The report explores what has prevented donor-led stabilisation efforts from achieving their stated purpose, despite having become the dominant international approach to reducing conflict and building peace in fragile areas. The paper provides an overview of current stabilisation practices, identifying key challenges and potential opportunities for improvement and better collaboration between military, civilian, diplomatic, security, and peace-building actors. Our research shows that working from incomplete conflict analyses and incorrectly rushing to stabilise the most contested areas first has caused interventions to stall, miring actors in inhospitable areas, and displacing rather than addressing the drivers of instability. In introducing the current stabilisation toolbox with its limitations, the report hopes to contribute to much-needed donor reforms at a time when getting interventions wrong is becoming increasingly costly, above all for those living in conflict-affected environments.