The Russia-Ukraine war has inflicted severe damage on infrastructure, disrupted economic stability, and displaced communities. While international stakeholders have committed extensive financial and technical assistance to Ukraine’s reconstruction, top-down strategies alone may not suffice. This study examines the role of horizontal civil society networks—decentralized, grassroots coalitions of organizations and individuals—as essential drivers of an inclusive, resilient, and sustainable recovery. It also explores their interactions with external actors and their impact on governance, resource allocation, and social cohesion during and after the war. This research examines the critical role of horizontal civil society networks in Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction, focusing on their contributions to resilience, governance, and social cohesion. These decentralized grassroots organizations play a vital role in shaping an inclusive and sustainable recovery process. The research explores how these networks interact with external aid efforts, influence resource distribution, and contribute to long-term social and economic stability in Ukraine. It documents pre-war and wartime, offering empirical evidence on the effectiveness of grassroots networks in post-conflict environments. The findings provide policy recommendations to help national and international actors incorporate these networks into broader reconstruction strategies. Ultimately, the study aims to support a more participatory and sustainable rebuilding model that can be applied both in Ukraine and in other post-conflict settings worldwide. Keywords: Ukraine, post-war reconstruction, civil society, horizontal networks, governance, resilience, social cohesion, grassroots organizations, participatory recovery, post-conflict development.

There is a growing consensus in the literature that Ukrainian civil society is exceptionally resilient compared to other post-communist states (Worschech 2017) – and that the Russian invasion has given a major boost to Ukrainian civil society organizations (Zarembo & Martin 2024). However, interest group research – as a key sub-discipline of political science – has so far overlooked Ukraine. This is surprising due to Ukraine’s tumultuous political trajectory, but above all the resilience, agility and political clout attested to Ukrainian civil society organizations. At the same time, Ukraine is a particularly fascinating case of large-scale political and institutional democratization amid the reality of a full-scale war of aggression. This present a highly unique, but potentially treacherous lobbying environment. Based on Lowery’s theory of lobbying (2017) and a large survey of nationally active Ukrainian interest groups which I am currently conducting, I aim to convey a better understanding how different types of Ukrainian interest groups assert their demands, engage with policy-makers, manage their membership base and resources, and ultimately influence policy-making against the background of three major critical junctures: the Euromaidan revolution (since 2014), the ongoing large-scale political decentralization process (since 2014) and the outbreak of a full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine. I first present data on the foundation rates of various types of Ukrainian interest groups, e.g., employers/employees, anti-corruption and pro-democracy groups, ethnic-religious associations, environmental and social policy organizations, etc. Based on this, I explore how organizational populations have developed amid the recent critical junctures of Ukrainian history. Drawing on Lowery’s theory of lobbying (2017), I then present survey data on four key dimensions of interest group activities in war-time Ukraine 1) organizational “niche-seeking”, 2) engagement with policy-makers and multi-level lobbying, 3) inter-group cooperation strategies and 4) and organizational development over time. Under what conditions are Ukrainian interest groups carving out new ideological or policy niches? Under what conditions do organizations choose to “fight” and when do they opt to “flight”? (Junk et al 2024). What types of organizations have boosted coalition-building strategies with like-minded groups? (Dobbins & Labanino 2024). Do what extent have ongoing processes of democratization, decentralization and full-scale war enhanced internal organizational democratization and professionalization?

We know from studies such as Visible Learning that the teacher–student relationship has a strong effect on students’ learning and well-being (Hattie, 2009; Hattie & Zierer, 2018). With this study, we support the central role that teachers play in students’ lives, while shifting the emphasis toward the teacher as a navigator in times of war and forced displacement. Drawing on our international study within the Erasmus project Act4Mig: A Course for Teachers on Forced Migration, with a particular focus on Eastern Central Europe, we present data from interviews with Ukrainian teachers who remained in Ukraine during the war. Our analysis indicates that these teachers are taking on new responsibilities and increasingly becoming key figures in existential decision-making processes – namely, whether families remain in Ukraine, emigrate, or return after having left. In doing so, teachers are staying attuned to emotional vulnerability of parents, frequently encounter complex family situations and provide informal support to children and parents returning to Ukraine, whether to reunite families or to navigate separation. The findings highlight teachers as key relational and ethical navigators and anchors in contexts of war and forced migration, sustaining family ties, educational continuity, and a sense of belonging across borders. Our contribution therefore explicitly engages with the chronified uncertainties experienced by Ukrainian families (Herbst & Sitek, 2025; Chargaziia & Panchenko, 2025), as well as with mental health challenges documented among children, adolescents, and adults (Lushchak et al., 2024; Yasenok et al., 2025). We explore how teachers navigate these uncertainties and foster agency among their students despite extreme circumstances. We conclude by offering recommendations for supporting teachers in these new, demanding, and emotionally burdensome roles.

We know from studies such as Visible Learning that the teacher–student relationship has a strong effect on students’ learning and well-being (Hattie, 2009; Hattie & Zierer, 2018). With this study, we support the central role that teachers play in students’ lives, while shifting the emphasis toward the teacher as a navigator in times of war and forced displacement. Drawing on our international study within the Erasmus project Act4Mig: A Course for Teachers on Forced Migration, with a particular focus on Eastern Central Europe, we present data from interviews with Ukrainian teachers who remained in Ukraine during the war. Our analysis indicates that these teachers are taking on new responsibilities and increasingly becoming key figures in existential decision-making processes – namely, whether families remain in Ukraine, emigrate, or return after having left. In doing so, teachers are staying attuned to emotional vulnerability of parents, frequently encounter complex family situations and provide informal support to children and parents returning to Ukraine, whether to reunite families or to navigate separation. The findings highlight teachers as key relational and ethical navigators and anchors in contexts of war and forced migration, sustaining family ties, educational continuity, and a sense of belonging across borders. Our contribution therefore explicitly engages with the chronified uncertainties experienced by Ukrainian families (Herbst & Sitek, 2025; Chargaziia & Panchenko, 2025), as well as with mental health challenges documented among children, adolescents, and adults (Lushchak et al., 2024; Yasenok et al., 2025). We explore how teachers navigate these uncertainties and foster agency among their students despite extreme circumstances. We conclude by offering recommendations for supporting teachers in these new, demanding, and emotionally burdensome roles.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has shattered the “certainties” of the post–Cold War order, thrusting Ukrainian society into radical existential uncertainty. This paper argues that the societal effects of large-scale violence transcend mere emergency adaptation. Instead, they constitute a profound process of normalizing the extraordinary through the consolidation of war frames -cognitive, normative, and institutional mechanisms of sense-making. Drawing on framing theory, the paper conceptualizes war frames as a form of social scaffolding that translates unpredictability into a structured social reality. These frames reorganize radical indeterminacy into a bounded horizon of expectations. Central to the analysis is the transition from initial shock to routinized resilience, where uncertainty becomes a permanent background condition rather than an episodic disruption. The paper identifies three dimensions through which new social “certainties” are constructed: 1. Reframing everyday life. Wartime disruptions (air raids, blackouts, displacement) are incorporated into stabilized civic routines. This mitigates social atomization and sustains collective agency under permanent threat. 2. Transnational social reproduction. Forced displacement is reconceptualized as a structural reconfiguration of the national social body across borders. Through remittances, volunteering, and diaspora networks, Ukrainians abroad become active agents of social and symbolic reproduction, counteracting the fragmenting effects of war. 3. Normative consolidation. Democratic orientation emerges as a consciously chosen normative anchor. Civic democracy functions as a political frame providing moral clarity in contrast to the arbitrariness and coercion of the invading autocratic order. Empirically, the paper synthesizes longitudinal survey data (IS NASU, KIIS, Razumkov Center) with findings from original research conducted between 2023 and 2026. The findings demonstrate that wartime “certainty” is derived not from stability per se, but from the persistence of civic norms and the routinization of collective practices. The paper concludes that the normalization of life under fire constitutes a distinct form of social agency. In contexts of radical uncertainty, the stabilization of meaning and expectations becomes a central mechanism of societal resilience - one that operates through the reconfiguration of uncertainty itself.

Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine has produced a prolonged environment of institutional disruption and personal uncertainty, raising urgent questions about how academic work and well-being evolve under sustained crisis. Our study examines the intensification and changing structure of burnout among Ukrainian academic staff across three survey waves (July 2022, January 2023, January 2024; total N = 1,493), using the Maslach Burnout Inventory to assess emotional exhaustion (EE), depersonalization (DP), and personal accomplishment (PA). The prevalence of high EE increased markedly from 49.5% in Wave 1 to 71.8% in Wave 3, while high DP rose from 32.9% to 59.4%, indicating a cumulative erosion of occupational well-being under protracted stress. In contrast, PA showed a divergent pattern: low PA declined from 22.0% to 13.0%, and high PA increased from 45.7% to 59.9%, suggesting that for a growing share of staff, professional meaning and efficacy may coexist with severe exhaustion and cynicism in wartime conditions. Regression results further indicate that institutional relocation is associated with lower burnout levels, whereas migration status and sustained war-related stress predict higher burnout across dimensions. Taken together, the findings suggest that burnout symptoms have become more generalized at the population level over time, while organizational arrangements (e.g., relocation and reconfiguration of work) can partially buffer risk. The paper concludes by outlining implications for crisis-ready university governance and targeted, non-clinical institutional interventions to support academic resilience in conflict-affected environments.