"The Peace Process in the Streets": Public Expectations From the Good Friday Agreement and the Impact of Unsatisfied Expectations and the Unjustified Suffering of the Past on the Stability of the Peace Process in Northern Ireland

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the extent to which the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland has been successful in addressing the fundamental public expectations on the ground in order to achieve broad based public support, particularly within demographic zones in which violence has sustained after the peace-Agreement. The main hypothesis in this study argues that durability and stability of a peace process depends on felt (noticeable and practical) tangible improvements on the ground, leading the majority on the ground to perceive improvement in conditions, compared to what they had endured prior to the Agreement.

There were four steps involved in this. The first involved an exploration of public expectations from the peace process within direct and indirect zones of conflict. Direct zones were defined as demographic areas, in which violence throughout the conflict has had a high impact on residents and indirect zones are areas, in which the effects of violence had been less or indirect. The second involved the evaluation of the expectations and perceptions of satisfaction from the peace Agreement. The third step involved an analysis of perceptions of suffering endured throughout the conflict period. The final step involved the analysis of the impact of these perceptions on the stability of the peace process.

The subjects of this study were non-"Track I", non-elite residents of conflict zones divided into direct and indirect areas in Northern Ireland. Open ended in-depth interviews were applied to explore the perceived expectations, suffering and levels of satisfaction with the peace process.

The findings demonstrated that people's expectations of the peace Agreement varied demographically and were influenced by the experience and impact of the conflict. People in direct zones had different expectations compared to indirect zones. Results also demonstrated that perceptions of peace benefits and satisfaction of expectations varied demographically. People effected demographically the most by the conflict and violence, were the people benefiting the least , in the post Agreement period. With regards to whether the peace Agreement had led to the justification of past suffering and sacrifices, the findings were mixed. Residents in both zones (direct and indirect) did not consider that their suffering endured in the conflict could ever be justified. It was argued that this could be because the peace Agreement had not led to a stable and secure society. The study concluded by presenting various indicators of discontent which could impact the stability of the peace process, unless the disparity caused by the peace process is addressed.