Researchers matched sections of 10 villages into pairs and randomized one section in each pair into a treatment group and the other into a control group. They collected data on individuals residing in villages within these sections using original surveys designed for the evaluation. They measured social capital outcomes by measuring individuals’ social networks and contributions to public goods. They also used an inventory of questions that are commonly used in the psychology literature—including those that are designed to measure respondents’ feelings of anger and resentment toward a potential offender. They measured outcomes at three different durations: 9 months, 19 months, and 31 months after the interventions.
The study revealed that reconciliation had both positive and negative consequences. It led to greater forgiveness of perpetrators and strengthened social capital: Social networks were larger, and people contributed more to public goods in treated villages. However, these benefits came at a substantial cost: The reconciliation treatment also worsened psychological health, increasing depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder in these same villages. These results show that the effects, both positive and negative, persisted into the longer time horizon.
The study shows that war casts a long shadow, and people do not self-heal: Reconciliation processes conducted 10 years after the end of the civil conflict led to greater forgiveness and higher social capital, suggesting the need for reconciliation still remained. At the same time, recounting war experiences from 10 years prior still had the ability to undermine psychological well-being. These results suggest that post-conflict reconciliation has the power to help communities heal, but policymakers should find ways of restructuring these processes to minimize the psychological costs while retaining the societal benefits.