Abstract:
National dialogues are increasingly recognised as vital tools for resolving political
con9icts, fostering state- and nation-building, enhancing social cohesion, and
facilitating peaceful socio-economic and political transformation. Despite a
growing body of literature examining national dialogues and their outcomes, there
remains a gap in understanding their theoretical underpinnings and
conceptualisations. This article addresses this gap by conducting a discursive
analysis offering an alternative theoretical framework for national dialogues,
drawing on three theories: social contract, consociationalism, and con9ict
transformation. Using secondary data from scholarly journals, reports, political
agreements, and documented policies and strategies, this article assesses the
theories’ applicability in developing a robust conceptual framework for national
dialogues. An analysis of each theory demonstrates that, while they approach
peacebuilding from different angles, they share unique and common themes such
as participatory governance, addressing root causes, and building trust and
cooperation, which are essential in designing and implementing successful
national dialogues. Leveraging the unique elements of each theory, the observed
insights provide a more comprehensive approach to planning and implementing
national dialogues, even in diverse socio-economic and political contexts. fe
1ndings’ implications are pertinent to scholars in the 1eld of peace studies,
governments, political entities, civil society organisations, and international
stakeholders engaged in national dialogue processes.
