Much academic and practitioner literature has placed an emphasis on the need to capture ‘local voices’ in societies experiencing conlict and transitions out of conlict1. The rationale behind this is that ‘local voices’ will be authentic and truly relect the needs and aspirations of local populations. Listening to these voices, the thinking goes, will result in better and more sustainable peacebuilding and conlict-transformation policy. There has been something of a rediscovery of all things local among many peacebuilding donors, international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) and non governmental organizations (NGOs) who share the belief that ‘local ownership’ and ‘local participation’ provide the key to sensitive programming.