Bringing down the walls: Is the notion of ‘promoting shared space’ commensurate with effective transformation of contested places in Belfast?

This article is a reflexive and critical examination of recent empirical research on effective practice in the management and ‘transformation’ of contested urban space at sectarian interfaces in Belfast. By considering the development of interfaces, the areas around them and policy responses to their persistence, the reality of contested space in the context of ‘peace building’ is apparent; with implications for local government as central to the statutory response. Belfast has developed an inbuilt absence of connectivity; where freedom of movement is particularly restricted and separation of contested space is the policy default position. Empirical research findings focus attention on the significance of social and economic regeneration and fall into three specific areas that reflect both long-term concerns within neighbourhoods and the need for adequate policy responses and action ‘on the ground’. Drawing on Elden and Sassen we reconfigure the analytical framework by which interfaces are defined, with implications for policy and practice in post-conflict Belfast. Past and current policy for peace-building in Northern Ireland, and transforming the most contested space, at interfaces in Belfast, is deliberately ambiguous and offers little substance having failed to advance from funding-led linguistic compliance to a sustainable peace-building methodology.

The Evolution of Extreme Cooperation via Shared Dysphoric Experiences

Willingness to lay down one’s life for a group of non-kin, well documented in the
historical and ethnographic records, represents an evolutionary puzzle. Here we
present a novel explanation for the willingness to fight and die for a group, combining evolutionary theorizing with empirical evidence from real-world human groups. Building on research in social psychology, we develop a mathematical model showing how conditioning cooperation on previous shared experience can allow extreme (i.e., life-threatening) pro-social behavior to evolve. The model generates a series of predictions that we then test empirically in a range of special sample populations (including military veterans, college fraternity/sorority members, football fans, martial arts practitioners, and twins). Our results show that sharing painful experiences produces “identity fusion” – a visceral sense of oneness – more so even than bonds of kinship, in turn motivating extreme pro-group behavior, including willingness to fight and die for the group. These findings have theoretical and practical relevance. Theoretically, our results speak to the origins of human cooperation, as we offer an explanation of extremely costly actions left unexplained by existing models.
Practically, our account of how shared dysphoric experiences produce identity fusion, which produces a willingness to fight and die for a non-kin group, helps us better understand such pressing social issues as suicide terrorism, holy wars, sectarian violence, gang-related violence, and other forms of intergroup conflict.