Dr Gal Harmat and MSocSc Gaëtan Gamba
Social cohesion is often described as the glue of society: the set of relationships, of trust, power, recognition and mutual responsibility, that bind individuals, families, communities, municipalities, and identity groups together. It is what enables societies to function not merely as collections of individuals, but as interconnected wholes. When this glue weakens, societies risk fragmentation; when it is strengthened, they gain resilience. Conflict sensitivity focuses on minimizing negative impacts of action, or inaction, in conflict-affected contexts, whilst promoting positive peace and addressing the root causes of conflict. Conflict sensitivity therefore is critical for laying out the conditions in which social cohesion activities should take place.
Over the past two decades, social cohesion has gained substantial traction within development discourses. It has become a core objective in the policies and programming of major international actors such as UNDP, the World Bank, and the OECD. This shift reflects growing recognition that economic growth and institutional reform alone are insufficient to ensure stability and peace without strong social bonds.
Moldova at a Crossroads
Moldova occupies a precarious geopolitical position, situated between Eastern and Western spheres of influence and navigating tensions between the European Union and Russia, China to the East. The unresolved conflict in the separatist region of Transnistria, combined with enduring post-Soviet political, economic, and cultural ties to Russia further complicates the country’s internal cohesion (read more here ). Unresolved tensions and existing divisions between ethnic, linguistic, and national groups in the country meanwhile continue to place significant strain on society at all levels.
Since 2022, Moldova has faced heightened instability driven by multiple, intersecting factors: the displacement of Ukrainian refugees into Moldova, the proximity of military frontlines near its borders and increased hybrid and cyberattacks targeting state institutions (read about it here ). Recently, in a 2024 referendum held at the same time as the first round of the presidential elections, Moldovans narrowly supported the country’s application for EU membership with 50,4% of votes. These divides and pressures have exacerbated existing social fractures, placing additional strain on an already fragile social fabric, and reinforcing the importance of adopting a conflict sensitive approach in our work in Moldova.
None of this makes social protection a peacebuilding silver bullet. The honest reading of the evidence is more modest: social protection can support peace and stability objectives when it’s inclusive, conflict-sensitive, politically informed and coordinated with wider efforts. That’s a real contribution, but a conditional one.
The Metaphor of the Family Dinner
Our experience of facilitating social cohesion workshops in Moldova has highlighted the importance of being able to carefully navigate linguistic diversity, historical sensitivities, whilst recognizing that trust is often fractured between groups. In such settings, we have found metaphors to be powerful tools for creating shared understanding and opening the dialogue in a conflict sensitive manner. A particularly effective exercise draws on the “lively metaphor” of the family, a social unit that most people intuitively understand, regardless of background. Methodologically, it is an approach that seeks to encourage cross-cultural dialogue by bringing out similarities and highlighting the hybrid and heterogenous aspects of all cultures (read more about this methodology ). It helps us to focus on what connects us, rather than what divides us.
Imagine a family gathering. Perhaps it is a grandmother’s 80th birthday, a wedding, or an annual barbecue where politeness masks long-standing tensions. One uncle refuses to speak to an aunt over a conflict dating back decades. A cousin is ill yet receives little support because attention is consumed by old arguments. One branch of the family proudly displays its success, while another is silently compared and diminished.
This family, despite its shared history, lacks social cohesion. Now, scale this image up. Replace the family with a neighborhood, a village, or a country. When communication breaks down, when groups compete rather than collaborate, and when success is measured comparatively rather than collectively, personal conflict transforms into societal tension. In extreme cases, such dynamics can escalate into instability or violence.
Social cohesion is conflict sensitive when it is not an abstract policy term or a rhetorical addition to development frameworks. It practically describes whether the diverse fragments of a society can coexist, support one another, and recognize themselves as part of a shared narrative.
The difference is tangible: between a family gathering that ends with reconciliation and shared food, and one that ends with estrangement and silence. In the absence of cohesion, individuals feel isolated, blamed and compared often for factors beyond their control, such as language, historical legacy or access to resources. Communities pull apart rather than together. Conversely, when cohesion is nurtured through trust, dialogue, and mutual recognition, competition gives way to collective problem-solving.
A phrase rooted in East African (Ubuntu) philosophy captures this ethos succinctly: “I am because you are.” It reflects the understanding that individual well-being is inseparable from collective well-being. This principle lies at the heart of social cohesion.
Conflict Sensitive Social Cohesion in Practice
Practically, this means creating spaces for dialogue at all levels of society, dialogue that allows people to understand others’ perspectives while also clarifying their own needs and aspirations. Importantly, such dialogue should not be confined to formal settings. When culture is treated as an inherent component of dialogue, through food, art, literature, music, or even street graffiti-it becomes embedded in everyday life. Cultural forms can engage broader segments of society, lower barriers to participation, and generate new points of connection.
In Moldova, where divisions are often reinforced by history and geopolitics, these culturally grounded approaches can incrementally contribute to rebuilding trust, adding piece by piece, more glue to a society under strain. It is therefore important to engage with culturally appropriate and relevant metaphors to the audience. In this sense, the metaphor of the family meal is very powerful as it represents a meaningful expression of togetherness and a situation full of histories and passed experiences – complexities, but also completely ordinary.
To end on our metaphorical journey, if Uncle Ion is still angry about something that happened in 1998, perhaps the first step is not confrontation or judgement, but conversation, passing the sarmale, kavirma or shuba, listening, and choosing to move forward together.
And just like in any family gathering if we don’t work on those relationships, someone will always go home hungry, angry and ready for revenge. It is exactly what we want to avoid in this context and why conflict sensitive social cohesion is not merely a policy goal. It is the everyday work of learning how to live together.
Promoting dialogue across all levels of society, not just among elites or certain groups of the population; this is a core principle of both conflict-sensitivity and social cohesion practice.
Recognizing that formal spaces can exclude people, it is important to promote spaces for dialogue in everyday life.
Using food, art, music, literature, and even graffiti to facilitate connection and lower barriers to participation and reaching broader audiences, including those who might disengage from conventional dialogue formats.
Using culturally appropriate metaphors and references specific to the audience, in this case relevant to the Moldovan context and history.
Rather than expecting rapid transformation, frame progress as gradual (“step by step”), especially for trust-building.
Prioritizing conversation and empathy over judgment or confrontation when dealing with grievances, including historical ones.
The family meal metaphor holds both the difficulty (histories, tensions) and the ordinariness of togetherness simultaneously, an honest framing.
The warning that neglecting relationships means someone “goes home hungry, angry and ready for revenge” (inaction), increasing the stakes of not doing this work.
Positioning social cohesion as an ongoing practice, not a policy outcome.
Resist the tendency to treat cohesion as a box to tick and instead ground it in sustained, relational effort.
Dr Gal Harmat is a Senior Researcher at swisspeace. Her work focuses on dialogue facilitation including in Moldova, Armenia-Azerbaijan and Georgia, with a focus on social cohesion, gender and intersectionality, identity, creative mythology, evaluation and research. She was a lecturer and researcher at Kibbutzim College of Education, Ben Gurion University in the Negev, Israel, and the Head of the Peace Education Department at the United Nations University for Peace. On her personal capacity she’s an activist promoting children rights and gender equality mainly in war affected areas.
MSocSc Gaëtan Gamba is a Program Associate at swisspeace. He works on diverse research projects at the crossroad of social cohesion, art & peace, and geopolitics, mostly focusing on Central Eastern Europe, including in Moldova and Armenia- Azerbaijan. He worked both for research and governmental institutions in Switzerland, the USA and Finland and holds a Social Science Master’s degree in European and Nordic Studies, Central Eastern European Studies, from the University of Helsinki.
Bibliography & Further Readings
Burchi, F., Loewe, M., Malerba, D.& Leiniger, J. (2022). Disentangling the Relationship Between Social Protection and Social Cohesion: Introduction to the Special Issue. The European Journal of Development Research. 34, 1195-1215. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-022-00532-2
Cebotari, S., & Putină, N. (2025). Internal Divisions and Social Cohesion – Obstacles in the EU Accession Process. The Experience of the Western Balkans and the Republic of Moldova. Analele Universitatii Din Oradea. Relatii Internationale Si Studii Europene . https://doi.org/10.58603/HKXN4480
Ghenghea, M. (2014). A Geopolitical Stake: Republic of Moldova Between the European Union and the Eurasian Union, CES Working Papers, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, Centre for European Studies, Iasi, 6 (2a), 86-93. https://hdl.handle.net/10419/198323
Gherghina, S. (2025). In the Pursuit of Democracy: Support for Referendums in Moldova. Politics and Governance, 14 . https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.11124
Harmat, G. (2019). Intersectional Pedagogy: Creative Education Practices for Gender and Peace Work (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429319518
Marc, A., Willman A., Aslam G., Rebosio M., with Balasuriya, K. (2012). Societal Dynamics and Fragility: Engaging Societies in Responding to Fragile Situations. Washington DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-9656-8
Martin, J. N., Nakayama, T. K. (2010). Chapter 5: Intercultural Communication and Dialectics Revisited. The Handbook of Critical Intercultural Communication . https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444390681.ch5
Mocanu, V., Mocanu, I. (2024). Trust as a Pillar of Social Cohesion in the Republic of Moldova: Dynamics and Interconnections. Scientific Annals of “Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University of Iasi, 17 (2), 85-97. https://doi.org/10.47743/asas-2024-2-771
OECD. (2011). Perspectives on Global Development 2012: Social Cohesion in a Shifting World, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/persp_glob_dev-2012-en
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2008). How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol ., 38, 922–934. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.504
Pociumban, A. (2023). Moldova’s response to Hybrid Attacks. A Learning-by-doing Strategy. The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies. https://hcss.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Moldovas-Response-to-Hybrid-Threats-HCSS-2023.pdf
Schmeidl, S., Ware, A. & Alberti, C. (2023) Conflict sensitivity/Do No Harm (DNH) in development, humanitarian, and peacebuilding practice– reflections and emerging trends [special issue editorial], Development in Practice, 33 (5), 517-527. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2023.2215970
Sprincean, S., Grigoriu, I. & Guigov, A. (2025). Human Security and Forced Displacement in the Republic of Moldova. Institutional and Civil Society Perspectives. Studia Securitatis Journal . 19 (2), 18-35. https://doi.org/10.54989/stusec.2025.19.02.02
UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2020). Strengthening social cohesion: Conceptual framing and programming implications. New York. https://www.undp.org/publications/strengthening-social-cohesion-conceptual-framing-and-programming-implications
The Metaphor of the Family Dinner: On the Importance of Social Cohesion in Moldova October 16, 2026 Dr Gal Harmat and MSocSc Gaëtan Gamba Social cohesion is often described as the glue of society: the set of relationships, of trust, power, recognition and mutual responsibility, that bind individuals, families, communities, municipalities, and identity groups together. It is what enables societies to function not merely as collections of individuals, but as interconnected wholes.…
Read more: The Metaphor of the Family Dinner: On the Importance of Social Cohesion in Moldova Peacebuilding, stabilisation, conflict sensitivity, and social protection: time to join the dots… August 28, 2026 Rob Parker and Tim Midgley When insecurity spread across parts of Niger and Mali in recent years, humanitarian and social protection actors faced an obvious dilemma: how do you keep a cash transfer programme running when the roads aren’t safe and state presence is thin? In both countries, programme teams found workarounds. By adopting conflict…
Read more: Peacebuilding, stabilisation, conflict sensitivity, and social protection: time to join the dots… Conflict sensitivity hubs: what works, what doesn’t and what next? August 20, 2026 Elizabeth Laruni In a world where conflicts are on the rise and becoming more complex, more humanitarian and development aid is taking place in contexts of increased fragility and insecurity. At the same time budgets are further under strain and the aid landscape has shifted, making it even more important to navigate conflict sensitivity challenges…
Read more: Conflict sensitivity hubs: what works, what doesn’t and what next? Operationalizing Conflict Sensitivity in Iraq: From Intent to Practice July 31, 2026 Linda Atta Rashid Conflict sensitivity in Iraq is rarely absent from plans or proposals. It appears in strategies, logframes, and donor narratives, often framed as a requirement that must be demonstrated. The real challenge, however, is not whether conflict sensitivity is acknowledged, but whether it meaningfully shapes everyday decisions once programs are underway. Operationalizing conflict…
Read more: Operationalizing Conflict Sensitivity in Iraq: From Intent to Practice Navigating Ethiopia’s Web of Crises: The Role of the Conflict Sensitivity Hub July 3, 2026 Fikir Getachew Mekonen In the volatile borderlands of Ethiopia’s Gambella region, where refugees have sought safety from escalating violence in neighbouring states, a fragile coexistence has repeatedly frayed under mounting pressures. By late 2025, as over 50,000 new arrivals swelled the already strained camps, tensions between refugees and host communities simmered into open unrest. Repeated…
Read more: Navigating Ethiopia’s Web of Crises: The Role of the Conflict Sensitivity Hub
