news
Centre on Conflict, Development and Peacebuilding
02 February 2026

Everyday Peace Indicators: Reflections on Everyday Peace

The CCDP received a 2025 SNSF AGORA grant to share 17,000 Everyday Peace Indicators, fostering dialogue between research and society. Follow the research process in this new blog series by CCDP Doctoral Researcher Apolline Foedit.

For more than a decade, the Swiss National Science Foundation’s AGORA programme has supported initiatives that bring science into conversation with society. Building on this mission, the CCDP Research Project lead by Eliza Urwin, will share insights from the Everyday Peace Indicators (EPI) team, whose 17,000 locally generated indicators shed light on how communities experience peace and conflict in their daily lives. Apolline  reflections in this blog post asks: What do these local voices tell us about peace? And what does it even mean to measure peace in the first place?

Everyday Peace Indicators: project at the CCDP

The Swiss National Science Foundation awarded the CCDP a new grant to share the 17,000 indicators collected by the Everyday Peace Indicators (EPI) team.  This is the fourth post in the blog series following the research process by CCDP Doctoral Researcher, Apolline Foedit sharing a behind-the-scenes look at this project. 

Research Project


 

REFLECTIONS

Diving into the 17,000 Everyday Peace Indicators has been a journey like no other. Tasked with reading through them, my goal was simple: to understand what the indicators reveal, and what questions emerge when you step back from methodology and look more broadly at the material. What appears are fragments of daily life – small, concrete observations that together form powerful portraits of insecurity and resilience. Reading them feels less like analyzing data and more like listening in on conversations people might never expect to be heard beyond their communities.

Some indicators are strikingly concrete: “The fishing pond is safe from crocodiles.” Others gesture toward broader social conditions: “There is no situation where children have to leave their parents to go to school.” Both speak to safety and stability, but at entirely different scales – from the immediate sensory world to the social structures that make everyday life predictable. Together, they form a mosaic of what peace can look and feel like.

One cluster of indicators from Afghanistan, for instance, reveals how conflict becomes embedded in ordinary routines. “Observing Taliban flag on the top of the mountains,” one person notes – not as a political statement, but as an environmental fact, something that structures how space itself is perceived. Control is visible not only in armed encounters, but in cultural and social life: drivers punished for music, people punished for shaving their beards, and the absence of women’s voices on television and radio. These are not battlefield events, but they are forms of violence nonetheless – regulating what people hear, see, and express.

Children’s lives appear repeatedly. One parent reports: “My son says that the children of government employees are protected by guards when they come to school.” Others describe Taliban firing at boys playing sports, or killing a 13-year-old watching cricket. Schoolyards and playing fields, usually imagined as spaces of safety, emerge instead as sites of fear and inequality.

Movement itself becomes restricted. People say they “can’t find any cars at the station after getting dark” and that “shops aren’t open after dark.” There is no official curfew, yet daily life contracts as people learn when it is safer to disappear indoors. Even justice shifts: “People file their complaints at the court of Taliban,” reflecting how authority becomes fragmented and pragmatic choices replace formal citizenship.

Economic insecurity runs alongside physical danger. Doctors report being forced to give money, businessmen are abducted, and “some rich people migrated to Kabul.” At the same time, others note that “many people who graduated four years ago are still jobless.” Conflict here does not only kill – it stalls futures and drains communities.

Across contexts, much of this knowledge circulates indirectly: “we hear in the news,” “people say,” “we hear from drivers.” Rumor and shared stories become critical ways of making sense of risk when formal information is scarce or unsafe.

These readings also surfaced deeper dilemmas. Peace is not universal: what feels safe or respectful in one community may feel oppressive in another. Some indicators illustrate this clearly – for example, whether women wearing hijabs in public signals dignity or constraint. Rather than resolving these tensions, the indicators invite us to sit with them, recognizing that peace is lived, experienced, and defined differently across contexts.

Together, these indicators show violence not as exceptional, but as ambient – shaping routines, relationships, and horizons. Peace, in this context, is not primarily about treaties or ceasefires. It looks more like music playing in cars again, women’s voices returning to the radio, children playing sports without fear, and shops staying open after dark. In other words, peace looks like the return of the ordinary.

What’s next?

Stay tuned for the next blog post, which will explore the site launch and the upcoming exhibition. 

 

Learn More

 

About the series 

This blog series itself is a collaborative effort, shaped by CCDP Head of Research Eliza Urwin, Doctoral Researcher Apolline Foedit, and envisioned through the communications lens of CCDP specialist Jennifer Thornquest.

Launching a new AGORA project at the CCDP

Blog post 1 

Ethics and meaning

Blog Post 2

Data points or stories? Visualizing Everyday Peace

Blog Post 3

Reflections on Everyday Peace

Blog post 4