[...]. With his academic background in mathematics and sociology, Galtung was not only an exceptionally creative theorist but also actively applied his ideas in practice. This is evident in his successful interventions that helped facilitate negotiations between states that had been stalled for years. I had the privilege of getting to know Johan quite well during his time at Cesare Alfieri when he accepted my invitation to attend a series of meetings focused on Peace Research. I published The Nature and Orientations of Peace Research in 1978, to which Norberto Bobbio contributed, and I was eager to hear Johan’s perspective. What stood out was the enthusiasm he conveyed to his audience, even when, at times, he spoke in a language other than his own - Italian, to be precise. The manner of his teaching revealed a genuine missionary spirit. [...]

In contrast to the journalism defined as “war journalism”, “peace journalism” is entrusted with a delicate and crucial task: to go beyond, to transcend – in line with Galtung's theoretical framework – the reasons, dynamics, concepts, and sources closely linked to a war-oriented perspective, and to lay the foundations for mechanisms of understanding and the construction of solid peace scenarios. The objective of this work is to highlight the essential elements of the peace journalism paradigm, capturing its innovative content and the critical issues that have emerged in the scientific debate, comparing them with some of the central themes of media and journalism reflection, as well as with trends in textual analysis and critical discourse analysis, in order to contribute to an assessment of the prospects and relevance of Galtung's proposal.

This article applies Johan Galtung’s “Conflict Triangle” theory—traditionally used to analyze state and inter-group conflicts—to the underexplored realm of organized crime, with a focus on gender dynamics. Centering on the Ascione Clan, a Camorra group in Italy, it examines the often-overlooked roles women play in perpetuating and challenging violence within criminal organizations. Through qualitative analysis of secondary sources, the study highlights figures like Antonella Madonna and the mother of Natale Dantese, revealing how women, typically seen as marginal, are central to the clan’s operations and power structures. The research illustrates how cultural norms, structural inequalities, and direct violence interact to sustain the Camorra’s patriarchal systems. It particularly traces Madonna’s transformation from a participant to a leader and eventual collaborator with law enforcement, showcasing the complex relationship between gender, power, and resistance. By extending Galtung’s framework to the micro-level of organized crime, the study reveals its broader applicability in understanding gender-based violence. Combining insights from peace studies and political anthropology, it offers a nuanced analysis of how gender functions as both a stabilizing and destabilizing force in criminal organizations, urging future research to further explore these intersections within non-state violent entities.

Violence in Africa has often been analyzed through sociological, economic, political, and international relations lenses, while rarely through Johan Galtung’s Structural Violence framework. Yet, Galtung provides a more nuanced understanding of the region’s megatrends. This paper explores the relevance of his theory, particularly in the Sahel, by drawing from his 1969 work Violence, Peace, and Peace Research. Structural violence focuses on systemic and institutional factors—such as inequality, ethnic domination, weak governance, and lack of the rule of law—that fuel unrest beyond direct physical violence. In the Sahel, these structural conditions have led to political instability, social unrest, coups, climate vulnerability, unemployment, and widespread suffering. Deprivation and marginalization become fertile ground for conflict. The paper argues that deviant political leadership and poor arms control are both products and drivers of these embedded structural issues. It also examines how climate change, as a “violence multiplier,” worsens instability and undermines adaptation strategies. While Galtung’s framework has limitations, especially when used in isolation, it offers a valuable lens for understanding violence rooted in colonial legacies, inequality, and political dysfunction. Structural, direct, and cultural violence are interlinked, necessitating holistic approaches for addressing violence in diverse geopolitical contexts.

Although Galtung is best known for his research on peace and conflict resolution strategies, his work also extensively addresses the issue of violence. In particular, he is credited with expanding the understanding of violence beyond physical aggression, identifying its cultural and structural dimensions. His analysis of structural violence has been especially significant, contributing to the work of scholars across various disciplines in examining systemic inequalities. However, Galtung’s concept of structural violence has also been criticized. In short, the literature suggests that it is too vague, with the relationships between power, inequality, and harm becoming blurred. This paper seeks to address these shortcomings, particularly by clarifying the characteristics of structural violence and its connection to power relations. This will establish a connection between structural violence and Foucault’s concept of states of domination - namely, specific arrangements of power relations marked by the lack of freedom. These clarifications will also enable a brief review of Galtung’s violence triangle, with a particular focus on the relationship between structural and direct violence.

Johan Galtung occupies a unique and foundational position in the field of Peace and Conflict Studies. Over more than six decades, his work has shaped Peace Research as both a scholarly discipline and a form of praxis. His contributions span conflict mediation, international relations, sociology and cultural analysis, but he is perhaps best known for two enduring conceptual frameworks: the distinction between positive and negative peace, and the Violence Triangle. These concepts did not merely introduce new terminology—they fundamentally redefined how scholars and practitioners understand the causes of conflict, systems of domination, and the prospects for sustainable peace. This special issue is dedicated to critically revisiting and creatively applying Galtung’s ideas, particularly in response to contemporary challenges. In a world marked by increasingly complex forms of violence—ranging from organized crime and gender-based oppression to climate instability and cultural polarization—it is crucial to reassess the conceptual tools we use to analyze and transform these realities. While Galtung’s frameworks have been critiqued, they remain strikingly relevant. The contributions in this issue explore his legacy through theoretical refinement, empirical analysis, and interdisciplinary dialogue, offering new insights into how Peace Research can respond to today's most pressing issues.

The paper examines how the war in Ukraine is impacting the Ottawa and Oslo Conventions. It discusses how Finland, Poland, and the Baltic Republics withdrew from the agreements between 2024 and 2025. They did this because of strategic needs and self-defence, as a response to the threat from Russia. The article reconstructs the legal basis for these decisions, highlighting the regulatory implications and tensions between national sovereignty and international obligations. The article also explores the role of the military industry and the global production of anti-personnel mines. Despite the predominance of Asian companies, the widespread use of this type of weapon in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and the US supply to Ukraine represent two dangerous precedents that risk undermining the legitimacy of international humanitarian law and the process of universalising ICW treaties.

The “Battle of the Sexes” (BoS) game is often used to illustrate the challenges of coordination in competitive situations. However, when reading Luce and Raiffa (1957), who introduced this game, one notices that the narrative they propose does not perfectly align with the payoffs they uses. What happens if the payoffs are modified to better reflect their narrative? How can the game be modified to yield other equilibria, thereby allowing to interpret a wider range of real-life coordination problems? By explicitly introducing an utility function, we propose a general framework that addresses these questions and broaden the educational message that is conveyed.

The crisis of the modern paradigm of justice has given rise to a new imago Iustitiae: the restorative justice. This essay examines several genealogical trajectories underlying this new model, which first emerged in theoretical discourse during the 1980s. The analysis explores restorative justice as both a theoretical and practical approach that radically departs from the purely retributive function of punishment. It is oriented toward the reparation and reconstruction of relational and social bonds, placing the victim at the center of the process. In particular, the essay reconstructs two collateral but illuminating trajectories that contribute to a more complex understanding of restorative justice. First, through feminist literature on vulnerability, a notion of the victim is delineated — one that is intimately connected to the restorative justice revolution. Second, the relationship between neoliberal governmentality and restorative justice is examined.

This contribution examines the issue of family reunification for Unaccompanied Foreign Minors (UFMs), focusing on the key challenges in Italian and European legislation. Specifically, it analyzes the implementation of Law No. 47/2017 and the Dublin III Regulation, highlighting the procedural complexities arising from the absence of standardized protocols and the fragmented responsibilities among different authorities. The study underscores the need for enhanced training programs for voluntary guardians and professionals in the sector to improve case management and ensure the minors’ best interests. Ultimately, the analysis calls for stronger institutional coordination and more efficient service integration to guarantee the effective protection of UFMs’ rights.