Peace is a Smart Investment

Here’s how peacebuilders can make the case

Peacebuilding has historically relied on government grants and development aid.

That model isn’t just strained—it’s structurally unfit for the scale and speed of crises we now face. If we want to build peace at scale, we need a seat at a different table. And to get it, we need to do something we’ve tended to resist: We need to learn to speak business, finance, and investment.

To me, this is not about abandoning our values as peacebuilders. It’s simply about translating peace into terms that new partners understand. And helping them see what we’ve always known—that peace is a strategic force multiplier for every other aspect of life that we care about.

Here’s a roadmap for how we can make this case.

1. Know Your Investor: Who Might Fund Peace?

With the collapse of USAID and USIP, a buckling UN, and other sources of government spending that have traditionally funded peacebuilding projects under threat, we know we need “new funding models.”

But the peacebuilding community hasn’t yet spelled out who exactly those new funders might actually be (at least, not that I’ve seen). So let’s get specific. And once we have a basic understanding of who, we figure out how to engage them.

Investments in peace can come from a range of actors beyond traditional government and inter-governmental donors:

• Philanthropic foundations: Perhaps the most obvious and comparable to what we are familiar with, these funders are increasingly moving toward systems-level change, trust-based giving, and long-term impact. Some, like Humanity United or the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, already support peace and governance initiatives. Others are just starting to explore peace. Many have established funding cycles, so good to do homework now to identify when organizations are making decisions.

• Impact investors: These are mission-aligned investors who seek both financial return and measurable social or environmental impact. Many already fund adjacent sectors like inclusive economic growth, refugee livelihoods, and women’s empowerment—all of which intersect with peace.

• Catalytic capital funders: These include philanthropic funders like the MacArthur Foundation, as well as financial tools known as ‘impact-first vehicles’—such as catalytic loans, guarantees, or first-loss capital—that help reduce risk and attract additional investment. Their role is to absorb risk, attract co-investors, and unlock private capital for bold or early-stage initiatives. This is a helpful podcast from SOCAP that provides a good overview of catalytic capital and what leading organizations are doing in this space.

• Development finance institutions (DFIs): Also familiar to some peacebuilders, organizations like the International Finance Corporation, Africa Development Bank, and InterAmerican Development Bank invest in private sector growth in developing countries—including conflict-affected ones. DFIs have a mandate for both returns and impact, and are often open to blended finance models (public-private sector funding).

• ESG and sustainability-aligned investors: These actors are responding to regulations (like the EU taxonomy for sustainable activities) and public pressure to better assess the social and governance impacts of their portfolios. Peacebuilding connects directly to key ESG themes: human rights, inclusive governance, conflict-sensitive supply chains.

• Corporate Social Responsibility funding and social venture arms: Some corporations may want to invest in peacebuilding work because it aligns with their brand, supply chain security, or workforce stability. Think of telecoms operating in post-conflict zones, or mining firms facing community grievances.

• Private sector businesses: Companies operating in fragile states (or really, I would argue, anywhere) have a direct stake in peace—their operations depend on stability, secure supply chains, community goodwill, and regulatory predictability. Some are beginning to see peace as material to their business continuity and reputation, especially in sectors like extractives, telecom, logistics, and agri-business.

A bit more about entry points for peacebuilding in the private sector:

We know that companies operating in fragile and conflict-affected contexts have a direct financial and legal stake in peace. Their operations depend on community trust, workforce stability, reliable infrastructure, and secure supply chains. But increasingly, they are also being held accountable—by law and by investors—for how their actions affect conflict dynamics and human rights.

Under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and new European regulations like the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), companies are expected to conduct heightened human rights due diligence (hHRDD) when working in conflict-affected or high-risk areas. This includes:

• Conducting conflict analysis as part of risk assessments

• Identifying relationships with state or non-state actors that may violate human rights

• Avoiding complicity in forced labor, surveillance, or militarized economies

• Preventing their operations from exacerbating instability

Companies that ignore these obligations face growing pressure from investors, regulators, and civil society, as outlined the recent reports Navigating Portfolio Exposure to Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas. Those that engage responsibly can gain first-mover advantage, avoid reputational crises, and become part of the solution.

For peacebuilders, this opens up new space to partner with companies on hHRDD, conflict sensitivity, stakeholder engagement, and more—turning compliance pressure into shared value creation.

Many peacebuilders may already be working with some of these actors and can help the broader community understand their respective goals. Some want financial returns with social benefits, while others are looking for social impact with risk mitigation. A few just want to avoid making things worse.

If we want their partnership, we have to understand their incentives.

2. Speak Their Language: Turn Peace Into an Investment Case, Responsibly

Now that we have a general idea about potential new funding partners, let’s talk about how to engage with them successfully.

Peacebuilders are used to making the case for our work based on social impact, public goods, and moral grounds. But businesses and investors are thinking about value, risk, and return when they’re deciding on what to fund. Many report to boards of directors who want to know what their return on investment is.

Successful partnership will depend on learning how to communicate with one another, and here are 2 ideas to get started.

First, we can translate peace into investor language

There are several ways to translate our work into the language new funding partners already understand. For example:

• Reduced community violence → lower security costs and greater operational stability

• Social cohesion → conditions for business expansion, trust in institutions, and consumer growth

• Trauma recovery and reintegration → improved workforce readiness and productivity

• Conflict-sensitive development → reduced reputational and regulatory risk (not to mention that I’d imagine most leaders would sleep better at night knowing their products, services, or operations aren’t fueling instability or violence.)

• Inclusive governance → more predictable operating environments and stronger investor confidence

Investors aren’t asking for idealist utopias. They’re asking: Will my investment survive and grow in this context? Peacebuilders do have answers to that question—most of us just aren’t used to thinking about our work in this way.

But there’s a caution here.

As peace becomes more attractive to funders and investors, we risk peace-washing—where investments are branded with “peace,” but are not actually delivering any meaningful impact. Just as ESG has struggled with greenwashing, peace investing must guard against the same trap. Luckily, really smart people are already thinking about this and providing tools and resources to prevent or mitigate peace-washing.

The +P Framework, developed by the Peace Dividend Initiative, is one such tool.

The framework offers a structured, responsible way to align investment with real peace outcomes. It avoids vague claims about peace by grounding impact in clear, evidence-based practices. The approach is centered on a few core components:

• Due Diligence for Peace: Going beyond basic ESG screening, this requires conflict analysis and a deep understanding of local dynamics before deploying capital. It means engaging peacebuilders early—not retrofitting them later.

• Adaptive Strategy for Peace: Recognizing the fluid nature of conflict contexts, the +P Framework calls for iterative approaches that can adapt investment strategies in real time as the peace landscape shifts.

• Results for Peace: This component encourages us to define, measure, and report on concrete peace outcomes: reduced violence, improved intergroup trust, stronger institutions, or other locally relevant metrics of positive peace (because as peacebuilders know, the absence of violence does not automatically mean there is peace).

By applying this framework, we can help investors avoid tokenism by showing what meaningful, measurable peace contributions actually look like.

Second, we can help define what investable peace looks like

Not every peacebuilding initiative will be investable—and that’s okay.

But many are. In fact, a central peacebuilding practice to bridge community members in conflict is to engage in joint livelihood projects (e.g., Interpeace’s Livelihoods for Peace approach, or Catholic Relief Services’ Connector Projects approach). So many peacebuilders are already working very closely to how these new funding partners might approach the problem set, we just haven’t learned to pitch our work this way.

Here are some types of peacebuilding work that could attract investment:

• Youth employment and entrepreneurship initiatives in conflict-affected areas that offer alternatives to violence and political instability

• Cross-community cooperatives that generate income while building social trust and cooperation between divided groups

• Mental health services that enable survivors to return to productive economic and social life

• Infrastructure or public services designed with a conflict prevention lens—such as equitable access to water or land

• Social enterprises led by women or returnees that reduce recidivism or support reintegration

To get more capital to flow into peace initiatives, we need to design and communicate with investability in mind. We can sharpen our value proposition and hold ourselves to high standards of impact demanded by the peacebuilding mission. And we can break out of the projectized model that hasn’t really worked for building durable peace.

This is an obvious win-win for all involved.

3. Upskilling: What Peacebuilders Need to Learn

If we want to attract investment—or even start peace-positive ventures of our own—we have to prepare the space.

That starts with adding fluency (or at least basic competencies) in some new languages: business, finance, and investment. As peacebuilders, we know how important communication is, and some basic learning helps us do just that—become better communicators. This, in turn, earns us credibility and the confidence to sit with new partners at new tables.

Some basics we need to understand:

• How investment decisions are made (what do funders and investors actually look for?)

• What drives them (risk, return, impact metrics, portfolio balance, accountability)

• How to speak their language (“value proposition,” “value for investment,” and “pitch deck,” not just “theory of change”)

• How to co-design initiatives with financial and legal partners—not just policy or development ones

Some peacebuilders will want to go deep: launching their own ventures, raising capital, or joining blended finance consortia. Others may choose to engage with finance-savvy partners. But all of us need to understand the basics—not just to access funding, but to shape how peace gets built into the future.

This upskilling is within reach, thanks to an emerging ecosystem of resources and support:

• Courses on impact investing, blended finance, catalytic capital, and social enterprise

• Communities and networks like the Global Impact Investing Network, Investor Alliance for Human Rights, Toniic, and Peace Finance Hub

• Toolkits, standards, and frameworks (like the +P Framework or OECD guidance on fragile contexts or Finance for Peace’s Standards) to help translate peace outcomes into investment-ready language

These resources help us seize the opportunity presented by the disruption to our field to improve the way we’ve been working.

The Bottom Line

Peace underpins everything we want to achieve in development, business, and governance.

It reduces risk, unlocks growth, and stabilizes fragile systems. The opportunity in this disruption era is clear: if we can translate what we know into what others need, we can bring peace to new tables. And build it at scales that match the challenges we face.

As the old tables collapse, we’ve got to pull up our chairs to new ones—and make sure peace has a voice, a value, and a viable return.