This study aims to clarify the role of actionism as a peacebuilding tool, identify the advantages and disadvantages of its various techniques (performance, happening, art installation, flash mob, etc.), and evaluate their effectiveness in the urbanized space. The research methodology is based on postmodernism and its comprehension of activism, public action and protest. Anti-war actionism is considered an element of the system of socio-political actionism. It is characterized as a set of spectacular forms of non-violent public protest against armed aggression and its consequences. The expansion of today’s anti-war actionism beyond the narrow artistic environment and its entrance into the broad social dimension is demonstrated. The empirical basis for the conceptualization of anti-war actionism includes two groups of actions: (1) anti-war actions carried out since the 1960s in the United States and Western Europe; (2) anti-war actions carried out in various countries in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The regional features of anti-war actionism under the conditions of armed conflicts and wars are determined, and the advantages and disadvantages of anti-war actionism as a peacebuilding technology are identified within the space of modern cities.
Local communities worldwide rely on cultural values, and Indigenous institutions to recover from social conflict; however, the process by which social awareness is constructed as a peacebuilding mechanism remains insufficiently theorised, particularly in post-colonial island societies. This study examines how social awareness is constructed and mobilised in resolving recurring social conflicts in the Kei Islands, Maluku, Indonesia. Employing a qualitative phenomenological approach, data were collected through in-depth interviews and observations involving community leaders, customary elders, religious figures, and local residents. The findings reveal six interrelated forms of social awareness – sense of brotherhood, participation in joint activities, social interaction, problem-solving through deliberation, the ability to listen and communicate, and tolerance – which collectively shape everyday peace practices in the community. Drawing on Berger and Luckmann’s theory of social construction, this study demonstrates that while processes of internalisation and externalisation are increasingly challenged by modernisation and social pressures, objectification through strong customary institutions functions as the primary stabilising anchor in conflict resolution. The study extends social construction theory by proposing a communal–institutional variation, in which collective institutions play a corrective role in sustaining social cohesion. These findings underscore the importance of strengthening Indigenous institutions and culturally embedded practices in locally grounded peacebuilding initiatives.