As contemporary armed conflicts become increasingly complex, peacebuilding actors have been unable to prevent or respond effectively to related crises. Considering the policy trends evoked by the United Nations sustaining peace agenda and contextspecific peacebuilding theories, this article examines peacebuilding initiatives amid complex contexts in Syria and Mozambique. It argues that the adaptive approaches of the National Agenda for the Future of Syria and the architecture of the negotiations surrounding the new peace process in Mozambique represent examples of contextspecific, innovative, and non-linear peacebuilding methods that foster the selforganization capabilities of the respective conflict-affected societies. It concludes by asserting that through pragmatism, local and national ownership, and process facilitation, there is an increased potential for the effectiveness of peacebuilding interventions in complex conflict-affect situations.

The Syrian refugee crisis is characterized by the gap between refugees’ needs and donors’ expectations as humanitarian organizations struggle to meet emergency and development needs. The perspectives of eleven field workers from three levels of field management in the Zaatari and Azraq refugee camps in Jordan shed light on the field dynamics that contribute to this gap. I argue that the expectations gap in humanitarian operations is widened by the inability of humanitarian organizations to accurately communicate refugees’ needs to donors due to a lack of regular and professional needs assessments. Disparities within organizations regarding understanding contexts, adherence to rigid operational standards, and the need to address stressors on the ground also reinforce power imbalances within humanitarian operations and widen the expectations gap. Two effective responses for managing this gap are transparency with refugees and donor flexibility.