CONCLUSION
Constructivist approaches to conflict confirm genuine reasons for optimism about the possibilities of conflict transformation: if war and conflict are socially constructed by human beings and maintained through inter- subjective meanings and actions, then they can also be deconstructed and transformed through similar kinds of processes and actions.
This chapter has attempted to show some of the ways in which constructivist approaches to war, conflict and conflict resolution can contribute to, and complement, present understandings of these important phenomena. However, notwithstanding the obvious potentialities of constructivist theories and methods, it remains an approach to social research that has generated a number of useful findings rather than any substantive theory of political action (Fearon and Laitin, 2000: 847-8). It has also been argued that constructivist research in conflict adds little that is new or unique; rather, it is largely confirmatory of a great deal of existing research, particularly from the peace studies sub-field.The primary contributions of constructivism are, first, to challenge the dominant views of conflict and conflict resolution within the IR-based international conflict management sub-field - to provide an alternative ontology and set of analytical tools through which to generate new questions and understandings of conflict processes at the international level. Second, constructivism can add more elaborate social theory and greater empirical detail about the microphysics of the social construction of conflict to existing research. Lastly, constructivism challenges the broader conflict resolution field to exhibit a greater critical reflexivity and sensitivity to the interaction of theory and practice and uses to which conflict resolution knowledge is put. For all these reasons, constructivism should be viewed as a welcome addition to the existing heterogeneity of methodologies and approaches of the broader conflict resolution field, and its key insights should be utilized in the evaluation of research findings, particularly in terms of international conflict.