny but it
is the best way we found to date to describe what we are trying to do);
mentoring; do no harm
(2) CPI to facilitate the venues for discussion and
mobilize peace educators' collective intelligence (Larry Fisk provided the
example of how he went to a new class and asked them what they wanted to do
for a course; it was a wonderful and liberating dynamic very similar to what
we have been talking about for CPI)
(3) CPI to facilitate the creation of Canadian Peace Resource
Centres (libraries, videos, computer stations); these would become peace
tourism destination centres; it is not a 'political' activity and should be
well received; library donations would be sought (eg. retirees)
(4) Bob Stewart offered to facilitate one or more workshops
to provide a venue for the possible development of peace education courses
in Canada in Macropeace, Leaders of Peace, Change Management, a
National Culture of Peace Program, and the facilitating the development
of African Centers for Peace Education and Training.
(5) CPI to research Canada's opportunity to help shape UNESCO
(6) CPI to encourage getting peace education on the political
agenda (as versus being political); peace was not an issue in the recent
Canadian, U.S. or Alberta elections and yet 95%+ Canadians say it is
(7) CPI to approach one or more Peace Universities/Colleges
in Canada to provide an annual venue for Peace Education Dialogues (Bob
Stewart believes there may be a possibility of gaining support from service
clubs such as Rotary, Lions, etc.); possibly as early as November 11, 2001;
or possibly a July or August thing (timing has its' pros and cons)
(8) plan to start inviting individuals, mentors and
institutional Members to join CPI (consider membership fee, etc.)
(9) look for funding for two projects: (a) inventory of the
"175,000 NGOs in Canada, their impact on peace development, and their
needs for peace education and training; (b) refinement of the inventory of
peace education programs available in Canada
(10) the 2002 CPREA AGM to have a main them of
"Re-envisioning Peace Education in Canada" (or some such thing to
focus on CPI-type peace education developments)
(11) work towards a 2003 Symposium bringing together the
"175,000 NGOs" to discuss their needs for peace education
(12) work towards using technology to bring the venues to the
people who can not travel to the conferences (live web broadcasts;
6. Conclusion and Wrap-up
- Bob Stewart thanked the participants for their good work, and
thanked Larry Fisk, Menno Simons College and the Canadian Mennonite
University for their wonderful assistance (including hosting
- Larry Fisk thanked Bob Stewart on behalf of the group for
facilitating the workshop
- the meeting adjourned at 5:30 pm.
Robert A. Stewart, C.A., C.M.C.
APPENDIX 1 - CPI – PROGRAM & ACCREDITAION
Gal-Or, CPI Program Sub-Committee, February 16, 2000
This proposal is based on deliberations at the Kwantlen
meeting, Dec. 2001, and Janet's and Bob's suggestions.
Purpose of Sub-Committee
The purpose of the Programs Sub-Committee is to manage
programs (courses and studies) necessary for the success of CPI. The term
"management" implies planning, implementation, monitoring,
reacting, and accreditation.
Larry Fisk, Noemi Gal-Or, Janet Hudgins, Joyce Lydiard,
Sue McGregor, Derek Paul, Raj Ramanathapillai, Bob Stewart, Joy Warner.
Peace Studies (with areas of specialisation)
Nature of program
Master in Peace Promotion and Administration (MPPA)
Degree recognised by the Canadian Government in
agreement with leading post-secondary institutions in and outside Canada.
Degree to be awarded by the CPI or CPI accredited
Duration and Structure of Program
Total duration: 2 ½ - 2 ¾ years
Studies – courses (lecture, seminars, tutoring) and exams (15 credits);
2d – 7th semesters: Orientation
in Ottawa (?) and co-op placement;
Studies – courses (lecture, seminars, tutoring) and exams (15 credits);
9th semester (optional):
Submission of completed MPPA thesis and oral defence before a jury of 3 (2 academics
and 1 peace practitioner).
Yet to be determined: How many credits can be online.
Admission and Prerequisites
3d year completion of any university or university
college discipline (60 credits) with a minimum 72 GPA for the total 60
Prior learning assessment: previous work experience
criteria may be considered up to 20 credits equivalence. Criteria to be
Minimum 2 languages. Criteria to be determined.
Tuition fees: to be determined.
Co-op semesters: payment to students by employer.
Universal minimum payment requirement: to be determined.
The program content will be based on our courses and
program survey findings and on needs (e.g. as defined by Canadem). The CPI
will articulate the courses and may create new courses.
There will be a choice among several streams
targeting and distinguishing between:
- Formal full-time education institutions
(universities, colleges, secondary, elementary, kindergarten);
- Adult and continuing education.
4 content pillars to be addressed at introductory
and post co-op levels (24-19 credits):
- The holistic perspective of peace (co-operative vs.
competitive power, personal vs. societal transformation, environment,
justice and fairness, etc.);
- The public face of peace (global level, politics,
- Early warning (identification of challenges to
- Strategies of change (resolution,
transformation/restoration, management, promotion, securing).
Specialisation (including 6-11 study credits during 1st
and 8th semesters) to be determined by choice of co-op
APPENDIX 2: DGR CPI Project - Building
Credibility with Government, by David Rushton
OBJECTIVE: Under ACCREDITATON: Dave Rushton was asked to
write up and circulate in draft his summary of how CPI credibility might
be built with government partners (i.e. credibility; political interest in
maintaining Canadian image; governance; maintaining independence; etc.)
WHY? What benefits to CPI?
- Gov’t approval needed for accreditation?
- Fed or also host provincial govt responsible for
- Govt funding sought/required?
- For core operating funds?
- For peace action/research contracts?
- For student bursaries etc?
- Govt recognition needed:
- To get CPI member institutions on board?
- To draw faculty/students?
- For international status?
BENEFITS TO GOVT:
- International image coherence:
- Canada promotes peacemaker image; a national CPI
could strengthen that image.
- Enhanced Canadian capacity:
- Improved ability to draw students to peace studies?
- More cooperation among Canadian peace
- More efficient use of resources?
- Improved peace studies curricula?
- High profile Cdns declaring support; board of
governors / advisory council, etc:
- Pearson family involvement (e.g., Senator Brandon
- Academics who were formal high profile feds (e.g.,
Lloyd Axworthy, Gordon Smith, Ed Broadbent? Warren Allmand?)
- Trudeau family
- Confirm no competition with existing peace related
institutions and orgs à seek individualized
support agreements. The more direct benefit/coherence with their
mandates the better.
- Pearson Peacekeeping Institute, Cornwallis, NS
- CPREA institutional members / connections
- Police organizations
- Oversight organizations (e.g.CACOLE: Canadian
Organization for Civilian Oversight Of Law Enforcement)
- Human rights organizations
- Seek a link with all relevant government departments.
Pre-contact work would involve reviewing their mandates to determine
mutual needs/benefits between them and CPI:
- DFAIT: e.g. John Holmes Fund, which promotes foreign
- CIDA Peacebuilding Unit (if CPI intends int’l
component, or re support for development of Canadian capacity)
- IDRC: research on peace with international focus;
Canadian research capacity development.
- Canadian Centres of Excellence: First determine
program status and whether CPI might qualify if funding available.
- Alumni initiative: If CPI does not become a totally
separate bricks and mortar operation but more a virtual institution
which consists of accredited programs in member institutions, CPI
could immediately consider alumni from those member programs as
possible contacts for government liaison.
- Diversified $ support: The days of non-government
institutions being highly dependent on government funding seem to be
over. IF government funding is a key reason for developing credibility
with governments, then the more project-specific the government
funding being sought the better.
- Deborah Fletcher re her high power Toronto friend
involved in PR/Communications?
- Compare support campaign undertaken by International
IDEA re Cdn support/membership.