Box 6: “Do No Harm” There is an increasing recognition within the international community that development can have the unintended consequences of creating or reinforcing tensions and contributing to violent conflict by, for instance, increasing inequalities or the perception of inequalities. Even moves towards more equitable distribution can result in increased conflict risk in the short run. Aid programmes can work against the grain of existing social structures and undermine coping strategies of communities. External assistance has the potential to increase tensions and exacerbate conflict dynamics unintentionally. In situations where there is no direct physical violence, external assistance can have a negative impact by reinforcing conditions of structural violence. In particular, external interventions (including development interventions) can ‘do harm’ by:  privileging some groups at the expenses of others;  creating parallel systems and structures, hence undermining existing institutions; Development programmes that aim to reinforce the rights of minorities may also do harm if they consider the issues of minorities disconnected from the overall context. In order to be conflictsensitive, development interventions could take account of broader identity- and social- dynamics when considering minority issues. Minority issues need to be understood in the context of multiple identities. There is a danger that pro-minority policies and programmes may create an identity discourse that privileges one dimension of identity over other dimensions. For example, strong policies for the social inclusion of ethnic minorities could put the focus of public attention entirely on ethnicity. Such policies run  reinforcing corruption;  legitimizing or reinforcing existing structures of exploitation and inequity. The possibility that development interventions “do harm” does not merely depend on the objectives the development intervention plans to achieve, but also on how it tries to achieve such objectives – including the choice of modalities for implementation, the selection of partners and staff, and the timeline for implementation. When working with minority groups, harm could be avoided by appropriate participation processes. Minorities can be included in general participation and also given opportunities to give input in specially-designated consultations (because general participation meetings may be intimidating spaces for raising concerns). Minority communities are often the best judge of possible inter-communal tensions that might arise when projects targeted for them are developed; they can offer strategies, such as transparency, raising awareness of need through media reports, and collection of disaggregated data, that can avoid conflict. the risk of jeopardizing the inclusion of people who, for example, define themselves mainly in terms of being members of a minority religion. At the same time, social cohesion is dependent upon all individuals feeling committed to a common national identity that is meaningful and relevant to them. This requires full acknowledgement of cultural, religious and linguistic diversity within the State. In Fiji, a Peace Stability and Development Analysis (PSDA) facilitated by UNDP in 2005 found that one-dimensional international and national assertion of indigenous rights may have had backlash effects on the overall social cohesion. The methods of championing indigenous Chapter 4: Minorities in Development 59