Conflict. Chap 17 "Problem Solving"
This chapter discusses problem solving processes and distinguishes them from legal processes, bargaining and negotiation. Mitchell discusses the value of these types of processes - they deal with trying to find underlying issues. Problem-solving processes seek to change the perception of conflict from a win-lose battle of one side against another to a mutual problem that needs to be solved. Mitchell discusses the need to avoid fault-finding activity and blaming the other side. He also emphasizes the importance of setting in problem-solving strategies along with the idea of expanding the pie. In regards to timing, he brings up Zartman's idea of ripeness. He says that different processes of problem-solving at different levels can be more useful at different times. He also concedes that there is not much known about how to judge exactly what time is the best time to intervene.
In this chapter, Mitchell discusses the idea that fault should not be found with parties for several reasons. One reason that was especially interesting was that "those involved often do genuinely perceive that they have llittle alternative to courses of action that, ultimately, make things 'worse'". This reminded me of Kohlberg's idea that moral reasoning should be evaluated based on the reasoning behind an action, not on the action itself. This suggests that it is important for us to keep in mind that parties may have relatively acceptable or at least understandable reasoning behind seemingly appalling actions. Although this doesn't make the actions acceptable, it does require us to take a deeper look. It makes it more difficult, if not impossible to place blame. If we are to blame the party that had the most evil intentions, how do we measure that? It's not really possible, nor is it worthwhile. Instead, finding out why parties were in a situation where they were driven to act against each other and if there is an underlying problem in their society that caused the conflict, is much more feasible and probably more useful. Overall, I liked this chapter and thought it provided a lot of useful information. Mitchell ties in many different concepts and shows how they can be used in problem-solving techniques or their role in conflict to validify the use of such techniques in conflict resolution.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
April 28: Multiparty Conflicts
Bunker. Deutsch et al: The Handbook of Conflict Resolution. Ch 33 "Managing conflict through large group methods"
This chapter gives an overview of a specific style of conflict management - large group methods. These different methods give practitioners a way of dealing with group conflict through working with the "whole system". They are used to create changes within businesses or communities - a new strategic direction, redesigning work for increased productivity, or resolving a system-wide problem. Three types of methods are: 1. Methods for Creating the Future; 2. Methods of Work Design; and 3. Methods for Discussion and Decision Making. In future-oriented methods, the event is planned by a group from the system (business, community, etc) with guidance from an expert in the method. This method focuses on developing common ground so that groups can work toward setting goals for the future. Not much attention is placed on conflict resolution, though it is important to recognize conflict and take it seriously. In Methods of Work Design, those who have a stake in how work is done are involved. The author writes that, "The underlying principle here again is that there is a great deal of wisdom and experience in the people who do the work and deliver the service." This shows why large group methods can be useful in work design. One method of work design that is unique is "Participate Design". This method works from the bottom of the organization up. Management puts boundaries around what kind of changes would be acceptable and employees are in charge of the actual process. Methods for Discussion and Decision Making help diagnose and find solutions to problems. There are several types of methods in this category. One is called "Open Space Technology". In this method, people who come to the meeting create their own agenda. People can come forward with topics and discuss them at the place and time of their choice. Others can choose which discussions they would like to attend and summaries are posted on a "Community Bulletin Board".
I really liked this chapter because it gave a lot of new information. I like the idea of using large group methods for certain types of conflicts involving communities and businesses. In class we've talked about people being more satisfied with a resolution if they feel the process is fair. I think using large group methods correctly could be extremely beneficial in many instances. I like the case study that the author gives because it shows the usefulness of the methods but it also shows that the process may need time to truly be effective and that not everyone will support it or any type of resolution. I really like the "Open Space Technology" method because it is very organized but is really in the hands of the participants. I like that in the case study, the facilitator was simply a teacher for the participants. Once they learned the method and how to use it effectively, they could go through the process on their own. This method allows members of a hierarchical system to gather and discuss issues on equal grounds without the need for outside help (eventually). It is a way of creating a self-sustaining system. This reminds me of the last chapter that I read that dealt with peace-building in post-conflict society. In that chapter, the authors focused on the need to create a nation that could depend upon itself. In this method, the facilitators help a system develop a way for self-dependence.
This chapter gives an overview of a specific style of conflict management - large group methods. These different methods give practitioners a way of dealing with group conflict through working with the "whole system". They are used to create changes within businesses or communities - a new strategic direction, redesigning work for increased productivity, or resolving a system-wide problem. Three types of methods are: 1. Methods for Creating the Future; 2. Methods of Work Design; and 3. Methods for Discussion and Decision Making. In future-oriented methods, the event is planned by a group from the system (business, community, etc) with guidance from an expert in the method. This method focuses on developing common ground so that groups can work toward setting goals for the future. Not much attention is placed on conflict resolution, though it is important to recognize conflict and take it seriously. In Methods of Work Design, those who have a stake in how work is done are involved. The author writes that, "The underlying principle here again is that there is a great deal of wisdom and experience in the people who do the work and deliver the service." This shows why large group methods can be useful in work design. One method of work design that is unique is "Participate Design". This method works from the bottom of the organization up. Management puts boundaries around what kind of changes would be acceptable and employees are in charge of the actual process. Methods for Discussion and Decision Making help diagnose and find solutions to problems. There are several types of methods in this category. One is called "Open Space Technology". In this method, people who come to the meeting create their own agenda. People can come forward with topics and discuss them at the place and time of their choice. Others can choose which discussions they would like to attend and summaries are posted on a "Community Bulletin Board".
I really liked this chapter because it gave a lot of new information. I like the idea of using large group methods for certain types of conflicts involving communities and businesses. In class we've talked about people being more satisfied with a resolution if they feel the process is fair. I think using large group methods correctly could be extremely beneficial in many instances. I like the case study that the author gives because it shows the usefulness of the methods but it also shows that the process may need time to truly be effective and that not everyone will support it or any type of resolution. I really like the "Open Space Technology" method because it is very organized but is really in the hands of the participants. I like that in the case study, the facilitator was simply a teacher for the participants. Once they learned the method and how to use it effectively, they could go through the process on their own. This method allows members of a hierarchical system to gather and discuss issues on equal grounds without the need for outside help (eventually). It is a way of creating a self-sustaining system. This reminds me of the last chapter that I read that dealt with peace-building in post-conflict society. In that chapter, the authors focused on the need to create a nation that could depend upon itself. In this method, the facilitators help a system develop a way for self-dependence.
April 23: Int'l Arena - The Players and the Processes
Conflict. Chap 21: Peace Building
This chapter talked about the role of third parties in peace-building operations in the international arena. The authors argue that the most important and immediate task in post-conflict peace-building is managing short-term relations and preventing a renewal of violence. In order to work toward a peaceful society and conflict resolution, it is important to work toward social reconstruction. Third parties can play a major role in the realms of human rights protection and advocation, development, and physical protection of citizens. While it is helpful and sometimes necessary for third parties to assist in post-conflict societies, it can be dangerous for the future autonomy of the nation itself. When outside nations feed money and resources into a state to help bring about and/or maintain peace, the state can become dependent on the foreign aid. Because of this, it is important for third parties to focus efforts on the restructuring of the society so that it can become self-sustaining. A state that becomes dependent risks falling back into conflict or functioning at the will of other nations.
I didn't think this chapter gave a lot of new information, but it reinforced different ideas that we have learned in the course so far. I liked that the authors stressed the idea that third parties can be helpful and harmful in the ultimate goal of building a restructured peaceful nation in conflict resolution. It seems like a lot of nations are willing to give monetary support to rebuilding nations, but they are much more resistant when it comes to putting in the time and effort necessary for development projects. Do nations use the opportunity to help a nation rebuild in order to make that nation dependent on them? This could be a good short-term strategy, but overall, I think it would be a harmful one. A close connection such as this could drag the supporting nation into unfavorable situations in the future, especially in a world where the international community watches every nation's move very closely.
This chapter talked about the role of third parties in peace-building operations in the international arena. The authors argue that the most important and immediate task in post-conflict peace-building is managing short-term relations and preventing a renewal of violence. In order to work toward a peaceful society and conflict resolution, it is important to work toward social reconstruction. Third parties can play a major role in the realms of human rights protection and advocation, development, and physical protection of citizens. While it is helpful and sometimes necessary for third parties to assist in post-conflict societies, it can be dangerous for the future autonomy of the nation itself. When outside nations feed money and resources into a state to help bring about and/or maintain peace, the state can become dependent on the foreign aid. Because of this, it is important for third parties to focus efforts on the restructuring of the society so that it can become self-sustaining. A state that becomes dependent risks falling back into conflict or functioning at the will of other nations.
I didn't think this chapter gave a lot of new information, but it reinforced different ideas that we have learned in the course so far. I liked that the authors stressed the idea that third parties can be helpful and harmful in the ultimate goal of building a restructured peaceful nation in conflict resolution. It seems like a lot of nations are willing to give monetary support to rebuilding nations, but they are much more resistant when it comes to putting in the time and effort necessary for development projects. Do nations use the opportunity to help a nation rebuild in order to make that nation dependent on them? This could be a good short-term strategy, but overall, I think it would be a harmful one. A close connection such as this could drag the supporting nation into unfavorable situations in the future, especially in a world where the international community watches every nation's move very closely.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
April 21: The Politics of Environmental Disputes
Amy: The Politics of Environmental Mediation
This article addresses the issues inherent in the practice of environmental mediation. Amy discusses why environmentalists face specific troubles with mediation as a technique for conflict resolution. He argues that environmentalists tend to be co-opted in mediation. Amy says characterizes environmentalists as friendly people who lose sight of their values in a process in which relationships are developed. Environmental groups tend to have less power and fewer resources than pro-development groups. They may not even be able to make it to the table if they are not seen as "cloutful" people or groups. Resources may also include expertise. Having expertise can be vital in mediation in coming up with a resolution. Groups without a lot of expertise are more likely to lose out in the end. Amy also argues that by participating in mediation, environmental groups give legitimacy to decisions that are reached. If these decisions are not favorable, it can be harmful.
I like this article. I think Amy makes several good points about the nature of environmental mediation. I do think that this article might be a bit outdated. In recent years, environmental issues have come to the forefront in politics. Environmental groups have earned clout and have gained power in government and in society. Overall, I agree with Amy's conclusion. he says that environmental groups must think about the possible results of entering mediation before they accept it as a resolution process. It might be helpful in some situations but harmful in others. For example, in the case study I did for my project, environmental groups experienced many gains from a mediation-type process and very little success with litigation.
This article addresses the issues inherent in the practice of environmental mediation. Amy discusses why environmentalists face specific troubles with mediation as a technique for conflict resolution. He argues that environmentalists tend to be co-opted in mediation. Amy says characterizes environmentalists as friendly people who lose sight of their values in a process in which relationships are developed. Environmental groups tend to have less power and fewer resources than pro-development groups. They may not even be able to make it to the table if they are not seen as "cloutful" people or groups. Resources may also include expertise. Having expertise can be vital in mediation in coming up with a resolution. Groups without a lot of expertise are more likely to lose out in the end. Amy also argues that by participating in mediation, environmental groups give legitimacy to decisions that are reached. If these decisions are not favorable, it can be harmful.
I like this article. I think Amy makes several good points about the nature of environmental mediation. I do think that this article might be a bit outdated. In recent years, environmental issues have come to the forefront in politics. Environmental groups have earned clout and have gained power in government and in society. Overall, I agree with Amy's conclusion. he says that environmental groups must think about the possible results of entering mediation before they accept it as a resolution process. It might be helpful in some situations but harmful in others. For example, in the case study I did for my project, environmental groups experienced many gains from a mediation-type process and very little success with litigation.
April 16: The Conflict Context
Dukes et al: Putting Ground Rules to Work
This chapter discusses the need to keep groups on the path to higher ground in conflict resolution processes. Dukes et al give different methods for keeping groups focused and for dealing with problems that may be experienced during the process. They advise to "prepare for success as you plan for trouble". In this way, interveners work toward the most desirable end, while acknowledging that the worst could happen. They talk about the importance of developing a plan with the group that describes how the group will deal with any infringements on ground rules. This chapter also emphasizes the importance of recognizing positive aspects of group work. "Recognizing the good" can help reinforce the positive actions members take and keep the resolution on the right path.
This chapter was a helpful guide for how to make ground rules work for the groups involved in a conflict resolution process. I liked the practical guidance that was provided in the "from the toolbox" sections. I thought the tips that the authors gave for feedback techniques for different groups were interesting. They suggested using a "plus/delta" feedback technique in which groups rate what was positive (plus) and what should be changed (delta). I like that this technique doesn't use the word "negative" because it puts focus on how to change what might be negative in groups. This way groups are probably less likely to dwell on any negative aspects of the situation and turn toward how they want to see the group working together in the future.
This chapter discusses the need to keep groups on the path to higher ground in conflict resolution processes. Dukes et al give different methods for keeping groups focused and for dealing with problems that may be experienced during the process. They advise to "prepare for success as you plan for trouble". In this way, interveners work toward the most desirable end, while acknowledging that the worst could happen. They talk about the importance of developing a plan with the group that describes how the group will deal with any infringements on ground rules. This chapter also emphasizes the importance of recognizing positive aspects of group work. "Recognizing the good" can help reinforce the positive actions members take and keep the resolution on the right path.
This chapter was a helpful guide for how to make ground rules work for the groups involved in a conflict resolution process. I liked the practical guidance that was provided in the "from the toolbox" sections. I thought the tips that the authors gave for feedback techniques for different groups were interesting. They suggested using a "plus/delta" feedback technique in which groups rate what was positive (plus) and what should be changed (delta). I like that this technique doesn't use the word "negative" because it puts focus on how to change what might be negative in groups. This way groups are probably less likely to dwell on any negative aspects of the situation and turn toward how they want to see the group working together in the future.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
April 14: The Conflict Context
Kraybill. Facilitation skills for interpersonal transformation.
This article by Ron Kraybill applied the concept of transformation to methods used by facilitators in conflict intervention. Kraybill first introduced 3 main skills that facilitators can use in intervention settings to work toward transformation. The skills are paraphrasing, summarising and reframing. He gives special attention toward the need for intervenors to recognize the response of parties to make sure that they are responding positively to these methods. The author then gives 4 techniques to use in intervention that may help bring about transformation: The Samoan Circle, the Conflict Spectrum, Interviews, and Interviews with a Listening Chair. All of these techniques emphasize the need of all parties to listen to each other. They also work to allow people to gain a better understanding of the views of others and of themselves. Lastly, the author brings in the idea of transformative process design. He argues that many people will accept undesirable outcomes if they believe the process is fair. He writes about the importance of recognizing the people involved and making sure that all parties participate in this recognition. Kraybill says that decision-making should be a key focus in facilitation and that parties should turn their attention toward the process of decision-making. It is important for parties to recognize how decisions are made and by whom so that they can address issues that arise in the process in hopes of bringing about change if necessary.
I thought this article was really helpful. Kraybill gave a lot of examples of what to do and what not to do as a facilitator. This article made me think of the role play we did in class with the divided church. In the role play, it seemed like the focus of the intervention changed from finding out "who should get what?" to "how can the church be saved?" The skills introduced by Kraybill seem like basic communication skills, but as he says, they can have a transformative effect.
This article by Ron Kraybill applied the concept of transformation to methods used by facilitators in conflict intervention. Kraybill first introduced 3 main skills that facilitators can use in intervention settings to work toward transformation. The skills are paraphrasing, summarising and reframing. He gives special attention toward the need for intervenors to recognize the response of parties to make sure that they are responding positively to these methods. The author then gives 4 techniques to use in intervention that may help bring about transformation: The Samoan Circle, the Conflict Spectrum, Interviews, and Interviews with a Listening Chair. All of these techniques emphasize the need of all parties to listen to each other. They also work to allow people to gain a better understanding of the views of others and of themselves. Lastly, the author brings in the idea of transformative process design. He argues that many people will accept undesirable outcomes if they believe the process is fair. He writes about the importance of recognizing the people involved and making sure that all parties participate in this recognition. Kraybill says that decision-making should be a key focus in facilitation and that parties should turn their attention toward the process of decision-making. It is important for parties to recognize how decisions are made and by whom so that they can address issues that arise in the process in hopes of bringing about change if necessary.
I thought this article was really helpful. Kraybill gave a lot of examples of what to do and what not to do as a facilitator. This article made me think of the role play we did in class with the divided church. In the role play, it seemed like the focus of the intervention changed from finding out "who should get what?" to "how can the church be saved?" The skills introduced by Kraybill seem like basic communication skills, but as he says, they can have a transformative effect.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
April 9: Ethics
Honeyman, C. Bias and Mediator's Ethics
This chapter deals with the issue of the biased mediator. Honeyman argues that it is impossible for a mediator to be neutral and that it may not even be a desirable goal. He argues that every mediator has some form of bias, whether it is issue-related or structural. He discusses the need for mediators to disclose information about their bias. He says that it can be harmful for a mediator to portray himself or herself as neutral, especially in international conflict. Honeyman also addresses the argument that parties will reject mediation as a viable method if the mediators are known to be biased. He responds that parties must know all about the qualities of different interveners and different intervention styles and that being open will simply allow people to make the best choice.
I think Honeyman makes a good argument. I think it would be hard for anyone to object to the idea that mediators are biased, especially in terms of structure. It did seem like the argument was more conceptual than practical. Although I understand the author's point, I had trouble understanding how to apply it to an intervention situation. Was he arguing that mediation as a field should make the idea of bias known? Was he arguing that mediators should let parties know of bias before they start the process? It seems like it would be hard to do either in a practical way, though I think Honeyman has a good point in that it would be helpful for parties to be aware of bias.
This chapter deals with the issue of the biased mediator. Honeyman argues that it is impossible for a mediator to be neutral and that it may not even be a desirable goal. He argues that every mediator has some form of bias, whether it is issue-related or structural. He discusses the need for mediators to disclose information about their bias. He says that it can be harmful for a mediator to portray himself or herself as neutral, especially in international conflict. Honeyman also addresses the argument that parties will reject mediation as a viable method if the mediators are known to be biased. He responds that parties must know all about the qualities of different interveners and different intervention styles and that being open will simply allow people to make the best choice.
I think Honeyman makes a good argument. I think it would be hard for anyone to object to the idea that mediators are biased, especially in terms of structure. It did seem like the argument was more conceptual than practical. Although I understand the author's point, I had trouble understanding how to apply it to an intervention situation. Was he arguing that mediation as a field should make the idea of bias known? Was he arguing that mediators should let parties know of bias before they start the process? It seems like it would be hard to do either in a practical way, though I think Honeyman has a good point in that it would be helpful for parties to be aware of bias.
Monday, April 6, 2009
April 7: Ethics
The Milagro Beanfield War
This movie was about a town in New Mexico inhabited by Hispanic farmers who had been there for hundreds of years. A rich developer was trying to build up the area and bring in new life and new money. A few citizens realized that this would mean that they would be displaced from their land and their homes. In the beginning of the movie, one man accidentally opens an irrigation ditch which then pours water onto the beanfield that used to be his father's. When it causes a stir in the town, he becomes more adamant that it is the right thing to do. The town eventually comes together in support of the beanfield and the independence it represents for the community.
I thought that this movie was very interesting and represented the multiplicity of issues that can be involved in conflicts. This movie reminded me of the classic Marxist struggle that can be seen in many developing areas in both the United States and the world. I thought it was interesting to see how the strength of the unified community prevailed in the end. In class, we have talked about how in many cases, the shallow causes of conflict are symbolic of deeper needs and issues. I think this was the case in this movie. The issue of irrigating the beanfield was simply a tipping point in a repressed conflict. I liked that the "sides" of the conflict were not concrete. It was difficult to clearly divide the individuals onto different sides of the conflict because there were so many controversial issues. This was an important part for me because it was a reminder that no one should assume that it is obvious how each individual or party feels. Assumptions such as these could make negotiations difficult or ineffective.
This movie was about a town in New Mexico inhabited by Hispanic farmers who had been there for hundreds of years. A rich developer was trying to build up the area and bring in new life and new money. A few citizens realized that this would mean that they would be displaced from their land and their homes. In the beginning of the movie, one man accidentally opens an irrigation ditch which then pours water onto the beanfield that used to be his father's. When it causes a stir in the town, he becomes more adamant that it is the right thing to do. The town eventually comes together in support of the beanfield and the independence it represents for the community.
I thought that this movie was very interesting and represented the multiplicity of issues that can be involved in conflicts. This movie reminded me of the classic Marxist struggle that can be seen in many developing areas in both the United States and the world. I thought it was interesting to see how the strength of the unified community prevailed in the end. In class, we have talked about how in many cases, the shallow causes of conflict are symbolic of deeper needs and issues. I think this was the case in this movie. The issue of irrigating the beanfield was simply a tipping point in a repressed conflict. I liked that the "sides" of the conflict were not concrete. It was difficult to clearly divide the individuals onto different sides of the conflict because there were so many controversial issues. This was an important part for me because it was a reminder that no one should assume that it is obvious how each individual or party feels. Assumptions such as these could make negotiations difficult or ineffective.
March 31: Reconciliation Efforts
Hayner: Negotiating Justice (in Darby and Mac Ginty. 2008. Contemporary Peacemaking 2nd ed. Pg. 328-338)
This chapter was about the idea of incorporating justice into peace agreements. The author talked about the field of "transitional justice" which involves bringing justice to groups who have recently been through violent conflict - they are transitioning to a more stable society. There are several ways of incorporating justice into peace accords: 1. Non-judicial truth-seeking (Truth commisions), 2. Reparations (Compensation for past abuses), 3. International, hybrid, and national courts (setting up a hybrid or an international court may be more likely to be part of an effort of the national government at attaining justice than a part of a peace accord), 4. Vetting and reform of the armed forces (Looking at histories of human rights abuses when selecting post-war security forces). The main concept that was addressed was that of amnesty and whether or not it can or should be added to peace agreements. If amnesty is added to a peace agreement, there are deeper questions that must be addressed. For example, Who should the amnesty apply to? and Will the amnesty be upheld internationally? The author gave outlines for cases in Liberia and Sierra Leone that involved peace agreements and discussed the potential efficacy of involving justice in negotiations.
This chapter reminded me of the movie on truth commissions that we watched in class. It talked about the possibility of using a truth commission as a way to bring about transitional justice. The author, like the narrator of the movie, noted that each situation was different and that individual settings called for different actions. It was interesting to read about the impact the international community can have on issues of justice. It seems like modernization and globalization has changed the way peace is negotiated. Although being watched over by the international community may make negotiation more difficult, it also holds the leaders of groups involved in conflict and in the peace process more accountable. Also, the presence of the international community can give support for the peace process (i.e. international or hybrid courts).
This chapter was about the idea of incorporating justice into peace agreements. The author talked about the field of "transitional justice" which involves bringing justice to groups who have recently been through violent conflict - they are transitioning to a more stable society. There are several ways of incorporating justice into peace accords: 1. Non-judicial truth-seeking (Truth commisions), 2. Reparations (Compensation for past abuses), 3. International, hybrid, and national courts (setting up a hybrid or an international court may be more likely to be part of an effort of the national government at attaining justice than a part of a peace accord), 4. Vetting and reform of the armed forces (Looking at histories of human rights abuses when selecting post-war security forces). The main concept that was addressed was that of amnesty and whether or not it can or should be added to peace agreements. If amnesty is added to a peace agreement, there are deeper questions that must be addressed. For example, Who should the amnesty apply to? and Will the amnesty be upheld internationally? The author gave outlines for cases in Liberia and Sierra Leone that involved peace agreements and discussed the potential efficacy of involving justice in negotiations.
This chapter reminded me of the movie on truth commissions that we watched in class. It talked about the possibility of using a truth commission as a way to bring about transitional justice. The author, like the narrator of the movie, noted that each situation was different and that individual settings called for different actions. It was interesting to read about the impact the international community can have on issues of justice. It seems like modernization and globalization has changed the way peace is negotiated. Although being watched over by the international community may make negotiation more difficult, it also holds the leaders of groups involved in conflict and in the peace process more accountable. Also, the presence of the international community can give support for the peace process (i.e. international or hybrid courts).
Monday, March 30, 2009
March 26: International Conflict/The Context
Conflict. Ch 12. "Globalization"
This chapter is about globalization and its effects on conflict. The author presents two opposing views of how globalization effects conflict. One side sees globalization as having a positive impact on conflict. This side claims that globalization increases cross-cutting relationships between states and has caused a drop in the number of international conflicts. The other side, however, argues that globalization causes an increase in the number of intranational conflicts due to several factors. Among these factors is a decrease in government spending on social programs. Marginilization of certain segments of society is also a major factor. Although globalization opens markets and promotes the flow of wealth into impoverished countries, it can also take a toll on local markets by introducing competition. The author discusses neo-liberal economic reforms and the impact of these reforms when they are forced upon a society. She addresses the idea that while these reforms may have a positive effect in the long-term, they can have damaging effects in the short-term that may lead to deeper issues for a nation. She then discusses transnational mobization which is a response to the insecurity and resentment felt by people of a nation as a result of globalization. Transnational movements can come from all sectors of society but have a similar goal of resisting globalization.
I thought this chapter was very interesting. I liked that the author presented both viewpoints of the globalization argument and made it clear why globalization is neither truly good nor truly bad. I thought it was interesting that she talked about globalization increasing cross-cutting ties(without using that terminology) which are important for maintaining stable relationships. Her talk of transnational movements reminded me of the idea of superordinate goals. Although these groups come from different areas of society, they all have a common goal to unite against. Unfortunately it seems like this could cause internal conflict because they are uniting against globalization which could be represented by their government or those who have benefitted from the process in their society. The main thing that I took from this chapter was that it is important to look at globalization as an important influence on the context of the situation. It may have positive and/or negative effects on conflict, but it will almost always have some effect. Therefore, it is vital to recognize it and take it into account in both analysis, negotiations, and post-negotiation work. It's similar to Hampson's claim in "What Makes Peace Settlements Stick?" when he argues that making a negotiation with the international community in mind can be a determining factor in the success or failure of an agreement.
This chapter is about globalization and its effects on conflict. The author presents two opposing views of how globalization effects conflict. One side sees globalization as having a positive impact on conflict. This side claims that globalization increases cross-cutting relationships between states and has caused a drop in the number of international conflicts. The other side, however, argues that globalization causes an increase in the number of intranational conflicts due to several factors. Among these factors is a decrease in government spending on social programs. Marginilization of certain segments of society is also a major factor. Although globalization opens markets and promotes the flow of wealth into impoverished countries, it can also take a toll on local markets by introducing competition. The author discusses neo-liberal economic reforms and the impact of these reforms when they are forced upon a society. She addresses the idea that while these reforms may have a positive effect in the long-term, they can have damaging effects in the short-term that may lead to deeper issues for a nation. She then discusses transnational mobization which is a response to the insecurity and resentment felt by people of a nation as a result of globalization. Transnational movements can come from all sectors of society but have a similar goal of resisting globalization.
I thought this chapter was very interesting. I liked that the author presented both viewpoints of the globalization argument and made it clear why globalization is neither truly good nor truly bad. I thought it was interesting that she talked about globalization increasing cross-cutting ties(without using that terminology) which are important for maintaining stable relationships. Her talk of transnational movements reminded me of the idea of superordinate goals. Although these groups come from different areas of society, they all have a common goal to unite against. Unfortunately it seems like this could cause internal conflict because they are uniting against globalization which could be represented by their government or those who have benefitted from the process in their society. The main thing that I took from this chapter was that it is important to look at globalization as an important influence on the context of the situation. It may have positive and/or negative effects on conflict, but it will almost always have some effect. Therefore, it is vital to recognize it and take it into account in both analysis, negotiations, and post-negotiation work. It's similar to Hampson's claim in "What Makes Peace Settlements Stick?" when he argues that making a negotiation with the international community in mind can be a determining factor in the success or failure of an agreement.
March 24: Ethnicity and Intractable Conflict
Coleman: Ch 24, "Intractable Conflict" in Deutsch, et al. Handbook...
This chapter differentiated "intractable" from "tractable" conflict. The author suggests that intractable conflicts have similar characteristics related to their context, core issues, relations, processes, and outcomes. The author then gives five paradigms for looking at intractable conflict, each from different disciplines. He presents the paradigms in order from most to least influential currently in the field of conflict resolution. The paradigms are: 1. The Realist Paradigm, 2. The Human Relations Paradigm, 3. The Medical Paradigm, 4. The Postmodern Paradigm, 5. The Systems Paradigm. The author then gives a list of guidelines that should be followed for intervention in intractable conflicts. Lastly, the author discusses the need for training of interveners in intractable conflict. He also gives advice of what this training should address.
I found this chapter really interesting. I liked the authors description of intractable conflict and the characteristics he presented because it made the terminology clearer. In discussing outcomes, the author notes that, "...the links between trauma and intractability seem to lie in the degree of impairment of individuals and communities and, in particular, in the manner in which trauma is or is not addressed post-conflict." This reminded me of our discussion in class of the importance of post-negotiation work. Not only is it important to make sure a negotiation is followed by the parties and implemented correctly, it is also important to address aspects of the conflict and the parties that may have been affected by the intrinsic harmful characteristics of intractable conflict. When looking at the paradigms for conflict presented in this chapter, I found the Medical Paradigm especially interesting. This paradigm "pictures intractable social conflicts as pathological diseases... that can spread and afflict the system and that therefore need to be correctly diagnosed, treated and contained." This paradigm reminded me of the structural functionalist view in sociology, which views members of society as separate parts with distinct functions that work together to form a larger whole organism. When a part of society does not function as it should, it has an effect on the society as a whole. I think it's interesting to look at conflict from this viewpoint because it places a strong emphasis on "diagnosis" or analysis. In medicine, doctors follow-up with their patients to make sure treatment is working correctly and to possibly change treatment. Therefore, I would argue that this paradigm places a strong emphasis on post-negotiation work. In these ways, I think this paradigm is extremely useful for looking at intractable conflict.
This chapter differentiated "intractable" from "tractable" conflict. The author suggests that intractable conflicts have similar characteristics related to their context, core issues, relations, processes, and outcomes. The author then gives five paradigms for looking at intractable conflict, each from different disciplines. He presents the paradigms in order from most to least influential currently in the field of conflict resolution. The paradigms are: 1. The Realist Paradigm, 2. The Human Relations Paradigm, 3. The Medical Paradigm, 4. The Postmodern Paradigm, 5. The Systems Paradigm. The author then gives a list of guidelines that should be followed for intervention in intractable conflicts. Lastly, the author discusses the need for training of interveners in intractable conflict. He also gives advice of what this training should address.
I found this chapter really interesting. I liked the authors description of intractable conflict and the characteristics he presented because it made the terminology clearer. In discussing outcomes, the author notes that, "...the links between trauma and intractability seem to lie in the degree of impairment of individuals and communities and, in particular, in the manner in which trauma is or is not addressed post-conflict." This reminded me of our discussion in class of the importance of post-negotiation work. Not only is it important to make sure a negotiation is followed by the parties and implemented correctly, it is also important to address aspects of the conflict and the parties that may have been affected by the intrinsic harmful characteristics of intractable conflict. When looking at the paradigms for conflict presented in this chapter, I found the Medical Paradigm especially interesting. This paradigm "pictures intractable social conflicts as pathological diseases... that can spread and afflict the system and that therefore need to be correctly diagnosed, treated and contained." This paradigm reminded me of the structural functionalist view in sociology, which views members of society as separate parts with distinct functions that work together to form a larger whole organism. When a part of society does not function as it should, it has an effect on the society as a whole. I think it's interesting to look at conflict from this viewpoint because it places a strong emphasis on "diagnosis" or analysis. In medicine, doctors follow-up with their patients to make sure treatment is working correctly and to possibly change treatment. Therefore, I would argue that this paradigm places a strong emphasis on post-negotiation work. In these ways, I think this paradigm is extremely useful for looking at intractable conflict.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
March 19: Carrying Out Agreements
Hampson: Nurturing Peace. Ch 1. "What makes peace settlements stick?"
In this chapter, Hampson talks about the problems that can arise in the post-negotiation phase of conflict resolution. The author gives 5 different examples of cases in which settlements have failed or succeeded. Along with a brief analysis of these cases, the author brings up the question of what success or failure means. Due to the long-term nature of post-negotiation work, it is difficult to analyze when a peace settlement has worked and when it has failed. It is also hard to have strict criteria for judging these factors even if a time period is decided on. Hampson gives us a list by Hoisti of the "prerequisites for peace" that we can use to judge peace settlements by:
1. the provision of a system of governance that embodies certain norms of what constitutes acceptable behavior;
2. legitimacy, based on shared principles of justice that are incorporated into the peace settlement;
3. assimilation, which demonstrates 'that the gains of living within the system ... outweigh the potential advantages of seeking to destroy or dominate it';
4. a deterrent system powerful enough to prevent defections;
5. conflict-resolving procedures and institutions that "include procedures and institutions for identifying, monitoring, managing, and resolving major conflicts between members of the system," including the capacity 'to impose settlement terms where continuation of a conflict poses a threat to the system as a whole';
6. consensus on war, that is, the recognition that war is a fundamental problem so that the design of new orders develops and fosters explicit norms against the use of force;
7. procedures for peaceful change, including 'methods and procedures for reviewing settlement terms, for raising grievances, in general for adjusting commitments and responsibilities to new social, economic, demographic, and diplomatic conditions'; and
8. anticipation of future issues, that is, a system for anticipating issues that are potential sources of new conflict and for monitoring and handling them before they erupt into violence
Hampson also argues that it is important to keep in mind the environment in which a conflict takes place (i.e. other countries) when negotiating an agreement. Even if the peace agreement works for the parties involved, if outside parties do not agree or are affected negatively, the agreement may not be successful.
I thought this chapter was a good introduction to understanding the post-negotiation phase of conflict resolution. I like the list that Hampson gave for analyzing peace settlements because it is seems like it could be extremely helpful in trying to figure out why settlements don't work. I also found Hampson's warning to keep in mind other nations in negotiations to be eye-opening. It seems like it would be obvious that third parties need to think about how outside parties are affected by settlements, but it might be hard for them to do this in a lot of cases. In negotiations where coming to an agreement between two parties is nearly impossible, it would be difficult to add even more parties into consideration. However, I think this is vital, especially in the modern world, for making successful settlements. After reading this chapter, I realized how deep third parties must delve into the issues in order to find a working settlement. There is so much research that could be done to help make negotiation more successful in the world; it's exciting to think of how much opportunity there is for making conflict a less violent process and for expanding the use of negotiation in conflicts that are violent.
In this chapter, Hampson talks about the problems that can arise in the post-negotiation phase of conflict resolution. The author gives 5 different examples of cases in which settlements have failed or succeeded. Along with a brief analysis of these cases, the author brings up the question of what success or failure means. Due to the long-term nature of post-negotiation work, it is difficult to analyze when a peace settlement has worked and when it has failed. It is also hard to have strict criteria for judging these factors even if a time period is decided on. Hampson gives us a list by Hoisti of the "prerequisites for peace" that we can use to judge peace settlements by:
1. the provision of a system of governance that embodies certain norms of what constitutes acceptable behavior;
2. legitimacy, based on shared principles of justice that are incorporated into the peace settlement;
3. assimilation, which demonstrates 'that the gains of living within the system ... outweigh the potential advantages of seeking to destroy or dominate it';
4. a deterrent system powerful enough to prevent defections;
5. conflict-resolving procedures and institutions that "include procedures and institutions for identifying, monitoring, managing, and resolving major conflicts between members of the system," including the capacity 'to impose settlement terms where continuation of a conflict poses a threat to the system as a whole';
6. consensus on war, that is, the recognition that war is a fundamental problem so that the design of new orders develops and fosters explicit norms against the use of force;
7. procedures for peaceful change, including 'methods and procedures for reviewing settlement terms, for raising grievances, in general for adjusting commitments and responsibilities to new social, economic, demographic, and diplomatic conditions'; and
8. anticipation of future issues, that is, a system for anticipating issues that are potential sources of new conflict and for monitoring and handling them before they erupt into violence
Hampson also argues that it is important to keep in mind the environment in which a conflict takes place (i.e. other countries) when negotiating an agreement. Even if the peace agreement works for the parties involved, if outside parties do not agree or are affected negatively, the agreement may not be successful.
I thought this chapter was a good introduction to understanding the post-negotiation phase of conflict resolution. I like the list that Hampson gave for analyzing peace settlements because it is seems like it could be extremely helpful in trying to figure out why settlements don't work. I also found Hampson's warning to keep in mind other nations in negotiations to be eye-opening. It seems like it would be obvious that third parties need to think about how outside parties are affected by settlements, but it might be hard for them to do this in a lot of cases. In negotiations where coming to an agreement between two parties is nearly impossible, it would be difficult to add even more parties into consideration. However, I think this is vital, especially in the modern world, for making successful settlements. After reading this chapter, I realized how deep third parties must delve into the issues in order to find a working settlement. There is so much research that could be done to help make negotiation more successful in the world; it's exciting to think of how much opportunity there is for making conflict a less violent process and for expanding the use of negotiation in conflicts that are violent.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
March 5: Tactics and Strategies
Carpenter and Kennedy. Managing Public Disputes. Ch. 10 "The Human Side"
This chapter focused on what the authors call "the human side" of negotiation. It brought up dilemmas that might be seen in negotiations due to what certain people bring to the table. For example, the authors talked about the problems that can be caused by differing levels of negotiating experience among the participants. There was a section in this chapter that talked about keeping participants at the table. There are several reasons why participants may want to leave negotiations, but the authors introduced methods of keeping everyone involved. For example, if participants feel that the process is going too slow, interveners can use the group to try to demonstrate the progress that the group has made and the importance of taking time in negotiating.
I really enjoyed this chapter because I thought it addressed a lot of difficult issues that might arise in negotiations. It gave a lot of guidance for how to deal with difficult people and how to convince people of the viability and importance of the process. This chapter reminded me of the article from the Boston Globe about pro-life and pro-choice representatives meeting together because it talked about finding out what words should be avoided during negotiations. In the article, the pro-choice group was offended by the word "murder" when talking about abortion. In this chapter, mobile home owners were offended by the use of the word "trailer" when talking about their homes. I think this chapter is a vital part of learning how to navigate through a negotiation process. Knowing all of the conflict theories and methodology for intervention is almost useless if the intervener fails to understand and address the human side of the conflict or dispute.
This chapter focused on what the authors call "the human side" of negotiation. It brought up dilemmas that might be seen in negotiations due to what certain people bring to the table. For example, the authors talked about the problems that can be caused by differing levels of negotiating experience among the participants. There was a section in this chapter that talked about keeping participants at the table. There are several reasons why participants may want to leave negotiations, but the authors introduced methods of keeping everyone involved. For example, if participants feel that the process is going too slow, interveners can use the group to try to demonstrate the progress that the group has made and the importance of taking time in negotiating.
I really enjoyed this chapter because I thought it addressed a lot of difficult issues that might arise in negotiations. It gave a lot of guidance for how to deal with difficult people and how to convince people of the viability and importance of the process. This chapter reminded me of the article from the Boston Globe about pro-life and pro-choice representatives meeting together because it talked about finding out what words should be avoided during negotiations. In the article, the pro-choice group was offended by the word "murder" when talking about abortion. In this chapter, mobile home owners were offended by the use of the word "trailer" when talking about their homes. I think this chapter is a vital part of learning how to navigate through a negotiation process. Knowing all of the conflict theories and methodology for intervention is almost useless if the intervener fails to understand and address the human side of the conflict or dispute.
Monday, March 2, 2009
March 3: Negotiation
Conflict: Chapter 14
This chapter focused on different forms and theories of negotiation and discussed its variability due to its wide variety of contexts. Several conceptual frameworks were introduced: Game and decision theory, Social-psychological approaches, Negotiating in organizations, and Negotiation as diplomatic politics. The author focuses on the importance and applicabilty of empirical research done by social scientists. The author also gives a framework of the influences in and processes of negotiation. The topics included in this framework are: Preconditions, Process, Outcomes, Implementation, Conditions, and Background factors. Using the research on negotiation that has been completed and the framework provided, it is easier to design strategies for negotiation that have better chances of success.
Since I am interested in doing research, I thought this chapter was interesting. However, I also found it hard to follow in some areas. I think this is because the different conceptual frameworks seemed to overlap so much in my mind. Since negotiation can be seen at different levels, it is hard to view it from only one. For example, it seems difficult to me to look at the interactions that occur between individuals involved in negotiation without considering the social structure that they act within.
Guelke, Adrian. "Negotiations and Peace" (Darcy and Mac Ginty. 2008. Contemporary Peacemaking 2nd ed. Pg 63-77)
This article addresses peacemaking and negotiations and talks about the success of each in different situations. The article goes on to talk about 7 steps that are present in any negotiation of a violent conflict: 1. Pre-talks, 2. Secret talks, 3. Multi-lateral talks, 4. Negotiating to a settlement, 5. Gaining endorsement, 6. Implementing provisions, and 7. Institutionalization. Although every conflict has different peculiarities, these 7 steps represent a general pattern that negotiations follow. The author addresses how negotiation can go wrong in different phases. He also talks about the possible reasons some negotiations do not work in regards to the steps he provides. For example, he argues that if there isn't a high chance of unacceptable levels of violence returning if a settlement is not reached in negotiations, parties often will not come up with a settlement.
I found this article a little hard to read, but I also found it helpful for analyzing violent conflict on a large scale. It was intimidating to recognize all of the places where negotiations may go wrong or fail to reach the next level. Looking at negotiation from this perspective makes me realize how time-consuming this process can be. I thought it was interesting that the process goes through institutionalization because most people probably think of negotiation ending at step 4. This shows the importance of maintaining the relationship between parties even after they leave the table; it also shows the possible importance of bringing officials back to the table to regroup and analyze the progress (if any) that has been made. The author addresses the idea of changing norms in society. It would make sense that a society that is going through negotiation could have swift social change. Therefore, it may be necessary to reorganize and readdress concerns and agreements after they have been made to make sure that the settlement is still applicable.
This chapter focused on different forms and theories of negotiation and discussed its variability due to its wide variety of contexts. Several conceptual frameworks were introduced: Game and decision theory, Social-psychological approaches, Negotiating in organizations, and Negotiation as diplomatic politics. The author focuses on the importance and applicabilty of empirical research done by social scientists. The author also gives a framework of the influences in and processes of negotiation. The topics included in this framework are: Preconditions, Process, Outcomes, Implementation, Conditions, and Background factors. Using the research on negotiation that has been completed and the framework provided, it is easier to design strategies for negotiation that have better chances of success.
Since I am interested in doing research, I thought this chapter was interesting. However, I also found it hard to follow in some areas. I think this is because the different conceptual frameworks seemed to overlap so much in my mind. Since negotiation can be seen at different levels, it is hard to view it from only one. For example, it seems difficult to me to look at the interactions that occur between individuals involved in negotiation without considering the social structure that they act within.
Guelke, Adrian. "Negotiations and Peace" (Darcy and Mac Ginty. 2008. Contemporary Peacemaking 2nd ed. Pg 63-77)
This article addresses peacemaking and negotiations and talks about the success of each in different situations. The article goes on to talk about 7 steps that are present in any negotiation of a violent conflict: 1. Pre-talks, 2. Secret talks, 3. Multi-lateral talks, 4. Negotiating to a settlement, 5. Gaining endorsement, 6. Implementing provisions, and 7. Institutionalization. Although every conflict has different peculiarities, these 7 steps represent a general pattern that negotiations follow. The author addresses how negotiation can go wrong in different phases. He also talks about the possible reasons some negotiations do not work in regards to the steps he provides. For example, he argues that if there isn't a high chance of unacceptable levels of violence returning if a settlement is not reached in negotiations, parties often will not come up with a settlement.
I found this article a little hard to read, but I also found it helpful for analyzing violent conflict on a large scale. It was intimidating to recognize all of the places where negotiations may go wrong or fail to reach the next level. Looking at negotiation from this perspective makes me realize how time-consuming this process can be. I thought it was interesting that the process goes through institutionalization because most people probably think of negotiation ending at step 4. This shows the importance of maintaining the relationship between parties even after they leave the table; it also shows the possible importance of bringing officials back to the table to regroup and analyze the progress (if any) that has been made. The author addresses the idea of changing norms in society. It would make sense that a society that is going through negotiation could have swift social change. Therefore, it may be necessary to reorganize and readdress concerns and agreements after they have been made to make sure that the settlement is still applicable.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
February 26: Problem Solving - The Nuts and Bolts
Carpenter & Kennedy, "Adopting Procedures" Ch. 6
This chapter deals with the procedural piece of conflict intervention and management. The authors discuss the importance of adopting procedures, educating the parties, and developing options. Like the Duke et al chapter, this chapter talks about ground rules and emphasizes spending time on making sure everyone is on the same page at the table. The authors talk about how many participants argue that there is not enough time to spend on this piece of negotiation, but it is important to try to get them to invest the time.
It seems as though it is natural for people to want to jump in and try to resolve issues. At the same time, it seems reasonable that if parties are already at a stage where they need intervention, a deeper process is important and likely to be helpful. Working together to develop procedures and ground rules could be a great way to get people to unite and agree when they haven't agreed on anything in a long time. Maybe demonstrating where parties do agree could be a catalyst to change; however, it seems like frustration from spending time not talking about the "real issues" could cause some people to close up.
Duke, et al. Reaching for Higher Ground, Ch. 5
This chapter discusses reaching "higher ground" by creating a group covenant. It outlines six elements for creating this covenant: 1. Establish the need, 2. Educate and inspire, 3. Begin by envisioning desired outcomes, 4. Promote full participation, 5. Be accountable, 6. Evaluate and revise. The authors give several examples of the importance of establishing an agreement between conflicting groups on basic values in gaining a successful resolution outcome.
I really liked the "toolbox" portions of this chapter. The authors gave a lot of specific examples of ways to incorporate their six elements for creating a covenant into real negotiation situations. It seemed to me as though some of the tips that were given could be dangerous in some situations. For example, they offered the idea of having participants "police" the negotiation in order to keep everyone in check on the ground rules. It seems like this could be highly offensive, though maybe this strategy is helpful because it makes people extremely cautious of breaking rules for fear of peer criticism.
Spangle and Isenhart: Negotiation Ch. 3
This chapter dealt with 7 theories that can be applied to negotiation settings. The theories introduced are: 1. Identity theory, 2. Social interaction theory, 3. Field theory, 4. Human need theory, 5. Rational choice theory, 6. Transformation theory, 7. Mutual gains theory. The authors argue that, although studying theories may be tedious, it is important to know the underlying causes and factors involved in conflict and negotiation when entering into a negotiation. The authors, in some cases, address how the theories apply to both the parties to the conflict and to the negotiators themselves.
I had already heard of many of the theories that are presented in this chapter; however, i thought it was useful to see them laid out in this way. I agree that it is important to understand different theories when going into negotiation; however, i disagree with the idea that it's desirable to jump into negotiation without studying the theories. Personally, I find knowing the theories comforting when trying to intervene in conflict or even when participating in conflict because I feel like it helps me to deal with differences in opinion without being insulted. I liked the application of the theories to negotiators because it is important to think about what the negotiators bring to the table as well and what assumptions they have that might get in the way.
This chapter deals with the procedural piece of conflict intervention and management. The authors discuss the importance of adopting procedures, educating the parties, and developing options. Like the Duke et al chapter, this chapter talks about ground rules and emphasizes spending time on making sure everyone is on the same page at the table. The authors talk about how many participants argue that there is not enough time to spend on this piece of negotiation, but it is important to try to get them to invest the time.
It seems as though it is natural for people to want to jump in and try to resolve issues. At the same time, it seems reasonable that if parties are already at a stage where they need intervention, a deeper process is important and likely to be helpful. Working together to develop procedures and ground rules could be a great way to get people to unite and agree when they haven't agreed on anything in a long time. Maybe demonstrating where parties do agree could be a catalyst to change; however, it seems like frustration from spending time not talking about the "real issues" could cause some people to close up.
Duke, et al. Reaching for Higher Ground, Ch. 5
This chapter discusses reaching "higher ground" by creating a group covenant. It outlines six elements for creating this covenant: 1. Establish the need, 2. Educate and inspire, 3. Begin by envisioning desired outcomes, 4. Promote full participation, 5. Be accountable, 6. Evaluate and revise. The authors give several examples of the importance of establishing an agreement between conflicting groups on basic values in gaining a successful resolution outcome.
I really liked the "toolbox" portions of this chapter. The authors gave a lot of specific examples of ways to incorporate their six elements for creating a covenant into real negotiation situations. It seemed to me as though some of the tips that were given could be dangerous in some situations. For example, they offered the idea of having participants "police" the negotiation in order to keep everyone in check on the ground rules. It seems like this could be highly offensive, though maybe this strategy is helpful because it makes people extremely cautious of breaking rules for fear of peer criticism.
Spangle and Isenhart: Negotiation Ch. 3
This chapter dealt with 7 theories that can be applied to negotiation settings. The theories introduced are: 1. Identity theory, 2. Social interaction theory, 3. Field theory, 4. Human need theory, 5. Rational choice theory, 6. Transformation theory, 7. Mutual gains theory. The authors argue that, although studying theories may be tedious, it is important to know the underlying causes and factors involved in conflict and negotiation when entering into a negotiation. The authors, in some cases, address how the theories apply to both the parties to the conflict and to the negotiators themselves.
I had already heard of many of the theories that are presented in this chapter; however, i thought it was useful to see them laid out in this way. I agree that it is important to understand different theories when going into negotiation; however, i disagree with the idea that it's desirable to jump into negotiation without studying the theories. Personally, I find knowing the theories comforting when trying to intervene in conflict or even when participating in conflict because I feel like it helps me to deal with differences in opinion without being insulted. I liked the application of the theories to negotiators because it is important to think about what the negotiators bring to the table as well and what assumptions they have that might get in the way.
Monday, February 23, 2009
February 24: Cases
Ratnavale. (2009) Sri Lanka's "Ethnic" Conflict in Carter, et. al. Regional and Ethnic Conflict. Ch. 7 pg. 159-179.
This case study examined the conflict in Sri Lanka between the Tamils and Sinhalese. Although these two groups come from similar mixed ethnic backgrounds, they see each other as two separate groups and are highly segregated in society. When Sri Lanka was under rule by England, the Tamils had greater power due to their status as a minority and therefore low level of threat. When Sri Lanka gained independence, the Sinhalese took power and quickly made sure to prevent the Tamils from having any chance at overcoming that power. The author argues that the Sinhalese had the mindset of a minority even though they were the majority in their own land. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) was the main representative group of the Tamils. This group was much smaller than the Sri Lankan Army and resorted to guerrilla warfare to gain an upperhand on its enemy. The group was soon viewed as a terrorist organization and needed to fight that image in order to gain respect and monetary support. Getting rid of this image also became important when peace talks and negotiations began to be considered. A cease-fire was established through the help of Norwegian interveners. Talks between the two groups continued in an effort to resolve the conflict and find a way for the groups to live peacefully together. Religious groups aided in this process by speaking out and praying together.
I found this case study very interesting because I didn't know anything about the conflict in Sri Lanka. It is upsetting to see how British colonial policies are still affecting the world so dramatically. I think this article is important when considering ethnic conflict because it shows how much depends on groups perceiving and believing that they are different rather than just being ethnically different. I also really liked the idea presented of judging history from its own perspective. People tend to look at history and judge actions that groups made based on the present situation. In this way, they can gather support against a group by showing all of the "bad" things that it has done. Lastly, I was really impressed by the efforts of religious groups to come together and try to inspire unity in the people. That is something that doesn't seem to be very common today. Religious leaders tend to have more power than any other kind of leaders when it comes to moral action; therefore it seems as though they could be more likely to incite social change than political authorities.
This case study examined the conflict in Sri Lanka between the Tamils and Sinhalese. Although these two groups come from similar mixed ethnic backgrounds, they see each other as two separate groups and are highly segregated in society. When Sri Lanka was under rule by England, the Tamils had greater power due to their status as a minority and therefore low level of threat. When Sri Lanka gained independence, the Sinhalese took power and quickly made sure to prevent the Tamils from having any chance at overcoming that power. The author argues that the Sinhalese had the mindset of a minority even though they were the majority in their own land. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) was the main representative group of the Tamils. This group was much smaller than the Sri Lankan Army and resorted to guerrilla warfare to gain an upperhand on its enemy. The group was soon viewed as a terrorist organization and needed to fight that image in order to gain respect and monetary support. Getting rid of this image also became important when peace talks and negotiations began to be considered. A cease-fire was established through the help of Norwegian interveners. Talks between the two groups continued in an effort to resolve the conflict and find a way for the groups to live peacefully together. Religious groups aided in this process by speaking out and praying together.
I found this case study very interesting because I didn't know anything about the conflict in Sri Lanka. It is upsetting to see how British colonial policies are still affecting the world so dramatically. I think this article is important when considering ethnic conflict because it shows how much depends on groups perceiving and believing that they are different rather than just being ethnically different. I also really liked the idea presented of judging history from its own perspective. People tend to look at history and judge actions that groups made based on the present situation. In this way, they can gather support against a group by showing all of the "bad" things that it has done. Lastly, I was really impressed by the efforts of religious groups to come together and try to inspire unity in the people. That is something that doesn't seem to be very common today. Religious leaders tend to have more power than any other kind of leaders when it comes to moral action; therefore it seems as though they could be more likely to incite social change than political authorities.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
February 19: More Context
Conflict:Chapter 11 "Institutions"
This chapter focuses on the legitimacy of authority, what it is, what it's founded upon, and what it means in terms of conflict resolution. The author talks about a balance between force and consent and an inverse relationship between them. In all societies, he argues, each one is present in at least some way. When consent is high enough, the authority is considered legitimate. In this kind of society, there is generally a basic agreement about what norms should be followed, also known as a normative consensus. The author makes a distinction between disputes which arise in a consensual relationship and conflicts which arise in dissensual relationships. Conflict resolution, for the latter, involves rebuilding and recreating a normative consensus. The author then delves into distinctions in conflict resolution methods based on whether or not conflicts are consensual or dissensual. The chapter then shifts to focus on Weber's ideas of the three types of authority: traditional, charismatic, and rational-legal. The author argues that maybe there needs to be a fourth type of authority, one involving the practices of conflict resolution.
I decided to focus on this chapter because, looking at the end of it, I didn't recognize as many of the terms as the other two chapters. I really liked the introduction to the chapter because it was packed full of information and ideas. I thought the idea of a balance between consent and force was a good way to look at authority in a system. I liked that this idea could be applied to determining how conflicts are generally dealt with in different societies. It just shows how deep one must look in order to really be able to analyze and intervene in a dispute or conflict efficiently and effectively. I also found it interesting that the distinctions that the author made regarding consensus, dissensus, force, consent, etc. could be applied to smaller groups as well as large societies.
This chapter focuses on the legitimacy of authority, what it is, what it's founded upon, and what it means in terms of conflict resolution. The author talks about a balance between force and consent and an inverse relationship between them. In all societies, he argues, each one is present in at least some way. When consent is high enough, the authority is considered legitimate. In this kind of society, there is generally a basic agreement about what norms should be followed, also known as a normative consensus. The author makes a distinction between disputes which arise in a consensual relationship and conflicts which arise in dissensual relationships. Conflict resolution, for the latter, involves rebuilding and recreating a normative consensus. The author then delves into distinctions in conflict resolution methods based on whether or not conflicts are consensual or dissensual. The chapter then shifts to focus on Weber's ideas of the three types of authority: traditional, charismatic, and rational-legal. The author argues that maybe there needs to be a fourth type of authority, one involving the practices of conflict resolution.
I decided to focus on this chapter because, looking at the end of it, I didn't recognize as many of the terms as the other two chapters. I really liked the introduction to the chapter because it was packed full of information and ideas. I thought the idea of a balance between consent and force was a good way to look at authority in a system. I liked that this idea could be applied to determining how conflicts are generally dealt with in different societies. It just shows how deep one must look in order to really be able to analyze and intervene in a dispute or conflict efficiently and effectively. I also found it interesting that the distinctions that the author made regarding consensus, dissensus, force, consent, etc. could be applied to smaller groups as well as large societies.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
February 17: Influences
Conflict. Ch 8. "Situations"
This chapter talks about the influence of situations on how people behave. The author makes his argument for the importance of the situation on behavior by creating a continuum of where theorists have placed causes for behavior. On one end is personality and on the other is social structure. The situational viewpoint falls in the middle of the two. The author brings up the idea that interveners and third-parties could use the power of situations to their advantage. For example, they could manipulate where the parties are sitting.
I thought this chapter was important because it gave a lot of data to support the idea that situations are a large influence on how people act. I really liked the point that the author brought up about how this knowledge could help researchers to figure out how different environments affect conflict resolution. At the same time, I think it would be hard to conduct an experiment like this with a real conflict because it seems like it could be unethical or at least risky for the parties to the conflict.
Conflict. Ch 9. "Identities"
This chapter addressed the concept of identity and the many ways that people view themselves. Some topics that were brought up were ethnicity, race, gender, and religion. The author talked about the importance of taking into account the culture and identity of the parties to conflict as an intervener. The author also introduced the idea of conflict and identity as a cycle that sustains and sometimes strengthens itself.
For me, this chapter was much easier to read than the previous chapter in Conflict. I also really enjoyed this chapter because it brought up a lot of good points about how society has created categories for people such as race and gender and many people believe these to be real and natural. It is frustrating how many people do not know this and use race interchangeably with ethnicity and gender interchangeably with sex.
Boston Globe Article
This was a short article that talked about the efforts of pro-life and pro-choice leaders to come together to stop the violence and hatred between their two groups as a response to shootings at institutions where abortion was performed. These two groups started meeting privately and slowly developed relationships with each other. Although the two groups said they supported their sides even more strongly now, they also said that they respected the individuals on the other side.
I really liked this article because it emphasized the idea that people don't have to agree with each other to live together peacefully. This article really showed the importance of dehumanization in conflict. Once the leaders of the two sides started to know each other on a personal level, their comments about the other side were not as much attacks as wishes for change. I also really liked that the article mentioned some procedural pieces such as deciding which words shouldn't be used at the table. Overall, I think this article gives a lot of hope for interveners to draw from.
This chapter talks about the influence of situations on how people behave. The author makes his argument for the importance of the situation on behavior by creating a continuum of where theorists have placed causes for behavior. On one end is personality and on the other is social structure. The situational viewpoint falls in the middle of the two. The author brings up the idea that interveners and third-parties could use the power of situations to their advantage. For example, they could manipulate where the parties are sitting.
I thought this chapter was important because it gave a lot of data to support the idea that situations are a large influence on how people act. I really liked the point that the author brought up about how this knowledge could help researchers to figure out how different environments affect conflict resolution. At the same time, I think it would be hard to conduct an experiment like this with a real conflict because it seems like it could be unethical or at least risky for the parties to the conflict.
Conflict. Ch 9. "Identities"
This chapter addressed the concept of identity and the many ways that people view themselves. Some topics that were brought up were ethnicity, race, gender, and religion. The author talked about the importance of taking into account the culture and identity of the parties to conflict as an intervener. The author also introduced the idea of conflict and identity as a cycle that sustains and sometimes strengthens itself.
For me, this chapter was much easier to read than the previous chapter in Conflict. I also really enjoyed this chapter because it brought up a lot of good points about how society has created categories for people such as race and gender and many people believe these to be real and natural. It is frustrating how many people do not know this and use race interchangeably with ethnicity and gender interchangeably with sex.
Boston Globe Article
This was a short article that talked about the efforts of pro-life and pro-choice leaders to come together to stop the violence and hatred between their two groups as a response to shootings at institutions where abortion was performed. These two groups started meeting privately and slowly developed relationships with each other. Although the two groups said they supported their sides even more strongly now, they also said that they respected the individuals on the other side.
I really liked this article because it emphasized the idea that people don't have to agree with each other to live together peacefully. This article really showed the importance of dehumanization in conflict. Once the leaders of the two sides started to know each other on a personal level, their comments about the other side were not as much attacks as wishes for change. I also really liked that the article mentioned some procedural pieces such as deciding which words shouldn't be used at the table. Overall, I think this article gives a lot of hope for interveners to draw from.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
February 12: More Analysis
Conflict: Ch. 4 "Sources"
This chapter dealt with the problem of identifying sources to conflict. It differentiated destructive conflict from general conflict in an effort to support the idea that the former is not inevitable. The author also explained two different views of the sources of conflict - social and personal - that have been used by many theorists to try to explain why conflicts occur. This chapter also dealt with the ideas of modernization and globalization and their possible effects on the occurrence of conflict, and more specifically destructive conflict. The author tries to relate the difficulty found in trying to determine the sources of conflict and then trying to change the structure of a society if those sources are found.
This chapter reminded me a lot of my Intro to PACS and Intro to Conflict Resolution classes because it talked about a lot of fundamental theoretical issues. I think this chapter is very important at this time because it talks about the problem of religious fundamentalism, which in the US is seen as an ever-growing threat (both from the Islamic world and evangelical Christians). At first, I thought the analysis of the Cain and Able story was ridiculous because of how deep it seemed to go, but I think the point the author was trying to get at with the story was important. For me, the author was saying that there are many different levels of analysis (Did the conflict come from Cain's jealous nature or the situation he was in?) and there are also different levels of resolution and prevention (Did the fault lie in his lack of recognition or his inability to control his jealousy?).
Conflict: Ch. 5 "Dynamics"
This chapter addresses the idea that conflict is always in a dynamic state. With so many variables that affect the course of a conflict, it is impossible for it to remain static. The author supports this idea with models and theories proposed by several different researchers in conflict and social theory. This chapter ties in many sociological concepts such as Cooley's "looking-glass self" and psychological concepts such as "schema".
While much of this chapter was review of both Intro to Conflict Resolution and Intro to Sociology, one term I had not heard of before was schema (large networks of related information). This concept is helpful in understanding conflict dynamics, especially in terms of enemy images. I liked that this chapter implicitly conveyed the importance of approaching conflict resolution from an interdisciplinary standpoint. In regards to the Rainbow Park case study, I thought this chapter was very applicable for analysis. The author addresses the importance of delving deeper into the conflict, beyond the basic issues, if the goal is de-escalation.
This chapter dealt with the problem of identifying sources to conflict. It differentiated destructive conflict from general conflict in an effort to support the idea that the former is not inevitable. The author also explained two different views of the sources of conflict - social and personal - that have been used by many theorists to try to explain why conflicts occur. This chapter also dealt with the ideas of modernization and globalization and their possible effects on the occurrence of conflict, and more specifically destructive conflict. The author tries to relate the difficulty found in trying to determine the sources of conflict and then trying to change the structure of a society if those sources are found.
This chapter reminded me a lot of my Intro to PACS and Intro to Conflict Resolution classes because it talked about a lot of fundamental theoretical issues. I think this chapter is very important at this time because it talks about the problem of religious fundamentalism, which in the US is seen as an ever-growing threat (both from the Islamic world and evangelical Christians). At first, I thought the analysis of the Cain and Able story was ridiculous because of how deep it seemed to go, but I think the point the author was trying to get at with the story was important. For me, the author was saying that there are many different levels of analysis (Did the conflict come from Cain's jealous nature or the situation he was in?) and there are also different levels of resolution and prevention (Did the fault lie in his lack of recognition or his inability to control his jealousy?).
Conflict: Ch. 5 "Dynamics"
This chapter addresses the idea that conflict is always in a dynamic state. With so many variables that affect the course of a conflict, it is impossible for it to remain static. The author supports this idea with models and theories proposed by several different researchers in conflict and social theory. This chapter ties in many sociological concepts such as Cooley's "looking-glass self" and psychological concepts such as "schema".
While much of this chapter was review of both Intro to Conflict Resolution and Intro to Sociology, one term I had not heard of before was schema (large networks of related information). This concept is helpful in understanding conflict dynamics, especially in terms of enemy images. I liked that this chapter implicitly conveyed the importance of approaching conflict resolution from an interdisciplinary standpoint. In regards to the Rainbow Park case study, I thought this chapter was very applicable for analysis. The author addresses the importance of delving deeper into the conflict, beyond the basic issues, if the goal is de-escalation.
Monday, February 9, 2009
February 10: Getting to the Table
Carpenter and Kennedy Ch. 5 "Designing a Strategy..."
This chapter addressed "designing a strategy and setting up the conflict management program". In the chapter, Carpenter and Kennedy talk about ways of designing the best strategy for managing a conflict and then go into detail about how to set up a program to actually start the management process. Designing the strategy involves analyzing the conflict, creating a goal for management, deciding on the best type of meeting structure, determining parties and participants, and considering issues that surround the process. Setting up the program can be extremely time consuming and requires a lot of preparation. There are many details that must be considered, such as the role of the media, funding, and paperwork. The authors argue that the first meeting is vital for the entire process because it is when parties may decide whether or not they are willing to invest any more time in the program.
I found this chapter interesting, though in some areas almost too detail-laden. It was hard for me to understand the main concepts when the authors were talking about exactly what needs to be done with paperwork and press releases. Although I thought all of the information was important, I thought it might be easier if the authors separated the details out from the basic groundwork. At the same time, this approach did make me think about how much is involved in conflict management and really how complicated the process can be. I thought it was interesting to compare this chapter to the one by Moore because, as pointed out by Reimann, terminology and concepts in the field of conflict resolution are so easy to mix up. Although Moore and Carpenter and Kennedy use many of the same concepts, Moore is addressing mediation as the main subject and Carpenter and Kennedy address mediation as almost a rarity.
Moore. Defining Issues and Setting an Agenda (2003). The Mediation Process. Ch 9. pg 232-251
In this chapter, Moore talks about how to define the issues that are involved in a conflict and how to set up an agenda for mediating a conflict. He contrasts between consensual and dissensual conflicts which are interest and value-related respectively. The author talks about how to reframe issues in order to try to find the best solution for both parties. This involves taking out negative or biased language and also trying to find ways in which different parties' viewpoints may coincide. Moore gives eight different types of agendas one can follow in the mediation process: (1) ad hoc, (2) simple agenda, (3) alternation of issues, (4) ranking by importance, (5) principled agenda, (6) “easier items first,” (7) building-block or contingent agenda, and (8) trade—offs or packaging. He finishes by talking about the importance of mediators trying to understand and apply the cultural norms of the parties involved in conflict if they want to be successful in developing the best framing of issues and planning of agenda for the specific situation.
I think this article provides a lot of useful information for beginning the mediation process. Setting up an agenda seems like a daunting task because there are so many variables to take into consideration. I like the eight different types of agendas Moore presents because they seem like good basic frameworks for situational agenda development. I also thought that the examples provided by Moore about immersing oneself in the culture of the parties involved in the conflict very helpful. The example about psychologists wanting to talk about their feelings made me realize that different cultures can be found in subsets across the general population and that this fact is extremely important to keep in mind.
This chapter addressed "designing a strategy and setting up the conflict management program". In the chapter, Carpenter and Kennedy talk about ways of designing the best strategy for managing a conflict and then go into detail about how to set up a program to actually start the management process. Designing the strategy involves analyzing the conflict, creating a goal for management, deciding on the best type of meeting structure, determining parties and participants, and considering issues that surround the process. Setting up the program can be extremely time consuming and requires a lot of preparation. There are many details that must be considered, such as the role of the media, funding, and paperwork. The authors argue that the first meeting is vital for the entire process because it is when parties may decide whether or not they are willing to invest any more time in the program.
I found this chapter interesting, though in some areas almost too detail-laden. It was hard for me to understand the main concepts when the authors were talking about exactly what needs to be done with paperwork and press releases. Although I thought all of the information was important, I thought it might be easier if the authors separated the details out from the basic groundwork. At the same time, this approach did make me think about how much is involved in conflict management and really how complicated the process can be. I thought it was interesting to compare this chapter to the one by Moore because, as pointed out by Reimann, terminology and concepts in the field of conflict resolution are so easy to mix up. Although Moore and Carpenter and Kennedy use many of the same concepts, Moore is addressing mediation as the main subject and Carpenter and Kennedy address mediation as almost a rarity.
Moore. Defining Issues and Setting an Agenda (2003). The Mediation Process. Ch 9. pg 232-251
In this chapter, Moore talks about how to define the issues that are involved in a conflict and how to set up an agenda for mediating a conflict. He contrasts between consensual and dissensual conflicts which are interest and value-related respectively. The author talks about how to reframe issues in order to try to find the best solution for both parties. This involves taking out negative or biased language and also trying to find ways in which different parties' viewpoints may coincide. Moore gives eight different types of agendas one can follow in the mediation process: (1) ad hoc, (2) simple agenda, (3) alternation of issues, (4) ranking by importance, (5) principled agenda, (6) “easier items first,” (7) building-block or contingent agenda, and (8) trade—offs or packaging. He finishes by talking about the importance of mediators trying to understand and apply the cultural norms of the parties involved in conflict if they want to be successful in developing the best framing of issues and planning of agenda for the specific situation.
I think this article provides a lot of useful information for beginning the mediation process. Setting up an agenda seems like a daunting task because there are so many variables to take into consideration. I like the eight different types of agendas Moore presents because they seem like good basic frameworks for situational agenda development. I also thought that the examples provided by Moore about immersing oneself in the culture of the parties involved in the conflict very helpful. The example about psychologists wanting to talk about their feelings made me realize that different cultures can be found in subsets across the general population and that this fact is extremely important to keep in mind.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
February 5: Linking Assessment and Design
Laue: "Getting to the Table: Creating the Forum"
In this article, Laue addresses the issue of "getting to the table". He talks about what must happen before negotiation can begin. Laue argues that a lot of people view the first step in the negotiation process as finding out what the problem is, when in reality there are several things that must happen before the process even gets to that point (identifying who the parties are, who will participate, where they will meet, how they will interact, etc.). Laue addresses several ways of getting parties to the table when they do not willingly go themselves.
I found this article very informative. Whenever I read a case study, my first inclination is to start with the question, "what is the problem in this conflict?" I always want to jump right into the process. However, Laue says that there are pre-negotiation steps that must be taken. Even when just doing analysis, I think it's helpful to follow this order. If you try to identify the problem without knowing who the parties are or what values they hold, it's going to be hard to find what's really causing the conflict.
Zartman: The Timing of Peace Initiatives (Darby and Mac Ginty. 2008. Contemporary Peacemaking. 2nd ed. Pg. 22-35)
In this article, Zartman discusses the importance of timing in intervention. He begins by saying that a lot of attention in conflict resolution is placed on the substance of conflicts, but for peace initiatives it is also vital to consider timing and ripeness. He talks about the idea of a "Mutually Hurting Stalemate" as a moment when conflict is ripe for negotiation because parties want to find a "Way Out". Zartman argues that conflict is ripe for negotiation when parties perceive an MHS and a WO. Whether they are objectively present doesn't matter. On the other hand, he says that ripeness does not ensure the success of negotiation, nor does a lack of ripeness ensure defeat.
I think this article brings up a very important point. I like that Zartman clarifies that MHS and WO are about perception. This allows for the idea that interveners might be able to "ripen" a conflict through education. It's also a little disheartening because parties may be stuck in a horrible stalemate, yet the fact that they don't realize it or want to admit it can hold them back from negotiation. I also have trouble with the idea that the best time to create a negotiation is when parties are at their lowest points. Couldn't this kind of negotiation make parties feel like they are just conceding rather than collaborating? Is it possible that parties in this kind of situation would regret or possible resent the negotiations in the future?
In this article, Laue addresses the issue of "getting to the table". He talks about what must happen before negotiation can begin. Laue argues that a lot of people view the first step in the negotiation process as finding out what the problem is, when in reality there are several things that must happen before the process even gets to that point (identifying who the parties are, who will participate, where they will meet, how they will interact, etc.). Laue addresses several ways of getting parties to the table when they do not willingly go themselves.
I found this article very informative. Whenever I read a case study, my first inclination is to start with the question, "what is the problem in this conflict?" I always want to jump right into the process. However, Laue says that there are pre-negotiation steps that must be taken. Even when just doing analysis, I think it's helpful to follow this order. If you try to identify the problem without knowing who the parties are or what values they hold, it's going to be hard to find what's really causing the conflict.
Zartman: The Timing of Peace Initiatives (Darby and Mac Ginty. 2008. Contemporary Peacemaking. 2nd ed. Pg. 22-35)
In this article, Zartman discusses the importance of timing in intervention. He begins by saying that a lot of attention in conflict resolution is placed on the substance of conflicts, but for peace initiatives it is also vital to consider timing and ripeness. He talks about the idea of a "Mutually Hurting Stalemate" as a moment when conflict is ripe for negotiation because parties want to find a "Way Out". Zartman argues that conflict is ripe for negotiation when parties perceive an MHS and a WO. Whether they are objectively present doesn't matter. On the other hand, he says that ripeness does not ensure the success of negotiation, nor does a lack of ripeness ensure defeat.
I think this article brings up a very important point. I like that Zartman clarifies that MHS and WO are about perception. This allows for the idea that interveners might be able to "ripen" a conflict through education. It's also a little disheartening because parties may be stuck in a horrible stalemate, yet the fact that they don't realize it or want to admit it can hold them back from negotiation. I also have trouble with the idea that the best time to create a negotiation is when parties are at their lowest points. Couldn't this kind of negotiation make parties feel like they are just conceding rather than collaborating? Is it possible that parties in this kind of situation would regret or possible resent the negotiations in the future?
Monday, February 2, 2009
February 3: Conflict Analysis: Diagnosing Conflict
**Response to Lederach article missing because I couldn't find it on Moodle**
Carpenter and Kennedy: Chap. 4 "Analyzing the Conflict" + pgs. 67-69
In this chapter (and it's introduction), Carpenter and Kennedy layout a general plan for how one should go about analyzing a conflict in the realm of public disputes. It is a relatively detailed plan that contains information for how to enter the conflict for intervention purposes and how to gather the information necessary to develop a plan for action (or no action).
I thought this chapter was very helpful for gaining an understanding of the basic framework of "managing public disputes". It seems as though many writers give a basic idea of what intervention involves but there are fewer articles that give a step by step process. I like the guides that Carpenter and Kennedy give for gathering and analyzing information. The guides seem like they would be extremely useful in the type of situations the book deals with. I also noticed that they talk about using active listening (although they don't mention that exact term) to help get a clear idea of what the problem is.
Assessment Guide on Moodle
The assessment guide gives an outline of what should be considered when analyzing a conflict. It gives several groups of questions to explore in each situation under 6 main headings: (1) Parties, (2) Substance, (3) Subjective Dynamics in Conflict, (4) Relationships, (5) Background and Context, and (6) Strategic Issues/Resolution Potential. Overall, these are the main things that need to be considered when analyzing what is happening in a conflict and determining what steps should or should not be taken.
This assessment guide is similar to what is given in chapter 4 of Carpenter and Kennedy except more detailed. I like that it lays out the basic issues that need to be investigated while giving examples of what kinds of questions pertain to each issue.
Furlong, 2005. The Conflict Resolution Toolbox. Chap. 2.
This chapter gives 8 different models for analyzing conflict. The eight models are: (1) The Circle of Conflict, (2) The Triangle of Satisfaction, (3) The Boundary, (4) The Interest/Rights/Power, (5) The Dynamics of Trust, (6) The Dimensions, (7) The Social Style, and (8) The Moving Beyond models. While they all have similar goals, they analyze different aspects of the conflict and approach it from different viewpoints. No model is intrinsically better than another, however one may apply to a certain situation better than another does.
I liked this chapter because I am a very visual learner. The introduction of these 8 models in so short a chapter was slightly overwhelming, but I think it was a good way to see the differences between them. In a way, I think the presence of all of these models in just one chapter reflects the basic idea of conflict as a very complex thing. Although all of the models were interesting and seem useful, I really liked the Dynamics of Trust model because it offered a viewpoint that I hadn't really thought of before. The idea of blame being on a continuum with trust indirectly correlated seems logical and trying to plot a conflict on this model might help to see if there are issues with attribution error or distrust.
Carpenter and Kennedy: Chap. 4 "Analyzing the Conflict" + pgs. 67-69
In this chapter (and it's introduction), Carpenter and Kennedy layout a general plan for how one should go about analyzing a conflict in the realm of public disputes. It is a relatively detailed plan that contains information for how to enter the conflict for intervention purposes and how to gather the information necessary to develop a plan for action (or no action).
I thought this chapter was very helpful for gaining an understanding of the basic framework of "managing public disputes". It seems as though many writers give a basic idea of what intervention involves but there are fewer articles that give a step by step process. I like the guides that Carpenter and Kennedy give for gathering and analyzing information. The guides seem like they would be extremely useful in the type of situations the book deals with. I also noticed that they talk about using active listening (although they don't mention that exact term) to help get a clear idea of what the problem is.
Assessment Guide on Moodle
The assessment guide gives an outline of what should be considered when analyzing a conflict. It gives several groups of questions to explore in each situation under 6 main headings: (1) Parties, (2) Substance, (3) Subjective Dynamics in Conflict, (4) Relationships, (5) Background and Context, and (6) Strategic Issues/Resolution Potential. Overall, these are the main things that need to be considered when analyzing what is happening in a conflict and determining what steps should or should not be taken.
This assessment guide is similar to what is given in chapter 4 of Carpenter and Kennedy except more detailed. I like that it lays out the basic issues that need to be investigated while giving examples of what kinds of questions pertain to each issue.
Furlong, 2005. The Conflict Resolution Toolbox. Chap. 2.
This chapter gives 8 different models for analyzing conflict. The eight models are: (1) The Circle of Conflict, (2) The Triangle of Satisfaction, (3) The Boundary, (4) The Interest/Rights/Power, (5) The Dynamics of Trust, (6) The Dimensions, (7) The Social Style, and (8) The Moving Beyond models. While they all have similar goals, they analyze different aspects of the conflict and approach it from different viewpoints. No model is intrinsically better than another, however one may apply to a certain situation better than another does.
I liked this chapter because I am a very visual learner. The introduction of these 8 models in so short a chapter was slightly overwhelming, but I think it was a good way to see the differences between them. In a way, I think the presence of all of these models in just one chapter reflects the basic idea of conflict as a very complex thing. Although all of the models were interesting and seem useful, I really liked the Dynamics of Trust model because it offered a viewpoint that I hadn't really thought of before. The idea of blame being on a continuum with trust indirectly correlated seems logical and trying to plot a conflict on this model might help to see if there are issues with attribution error or distrust.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
January 29, 2009: Third Parties
Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. John Paul Lederach, 1997. Washington, DC: US Institute of Peace 63-71.
This chapter addresses the idea of peace as a process and conflict as a progression. Lederach places a strong emphasis on two points: (1) That conflict should be seen as going through stages (he uses Curle's model as to exemplify this), and (2) That peacebuilding can involve different roles, functions, and activities. He makes a point that it is common in society today to focus on the personality of the independent mediator rather than the combination of roles and activities usually necessary to make mediation successful.
I thought this chapter mirrored a lot of the ideas seen in the readings for last class. There is definitely a trend of supporting the view of peace and conflict as dynamic. I enjoy seeing the application of different models and ideas in this chapter because it helps me to put it all together. The simplicity of Curle's model is appealing to me because it leaves room for the intricacies that I think are often unique to different conflicts while at the same time providing a clear guide for the path of conflict and the peace process. I also like Lederach's description and interpretation of the Curle model because it helps the reader to see how this model can be used to develop a successful intervention strategy.
Peacemaking and the Consultant’s Role. C. R. Mitchell. Gower Publishing Co. 1981. Westmead, Hampstead, UK 102-136.
This chapter initiates a discussion on third parties in consultant conflict resolution. Mitchell talks about descriptive dimensions of different consultancy approaches, such as the emphasis put on long term versus short term solutions, and the importance of the nature of the parties, participants, and the conflict overall in determining the successfulness of the effort. Mitchell talks about different types of third parties in terms of affiliation, qualities, and functions. The author introduces a "cube" diagram that puts three important descriptive dimensions (distance, focus, and format) on each literal dimension of the shape to help plot different types of consultant resolution. This diagram is one way, the author argues, at taking a beginning step toward seeing what types of consultant conflict resolution are successful.
Although this chapter was much harder to read than Lederach's, I enjoyed it in a way. I liked that Mitchell began by giving a definition of what can be regarded as "consultant conflict resolution". This reminds me of Reimann's reference to the confusing use of terminology in the field of Conflict Resolution because he does a good job of laying out the boundaries around what it really means (at least in his study). Mitchell also addressed the idea that it is the consultant's job to improve communication between the parties. Although this seems like an obvious, I can appreciate the idea that sometimes parties in conflict need a "translator" of some kind to help sort out information. During meetings in my house, two people might be agreeing and still arguing because they are approaching a topic from different viewpoints. I have always found this both interesting and frustrating and I can see how helpful a consultant would be in such a situation. I was slightly disappointed in a way by this chapter because I felt like the author went into so much detail about different descriptive dimensions only to end with a simple diagram using only 3.
This chapter addresses the idea of peace as a process and conflict as a progression. Lederach places a strong emphasis on two points: (1) That conflict should be seen as going through stages (he uses Curle's model as to exemplify this), and (2) That peacebuilding can involve different roles, functions, and activities. He makes a point that it is common in society today to focus on the personality of the independent mediator rather than the combination of roles and activities usually necessary to make mediation successful.
I thought this chapter mirrored a lot of the ideas seen in the readings for last class. There is definitely a trend of supporting the view of peace and conflict as dynamic. I enjoy seeing the application of different models and ideas in this chapter because it helps me to put it all together. The simplicity of Curle's model is appealing to me because it leaves room for the intricacies that I think are often unique to different conflicts while at the same time providing a clear guide for the path of conflict and the peace process. I also like Lederach's description and interpretation of the Curle model because it helps the reader to see how this model can be used to develop a successful intervention strategy.
Peacemaking and the Consultant’s Role. C. R. Mitchell. Gower Publishing Co. 1981. Westmead, Hampstead, UK 102-136.
This chapter initiates a discussion on third parties in consultant conflict resolution. Mitchell talks about descriptive dimensions of different consultancy approaches, such as the emphasis put on long term versus short term solutions, and the importance of the nature of the parties, participants, and the conflict overall in determining the successfulness of the effort. Mitchell talks about different types of third parties in terms of affiliation, qualities, and functions. The author introduces a "cube" diagram that puts three important descriptive dimensions (distance, focus, and format) on each literal dimension of the shape to help plot different types of consultant resolution. This diagram is one way, the author argues, at taking a beginning step toward seeing what types of consultant conflict resolution are successful.
Although this chapter was much harder to read than Lederach's, I enjoyed it in a way. I liked that Mitchell began by giving a definition of what can be regarded as "consultant conflict resolution". This reminds me of Reimann's reference to the confusing use of terminology in the field of Conflict Resolution because he does a good job of laying out the boundaries around what it really means (at least in his study). Mitchell also addressed the idea that it is the consultant's job to improve communication between the parties. Although this seems like an obvious, I can appreciate the idea that sometimes parties in conflict need a "translator" of some kind to help sort out information. During meetings in my house, two people might be agreeing and still arguing because they are approaching a topic from different viewpoints. I have always found this both interesting and frustrating and I can see how helpful a consultant would be in such a situation. I was slightly disappointed in a way by this chapter because I felt like the author went into so much detail about different descriptive dimensions only to end with a simple diagram using only 3.
Monday, January 26, 2009
January 27, 2009: Overview of Conflict Theory
Carpenter and Kennedy Ch. 3
This chapter focused on the ten principles of creating a program for conflict management that works. The ten principles are (1) Conflicts are a mix of procedures, relationships, and substance, (2) To find a good solution, you have to understand the problem, (3) Take time to plan a strategy and follow it through, (4) Progress demands positive working relationships, (5) Negotiation begins with a constructive definition of the problem, (6) Parties should help design the process and solution, (7) Lasting solutions are based on interests, not positions, (8) The process must be flexible, (9) Think through what might go wrong, and (10) Do no harm.
The fifth and seventh principles in this chapter really seemed to grab my attention. Just like definitions need to be made clear for terms in the field of conflict resolution (as noted by Reimann), when managing disputes, interests need to be made clear to all parties involved. For example, if two people are talking about peace, one person meaning harmony and the other lack of violence, they may have a disagreement about certain points, even though they would agree if they were using the same definition. In a dispute, two parties may feel that they have opposing interests, but really their needs are not mutually exclusive. I also like the idea of defining what the problem truly is for the same reason. I feel that doing this makes conflict resolution more of a science, with its own type of scientific method.
Cordula Reimann: Assessing the State-of-the-Art in Conflict Transformation
This reading gave guidance about what is involved in conflict management and conflict transformation. The author addressed one major problem in this field today: inconsistent use of terminology. The main areas of research and analysis in this field have been (1) the sources and nature of the conflict and (2)third party characteristics and strategies that may help improve conflict managent. The author introduces three tracks that can be followed for different methods of conflict resolution and also emphasizes the idea that it is often useful or even necessary to use more than one approach. Track one involves "political and military leaders as mediators and/or representatives of conflict parties" and focuses on the outcome. Track two involves people on all levels of society, from "private individuals" to "local, non-governmental organisations" and is process-oriented. Track three is process and/or structure oriented and involves grassroots organizations and humanitarian agencies (among other groups).
I found this reading helpful; i especially liked the beginning where the author addresses the difficulties in consistency of terminology in the field of conflict resolution. I always get confused by the many terms used in this field and I also know that the sheer number of individual books/readings needed to gain a basic understanding of what peace and conflict studies involves makes it difficult to find a universal word bank such as what is found in older areas of study.
Darby and Mac Ginty: Introduction: What Peace? What Process?
This chapter introduced the idea of a peace process. The authors stressed the importance of flexibility in working toward peace (As did Carpenter and Kennedy and Reimann). The chapter talks about five criteria a successful peace accord must meet: (1) The protagonists are willing to negotiate in good faith, (2) Key actors are included in the process, (3) Negotiations address the central issues in dispute, (4) Force is not used to achieve objectives, and (5) The negotiators are committed to a sustained process. The authors also addressed the criticisms of the "peace process": (1) Many contemporary peace processes fail to address the underlying cause of the conflict, (2) Contemporary peacemaking is more closely connected to the elite of the international community and is not as aware of the needs/interests of the masses in the affected area(s), and (3) Contemporary peacemaking often reinforces power-holders and does not change the patterns of social and political relations.
As a response to the third criticism, Is this a criticism involving the ideas of negative versus positive peace? This criticism conveys to me the idea that contemporary peacemaking does not change the structure of society and therefore only brings about what some might call negative peace.
I was struck by the comment made by the authors that many peace-support interventions conform to traditionally Western norms. As Carpenter and Kennedy outlined, "Progress demands positive working relationships". If this is true, then it seems as though it would be hard to create lasting peace agreements when the norms used by the peace-makers are not those of the people. The idea of cultural relativism is hard in a peace process because it seems like it involves so much ethical and moral thought, however I think that trying to act from this standpoint is vital for the future of conflict resolution. I also think that it is becoming more feasible as the world becomes more of a global community.
This chapter focused on the ten principles of creating a program for conflict management that works. The ten principles are (1) Conflicts are a mix of procedures, relationships, and substance, (2) To find a good solution, you have to understand the problem, (3) Take time to plan a strategy and follow it through, (4) Progress demands positive working relationships, (5) Negotiation begins with a constructive definition of the problem, (6) Parties should help design the process and solution, (7) Lasting solutions are based on interests, not positions, (8) The process must be flexible, (9) Think through what might go wrong, and (10) Do no harm.
The fifth and seventh principles in this chapter really seemed to grab my attention. Just like definitions need to be made clear for terms in the field of conflict resolution (as noted by Reimann), when managing disputes, interests need to be made clear to all parties involved. For example, if two people are talking about peace, one person meaning harmony and the other lack of violence, they may have a disagreement about certain points, even though they would agree if they were using the same definition. In a dispute, two parties may feel that they have opposing interests, but really their needs are not mutually exclusive. I also like the idea of defining what the problem truly is for the same reason. I feel that doing this makes conflict resolution more of a science, with its own type of scientific method.
Cordula Reimann: Assessing the State-of-the-Art in Conflict Transformation
This reading gave guidance about what is involved in conflict management and conflict transformation. The author addressed one major problem in this field today: inconsistent use of terminology. The main areas of research and analysis in this field have been (1) the sources and nature of the conflict and (2)third party characteristics and strategies that may help improve conflict managent. The author introduces three tracks that can be followed for different methods of conflict resolution and also emphasizes the idea that it is often useful or even necessary to use more than one approach. Track one involves "political and military leaders as mediators and/or representatives of conflict parties" and focuses on the outcome. Track two involves people on all levels of society, from "private individuals" to "local, non-governmental organisations" and is process-oriented. Track three is process and/or structure oriented and involves grassroots organizations and humanitarian agencies (among other groups).
I found this reading helpful; i especially liked the beginning where the author addresses the difficulties in consistency of terminology in the field of conflict resolution. I always get confused by the many terms used in this field and I also know that the sheer number of individual books/readings needed to gain a basic understanding of what peace and conflict studies involves makes it difficult to find a universal word bank such as what is found in older areas of study.
Darby and Mac Ginty: Introduction: What Peace? What Process?
This chapter introduced the idea of a peace process. The authors stressed the importance of flexibility in working toward peace (As did Carpenter and Kennedy and Reimann). The chapter talks about five criteria a successful peace accord must meet: (1) The protagonists are willing to negotiate in good faith, (2) Key actors are included in the process, (3) Negotiations address the central issues in dispute, (4) Force is not used to achieve objectives, and (5) The negotiators are committed to a sustained process. The authors also addressed the criticisms of the "peace process": (1) Many contemporary peace processes fail to address the underlying cause of the conflict, (2) Contemporary peacemaking is more closely connected to the elite of the international community and is not as aware of the needs/interests of the masses in the affected area(s), and (3) Contemporary peacemaking often reinforces power-holders and does not change the patterns of social and political relations.
As a response to the third criticism, Is this a criticism involving the ideas of negative versus positive peace? This criticism conveys to me the idea that contemporary peacemaking does not change the structure of society and therefore only brings about what some might call negative peace.
I was struck by the comment made by the authors that many peace-support interventions conform to traditionally Western norms. As Carpenter and Kennedy outlined, "Progress demands positive working relationships". If this is true, then it seems as though it would be hard to create lasting peace agreements when the norms used by the peace-makers are not those of the people. The idea of cultural relativism is hard in a peace process because it seems like it involves so much ethical and moral thought, however I think that trying to act from this standpoint is vital for the future of conflict resolution. I also think that it is becoming more feasible as the world becomes more of a global community.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)