Professional Documents
Culture Documents
February 1999
Annex A
Briefing Notes for Exercise 9a and 9b
Annex B
Example of Systematic 'Re-Framing' in Complex Conflict Situations
Annex C
Briefing Notes for the Coralbay Coastal Resource Management Project
Annex D
Briefing Notes for the Tukubu Conservation Area
Annex E
Sources of Information
Abbreviations
CR Conflict Resolution
The following manual builds on the earlier version. It has been re-orientated to address
the emerging concept of sustainable rnral livelihoods (see Introduction). The approach
assumes that the principles and tools of conflict management and consensus-building can
contribute to achieving sustainable rnral livelihoods. Manual has drawn upon a wide
range of field experiences and published and unpublished material. The main sources of
information are given in Annex E. The two most dominant are:
The Manual is designed to be relevant to most types of rural livelihood projects and
interventions. This includes:
• projects and interventions in which resources and capital assets are owned by
community groups but managed by external public or private organisations, such as
private logging companies, medium scale mining companies, commercial agriculture
enterprises, water and electricity utilities, tourism operators, micro finance NGOs, or
commercial CBOs etc.
Context of Manual
The overall context for the Manual needs to be understood. Its goal is to promote public
involvement in sustainable development. Its purpose is to give practical guidance on the
role of conflict management and consensus-building in achieving sustainable rural
livelihoods.
The last fifteen years has seen increasing interest in the role of citizen participation in
community development projects as a route to greater project sustainability. As Redclift
( I 992) argues, "..if people are not brought into focus through sustainable development,
becoming both architects and engineers of the concept, then it will never be achieved
anyway, since they are unlikely to take responsibility for something they do not 'own'
themselves".
The Manual aims to provide guidance on how to establish and manage a process of
stakeholder negotiation in the context of rural livelihoods such that the concept of
sustainability-through-participation is operationalised in practice.
11
Overseas Development Institute
Sustainable Rural Livelihoods
"Around 70% of the world's poor live in rural areas. Though urban
poverty is rising, the correlation between poverty and remoteness
from urban centres is strong in most countries and s expected to
remain so until at least the second decade of the next century. Clearly
therefore the International Target of halving the number of people
living in extreme poverty by 2015 will be achievable only if the
problem of rural poverty is confronted head-on" (Carney, 1999).
Livelihoods Framework
lll
Overseas Development Institute
Figure A Sustainable Livelihoods Framework
Key
H = Human Capital S= Social Capital
N = Natural Capital P = Physical Capital
F = Financial Capital
I LIVELIHOOD ASSETS!
TRANSFORMING LIVELIHOOD
STRUCTURES & /;/ OUTCOMES
VULNERABILITY
~ H ~ ~
1-P_R_O_C_E_S_S_E_S_--,1
CONTEXT • More income
'--I
©
STRUCTURES ~---~ • Increased
•SHOCKS S N : Influence, , Levels of LIVELIHOOD well-being
•TRENDS : & access : government STRATEGIES • Reduced
\-------' •Private •laws vulnerability
•SEASONALITY
p F ¢:::r sector • Policies
• Improved food
~
• Culture security
• Institutions •More
sustainable use
PROCESSES of NR base
Camey, 1999
The proposed livelihoods framework explicitly recognises that issues of poverty and
sustainable livelihoods are indeed complex and human focused. The framework also
proposes the identification of projects and interventions through analysis of:
• internal strengths and weaknesses (for example of people's capital assets and
capacities);
IV
Overseas Development Institute
Role of Conflict Management and Consensus-Building in Sustainable
Rural Livelihoods
Operationalising the concept of sustainable rural livelihoods will likely require a range
of conflict management and consensus-building skills, both to exploit opportunities and
overcome constraints. Applications are likely to include:
• exploiting opportunities:
• protecting and building all five types of capital assets, particularly social and
human;
• re-negotiating the role of government and private structures in transforming
livelihood assets into benefits; and
• reducing constraints:
• managing contested processes of stakeholder participation within civil
society, and between civil society and external actors; and
• preventing, coping and recovering from violent conflict.
For example, productive common property resources (CPR) require robust CPR (ie
social) organisations, and robust CPR organisations will not emerge without human
skills that enable participants to agree constitutional rules with the formal (or informal)
regulating authorities, rules of competition and resource management, and access to
alternative income opportunities for those excluded. Neither will roads (physical
capital) or credit (financial capital) be accessible without the capacity to negotiate access
to transportation services or to affordable terms ofloan repayments (cash, in-kind or
otherwise).
1
Social capital can be defined as "features of social organisation, such as networks, norms and trust,
that facilitate co-ordination and co-operation for mutual benefit". It is argued that "working together is
easier in a community blessed with a substantial stock of social capital" and that social capital provides
the basis for effective government and economic development (Putman, 1993).
V
Overseas Development Institute
(in particular skills to build consensus between parties) are a means to protect and build
this co-ordination and co-operation.
Table A below show some of the ways in which a consensus approach to conflict
management can contribute to building different types of social and human capital.
Family and kinship Mediation of family disputes such as domestic violence, drunkenness and
connections attempted rape by a local NGO
Horizontal social networks, Training of village chiefs and Mataqali (land owner) heads in facilitation skills for
'associational life', networks of use in building consensus between stakeholders over 'rules' for harvesting forest
civic engagement resources, profit distribution and project membership.
NGO based brokering in a conservation and livelihood project over multiple land
claims. Disputing parties agreed to proportional access to future revenue streams
(eg from logging, oil palm, or tourists) as an alternative to the delineation ofland
ownership boundaries.
Horizontal trust, norms and Third-party facilitation by an NGO in the above project over tourist revenue
rules 'independent' oflinkages distribution. Agreement based on separating out responsibilities for different
between civil society service activities. No 'new' associations were created, but horizontal social capital
organisations was built in that the parties accepted mutually beneficial arrangements for engaging
with tourists.
The new livelihoods approach attempts to separate the ubiquitous link between 'rural'
and 'agriculture', and to widen the scope for rnral development to other sectors - health,
education, training, infrastrncture, financial services etc. This will likely involve new
associations between external strnctures and process (ministries, local authorities,
policies, laws, cultures and policy, private companies and non-target local stakeholders),
and the intended project beneficiaries
Recent thinking on social capital argues that such vertical macro-micro associations are
a prerequisite to strong horizontal associations in civil society, in that they facilitate
effective local representation, participation and institutional accountability (Harriss and
de Renzio, 1998). However, emerging evidence (for example, from the
aforementioned Conflict Management programme in Fiji and Papua New Guinea, see
Acknowledgernents) suggests that the importance of macro level social capital in
constrncting a stronger civil society may be overstated and that a focus on civil society
may be as misplaced current thinking would suggest..
Vl
Overseas Development Institute
This is because many of today's disputes, tensions and even some violent conflict are
underpinned as much by localised competition over power, resource distribution and
access to limited economic opportunities, as by structural injustices. The continuing
violence in South Africa could, for example, be attributed in part to the replacement of
political injustice of a structural nature with highly visible local economic inequalities.
Thus it is not always necessary to address structural injustices in society in order to
strengthen civil society and through this help build social and other capital assets.
Processes of consensus-building which look for creative and lateral solutions can help to
build co-operation and co-ordination and reduce tensions within civil society without the
assistance of government institutions and without necessarily having to resolve the
structural 'root' causes of conflict (see examples in above Table).
cross-sectoral (vertical) Training CBOs and NGOs to be able to better negotiate with private companies,
linkages, eg partnerships for example:
between private sector, • removing the threat of large-scale clear felling by a private oil palm company in
government agencies and civil a parks and people project;
society • replacing landowner roadblocks with revenue sharing arrangements between
private logging companies and local land owners; and
• agreeing profit distribution and tourist trail routes between community leaders
and tour operators.
macro level social capital Strengthening of formal institutional processes of conflict management such that they
(those constitutions. are better able mediate disputes, for example, the training oflocal land mediators and
regulations, laws, statutory village magistrates, and officers from Government Lands Department- with the aim
1ns11tut1onsand policies which in both cases being to facilitate the resolution of land ownership disputes.
define the 'formal'
relationships between state and Training in consensual negotiation and mediation skills for staff from the
civil society) Departments of Environment and Lands Department to:
• help reduce delays in the approval of infrastructure projects, and
• to bring the process of land claim arbitration closer to the local level.
Vll
Overseas Development Institute
Managing Contested Processes of Participation
A 'livelihoods' approach provides the basis for identifying desirable and feasible
projects and interventions to reduce rural poverty. However, a focus on reducing
poverty raises the possibility of new tensions between project beneficiaries and excluded
groups. It is by no means certain that promoting enterprises that make poorer groups
economically more secure will reduce rather than increase inter-group tensions.
Livelihood strategies which depend for their success upon those excluded from
immediate benefits - for example middle-men who 'own' access to transportation - are
vulnerable to these tensions.
The concept of civil society as a 'contested' space runs counter to the earlier notion of
civil society as a single entity, with the different organisations working towards common
objectives of democratic governance. This point is forcibly put by Mcllwaine (1998) in
the context of El Salvador. Her argument is that: " ..civil society and the social relations
that underpin it are not, by their nature, inherently democratic or participatory. Not does
strengthening civil society organisations automatically engender democratisation ..
Indeed, it may actually undermine it" (p656).
Conflict management offers a set of principles and tools for managing the evolution of
civil society organisations and groups and for defusing conflict between various parties
and individuals. In the first instance these skills can be used to strengthen customary
approaches to conflict resolution within and between community groups. Where
customary approaches are demonstrably failing, they offer a way to develop new hybrid
(customary/modem) approaches to managing conflict. Box A below gives an example
of a process of conflict management in a livelihood context. The case involves a
process of third-party facilitated negotiation transformed a dispute between two
community based organisations into a force for promoting more sustainable rural
livelihood strategies.
In the period 1996/97, PIOOM recorded twenty high-intensity conflicts (wars with more
than 1000 deaths) (for example, Algeria, Bosnia, the Great Lakes) and over 100 lower
intensity conflicts resulting in up to 1000 deaths (eg Sri Lanka, Northern Uganda,
Eastern Turkey) (PIOOM, 1997). Many of these latter conflicts are long term,
subsiding and escalating over time so that sporadic violence and the threat of violence
become the accepted social norm (World Disasters Report, 1998). Whilst at the tum of
the century 90% of war casualties were military, nowadays over 95% are civilian. As
well as death and injury, the civilian impacts of conflict include displacement, hunger
and disease.
Sustaining livelihoods in conflict-prone areas will require capabilities to cope with the
threat and reality of violence, and to contribute to recovery and post-conflict
reconstruction. Conflict management and consensus-building skills can play a part in
this. However this Manual is NOT designed for situations of 'open' armed conflict 2 •
2
For this the reader is directed to the Resource Pack for Conflict Transformation published by
International Alert ( 1996) as a starting point.
Vlll
Overseas Development Institute
The principles and tools discussed in the following sections are more applicable to
situations of post-conflict reconstruction - especially where this involves civil society
and local capacities - and to the prevention of 'latent' conflict from emerging into
violence.
The Conflict
In 1997, with financial and technical assistance from the Foundation for People and Community
Development (FPCD), community groups living within the Kakoro region of the proposed Lakekamu
Basin conservation area constructed a tourist guest-house. As tourists and scientists began to arrive a
dispute broke out between two local women's groups over the distribution of profits from the provision
of cooking and cleaning services to the guest house. The influx of tourists soon ceased, along with the
flow of income into the community. The dispute caused FPCD to consider withdrawing from the
project. Furthermore, an evaluation report by the project sponsors cited the dispute as evidence that the
Lakekamu initiative - of which the guest house was a part- was unlikely to be cost-effective and that
considerations were being given to withdrawing funding.
Using simple office-based analytical tools, staff from FPCD mapped out the causes of the dispute, the
stakeholders involved, each stakeholder's immediate concerns and their underlying motivations. The
information was then verified with the stakeholders. This month long process also served to build the
degree of trust necessary for FPCD to act as a facilitator in settling the dispute. Following a series of
separate focus group discussions, a joint meeting was held at which a settlement was negotiated. The
format of the final negotiations was designed to be familiar to the participants in terms of its location,
eligibility to contribute, style of dialogue and type of decision-making.
By creating awareness of their own and each others' underlying motivations, focusing discussion on
areas of common interest, and soliciting fresh ideas, FPCD was able to facilitate a settlement. The
process revealed that both sides shared a strong desire to see the dispute resolved such that tourists would
return and income would once again flow to individuals and the community. It also became clear that
the parties' true motivations had less to do with access to profits from the guesthouse per se, and more
with being involved 'in some way' in earning income from the presence of the tourists. Through free
and open discussion, and with FPCD clarifying the economic and technical viability of the various ideas,
it was agreed that one of the groups - the Community Women's Group - would voluntarily leave the
guest house services to the other - the Guest House Women's Group. In return the former group would
provide portaging services for the guest house, and make and sell handicrafts. This group would also
assume responsibility for collecting and selling Kunai grasses to help construct a proposed FPCD field
staff accommodation unit, and develop a small kerosene-trading business from earlier guest house
profits. Finally, the group were granted sole responsibility for providing cooking and cleaning services to
the field staff accommodation once completed. The overall settlement was tested for its social
acceptability with the men and leaders of the community. Six weeks later field observations suggest that
the settlement is holding.
IX
Overseas Development Institute
In addition to violent conflict, many other countries and regions are in a state of 'latent'
conflict. Armed conflicts may be subsiding (Bougainville, Mozambique, Guatemala,
Palestine), or showing the first signs of re-emerging (for example, Angola, Eritrea). Or,
various structural injustices (such as land ownership, access to the media etc.), or local
economic grievances (such as competition over access to limited income-earning
opportunities), are raising tensions to levels which present a risk of violence. Latent
conflict can also exist in a regional context. For example, some relatively stable
countries are threatened by violent conflict in neighbouring countries, and, of growing
importance in the future, many economically-significant but overexploited natural
resources (such as river basins) lie in transboundary zones between countries.
Because of the way they are designed, introduced or managed, projects in areas oflatent
conflict sometimes provoke or awaken disputes. In turn these disputes sometimes feed
on existing political or economic tensions and escalate into hostilities and violence.
Where this occurs the project's external social or political environment may be harmed
without the project itself being undermined. However, in other circumstances these
external consequences can rebound negatively on the project. Such negative impacts
have included threats to staff, project delays, office relocation, adverse media campaign,
loss of access to previous beneficiaries, and additional project and legal costs.
The first strategy is to manage disputes and conflicts as and when they unexpectedly
arise within the implementation of livelihood projects. At one extreme this may involve
·resolving' the conflict altogether, i.e. not only managing the immediate cause of the
dispute but also removing all underlying contributing factors. Given that sometimes
these ·contributing factors' will be structural and operate at the national or regional level
(e.g. land tenure legislation, economic policy, political expediency etc), it is likely that
many 'live' conflicts will only be able to be 'managed' and not fully 'resolved'.
X
OHrscas Development Institute
Table C The Role of Conflict Management and Consensus-Building in Reducing
Livelihood Vulnerability and Exploiting Opportunities in Conflict-
Prone Areas
Types of Conflict Situations
Economic trends, • improve access to and • design low profile • focus on meeting immediate
structures. management of natural interventions and avoid needs but with a view
activities and resources for poor and conspicuous assets towards development
processes disadvantaged objectives
• promote economic balance • contribute economic
and fair competition between incentives to the
civil society organisations 'mainstreaming' of
settlements
• promote immediate and
visible economic benefits
• rehabilitate financial
institutions
Social processes, • promote accountable and • contribute to the creation of • contribute to 'second- • contribute to reconciliation
111.SlllUl!OOS, etlective formal law and 'sate spaces' for non- tracking' mediation processes
behaviour, order confrontational land non- processes • contribute to building local
values and • support capacity building political dialogue across constituents for peace
relationships which leaves a legacy of social divides • strengthen conflict
social adaptability to rising • promote communications management mechanisms
tensions and a changing between potentially proved to have been effective
society conflicting • promote conflict
• build and strengthen societal • promote shared management mechanisms
networks. both horizontal understanding of each parties which rapidly defuse re-
and vertical underlying fears and emerging violence or
• build capacity for civil motivations tensions
society to mange its O\v11 • promote selt:.help and self • provide incentives which
internal competitive management in crisis- contribute to effectiveness of
tendencies threatened populations settlements
• provide facilitation and • promote awareness about
dispute resolution services conflict, its causes, impacts,
prevention and escalation.
• promote networks of
conciliation services at all
levels
• strengthen trouble shooting
and negotiation capabilities
of civil society
• promote a culture of dispute
resolution and conflict
management within civil
society
XI
Overseas Development Institute
In the context oflivelihood projects the objectives of conflict management are thus four
fold:
• where possible, to transform conflict into a force for positive social change; and
• to manage structural conflicts such that they no longer interfere with the efficient
implementation of the project or intervention.
The second strategy is for development agencies and intermediaries to build conflict
prevention measures into the design of their livelihood projects 'before' they are
implemented. This approach is analogous to the process of Environmental Impact
Assessment where effects (in this case 'conflicts') are first predicted, and the project
design and then strengthened to mitigate the most significant threats.
Structure of Manual
The Manual is divided into three Parts. Part 1 places the process of consensus-building
within the context of the different strategies for managing conflict. Part 2 describes the
core principles of consensus-building. Part 3 relates these principles to the detailed
process of consensus-building. Throughout the Manual exercises are presented which
can be used to gain experience and/or train others. Part 3 includes a series of 'tools'
relevant to different stages in the process of consensus-building. Where applicable
these tools are illustrated by case-studies.
Xll
Overseas Development Institute
Part 1
Conflict Management
Conflict is a very fluid, mobile, ambiguous word. It can mean different things to
different people. For example, it can refer to:
• a debate or contest;
• a disagreement, argument, dispute or quarrel;
• a strnggle, battle or confrontation; or
• a state of unrest, instability, turmoil or chaos.
Conflict is also generic. In other words, the characteristics of conflicts are present within
the full spectrnm of social interactions and behaviour. Some of these are given in Box
1.1.
The word 'conflict' usually has negative connotations. We tend to think of it as the
opposite of co-operation, harmony and peace. It is most commonly associated with
'violence' or the 'threat of violence'. Such a narrow view of conflict is unhelpful.
Instead, conflict needs to be thought of as an expression of a changing society. Nowhere
perhaps is society changing more rapidly than in certain rural areas of developing
countries. The introduction of new technologies, commercialisation of common property
resources, privatisation of public services, growing consumerism, and new government
policy for community-based natural resource management, all exert pressure on
individuals and community groups to adapt. Conflict is therefore not something that can
be avoided or suppressed. It needs to be acknowledged, managed and transformed into a
force for positive social change.
1. projects where capital assets utilised are owned To explore similarities in the
characteristics of conflict at
and managed by individuals or groups within different levels in society
rural community settings, including:
• smallholder agriculture;
• eco-forestry projects, for example those
1. each participant describes an
designed around portable sawmills and example of a conflict for one of
involving community forest management the levels of social interaction in
and timber processing of indigenous and/or Box 1.1. Ask the participant to
plantation forests; highlight the key characteristics
of both the conflict and the way
• coastal resource management projects
it is usually managed
involving management of fish stocks, coral
extraction, acquaculture etc by community 2. facilitate a group discussion of
groups; the similarities between the
• integrated conservation and development conflicts in terms of their key
characteristics
projects (ICDPs), with community groups
providing research and tourism
accommodation, guides, crafts and other services, often in co-ordination with
tour-operators;
• eco-tourism projects where these are unrelated to ICDPs;
• community-based wildlife management;
• community-based credit schemes.
2. projects where the assets are owned by individuals or community groups but managed
by external individuals, eg other community groups, or public or private
organisations. In these projects certain benefits such as employment or revenues
accruing to the owners. Such projects include:
• logging and timber processing;
• some agriculture projects;
• commercial silviculture; and
• small and medium scale extractive industries.
3. projects where the assets utilised are not owned but merely managed by individuals or
community groups. Ownership may reside in other community groups, or external
public or private organisations. Livelihood projects aimed at reducing poverty will
often exhibit these characteristics.
Within livelihood projects, different types of conflicts can occur, both among community
groups, and between communities and external organisations. The effects of conflicts
range from reducing the overall effectiveness and sustainability of asset management, to
the complete collapse of projects and withdrawal oflocal participation and outside
assistance. In some cases these non-violent conflicts can and have escalated into physical
violence.
Box I. I. I outlines some of the disputes and conflicts common to different types of
livelihood projects.
Income Disputes
Resource-Related Disputes
15. introduction of new resource management technologies ( e.g. motorised vehicles, guns, sawmills, fishing
nets etc.) which give rise to unsustainable competition for finite natural resources (e.g. wildlife, fish
stocks, timber, non-timber forest products etc.);
l 6. environmental impacts generated by one group of resource users adversely affecting another group
(impacts arising either from community groups or commercial companies);
17. disputes arising from unplanned exploitation of resources arising from the use of project-related access
roads;
18. disputes due to projects being skewed towards those land owning groups who own resources ofa higher
quality.
Conflict can be divided into two principle types: those caused directly by the introduction
of new developmental (or environmental) pressures, and those structural injustices that
often lie dormant but which can be 're-awakened' as an indirect consequence of new
development pressures.
Although the link between the more common developmental pressures (such as
commercialisation of common property resources) and the degradation ofrenewable
natural resources is well documented, these pressures may be only a part of the
explanation. Increased competition and conflict over community-based natural resources
are often underpinned by deeper lying, 'structural' conflicts. These include, for example,
the inequalities inherent in legal definitions of land ownership, local and regional
economic and political inequalities, and ethnic and cultural differences.
Many of these factors lie dormant until 're-awakened' by the onset of a particular set of
developmental pressures. The following is an example:
• growing awareness within rural communities that commercial value can be attributed to
common property resources (land, minerals, forests, fish and wildlife) and that these benefits
can be accessed through the exertion of 'private' property rights, and/or captured by elites;
• increasing importance of the cash economy to rural people and rising local aspirations for
consumer products;
• lack of incentive for resource users (community groups and 'outside' organisations) to avoid
giving rise to environmental and social impacts which adversely affect unintended third
parties;
• declining government public expenditure on essential rural services, e.g. health, education,
water and electricity supplies, transportation etc.;
• continuing rural to urban migration reducing the available labour for resource management;
and
• changes in rural employment activities arising from the arrival of rural-based industries, e.g.
crop processing, manufacturing, extractive industries, oil and gas, construction projects etc.
The events in this example are demonstrated schematically in Figure 1.2.2. Table 1.2.2
lists some strnctural conflicts relevant to sustainable rnral livelihoods and which when re-
awakened can contribute to more rapid degradation of natural resources.
t----····---------✓---..-------,----------.--
demographic change combines with
t
increasing competition
new developmental pressures
\
over natural resources new developmental
pressures 're-awaken'
structural conflicts
time
Legal legal systems with inherent • legal systems which recognise only
bias towards certain 'named' landowners, and not all
stakeholders resource users.
ft fr
ft
• violence begins with sporadic
fr
isolated acts of aggression
towards individuals and/or
• sections of population
sabotage to property
mobilised on behalf of "the
cause"
• attacks become co-ordinated
• previously established
• tensions, jealousy channels of communication • customary, institutional and
within communities shut down legal approaches • blame for violence always
demonstrably fail to control attributed to the "other side"
apparent
disputes
• people begin to talk only to
• sense of deadlock develops
• increasing scarcity of those with who they agree
common property • open expressions of
resources hostility and anger
• lines of separation develop,
ft conflict prevention
conflict mediation, preparedness
and mitigation
• provision of humanitarian
• shuttle diplomacy relief
between conflicting
• strengthening of 'outside' parties • management of refugee
institutional and legal movements
• building conflict prevention • impartial third-party
approaches to conflict
strategies into project mediation
planning
management • "second-tracking" (e.g .
parallel negotiation with
• constructing new • political, social and/or civil society)
• strengthening or customary 'independent' economic 'structural'
approaches to conflict adjustment (to remove
management at the
community-based
underlying causes of
• demobilisation of armed
systems of conflict groups
community level conflict)
management
• targeted livelihood projects
• social and economic
• legal assistance to • development of rehabilitation of displaced
(health, education, resource oppressed parties monitoring systems to people and refugees
management etc.) give early warning of
violence escalation
• enforcement of human
• demonstrations and rights
• targeted environmental boycotts by oppressed
management and • establishment of
parties
rehabilitation projects contingency plans
• arbitration;
• promotion of stakeholder
negotiation and dialogue
• partial third-party
mediation
• training of community
leaders in facilitation and
• other non-violent direct
mediation skills
action
• strengthening of civil
• improve credibility of
society
mile of law
• poverty alleviation
programmes
There is no perfect process for managing the vulnerability of livelihoods. The overall
strategy adopted for each intervention or project needs to be that which is 'most
practicable' given the available resources and capabilities of the implementing
individuals, groups or agencies, and due consideration to issues of safety and the
availability of viable risk management options.
Figure I .4 below summarises the different strategies that can be adopted by a conflicting
party. In this diagram the approaches differ depending upon the extent to which:
• the party values the maintenance of good relations with other parties; and
• the importance the party places on achieving its own goals.
High
i
Importance of
Accommodation Consensus
Relationship Compromise/
Trade-offs
Withdrawal Force
~
Low Importance of
Low achieving Goal ► High
Conflict is managed through 'force' where one party has the means and inclination to win
regardless of whether the other party loses, and whether or not the process of winning
causes damage to one's personal or professional relationships. Not all parties will be able
to use force. It will largely depend upon the power that one party holds relative to
another. Some of the more obvious uses of force include the following:
• physical violence;
• threat of physical violence;
• exertion of economic dominance, e.g. 'buying-out' opponents;
• corruption of government officials;
• black-mail.
In some cases recourse to the legal system is also a form of 'force' in that one party can
use their superior resources to 'buy' better advice or raise the stakes (for example, by
taking a lost case to an appeal court).
Some less obvious but often no less powerful forms of 'force' include:
1.4.2. Withdrawal
There are occasions when one party in a conflict situation values a strong and continuing
relationship with one or more of the other parties above the attainment of its own specific
goals. In these cases a party may elect to 'accommodate' the other parties' goals,
conceding to all or most of their demands. Although such outcomes may look as though
they have been the result of 'force', the difference is that, rather than losing outright, the
accommodating party perceives itself to have gained by way of securing good relations,
accompanied perhaps by an element of 'good will' and the option to achieve some greater
goal at a future date.
1.4.4. Compromise
Within the framework of rural livelihoods, many of the objectives forwarded by the
different stakeholder groups appear conflicting (for example, the use of the same resource
by poorer groups for fodder, and wealthier groups for commercial exploitation). Thus it
is not uncommon for the outcome to require various sacrifices and opportunity costs
forgone. The project is then re-designed to promote this minimum 'win-lose' scenario.
This may include a bias towards maximising benefits for the poor and disenfranchised,
but recognises the political limitations ofrestticting the activities of the more powerful
stakeholder groups.
1.4.5. Consensus
..L
Compromise Consensus
expected benefits prior to
contlict management process
Limitations of Compromise
In both the planning of livelihood projects to 'prevent' conflict, and in the resolution of
'live' conflicts during project implementation, a 'compromise' approach to conflict
management is limited by a number of factors:
• stakeholder groups are identified in relation to 'project benefits' rather than 'conflict
management';
• objectives for resource use are often generalised leading to overstating of the spatial,
temporal and quantitative nature of potential conflicts;
• the search for mutually beneficial solutions is constrained by viewing the strategic
components of the project design as fixed;
• an emphasis on analysis rather than negotiation limits the possibilities for creative and
imaginative solutions; and
• influence - the extent to which a stakeholder group has the power or resources to
support or undermine the objectives of the project.
Fixed Objectives
Viewing the initial objectives of the different stakeholder groups as immovable can
become a barrier to the search for 'win-win' outcomes to conflict prevention/ resolution.
A 'compromise' approach to conflict management such as Stakeholder Analysis tends to
define the stakeholders' initial objectives and then work within these in order to find the
'best fit' solution. In contrast, a 'consensus' approach dedicates time to investigating the
underlying social and economic 'needs' which are motivating the stakeholder groups
towards these initial objectives. Through this investigation it is hoped that any
conflicting objectives can be re-defined in terms of people's underlying needs. The
approach assumes that different stakeholders will find that they have more underlying
needs in common than they did initial objectives. This widening of the area of the
'common ground' provides greater scope for finding 'win-win' solutions. Because
negotiations are going on at this deeper level and not at the level of the initial objectives,
the approach also assumes that where underlying needs are found to be in conflict, there
will be more room for finding solutions that do not impinge on the exclusive underlying
needs of others. An example of the importance of exploring underlying needs rather than
initial objectives is given in Box 1.5.5
Analysis vs Negotiation
Following on from the above, 'compromise' approaches often fail to fully explore the
intangible benefits and losses that different stakeholders perceive will accrue to them
given different solutions to conflict prevention or resolution. Conventional Cost-Benefit
Analysis (CBA) is one example. In CBA monetary values are attributed to the different
impacts of solutions to conflict management, with the results used to identify overall
winners and losers. Design changes are then recommended to minimise the losses and/or
to enhance benefits.
Although consensual negotiations often lead to mutually acceptable and therefore more
sustainable outcomes, such an approach may not always be possible. Even where it is
possible, it may not be effective on its own, but require support either concurrently or
sequentially from one or more other types of conflict management. The process of
determining what Most Practicable Strategy to adopt in order to address a particular
conflict (whether it should involve consensual negotiation) will need to take account of a
range of factors. Some of these factors are given in Box 1.5 below. Figure 1.5 is
designed to assist in constructing this strategy.
Where the time and resources of the conflict management co-ordinating agency
(community group, NGO, government department or private company) are constrained,
and the contributing 'structural' conflicts (such as land ownership and/or ethnic dispute)
• the time and resources available to those parties interested in co-ordinating the process
of conflict management;
• the consequences if the conflict continues, such as its escalation towards violence;
• the effectiveness of the existing customary, institutional and legal approaches to conflict
management;
• those components within the existing customary, institutional or legal approaches that
could be readily strengthened using one or more conventional approaches to conflict
management (force, withdrawal, compromise, accommodation); and
• those components within the customary, institutional or legal approaches that could be
best be strengthened using consensus-building skills.
1
BATNA - Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (i.e. the 'fall-back' position if consensual
negotiation is not effective)
• avoidance
Withdrawal • opting out
• deployment of delaying tactics
.,...-----1►
• --
◄--- • postponement of decision
• temporary boycott
• strikes
Compromise
_ __,◄
•
•
trade-off
arbitration
• direct consensual
Consensus negotiation (no facilitator)
• third-party facilitated
◄ negotiation
1.6.1. Definition
• mediation of disputes
among community groups, • provision of • infrastructure
and between community humanitarian relief reconstruction at the
groups and outside parties community level
• management of refugee
movements
• consensus-building with • community based social
stakeholders over the and economic
• third-party mediation of rehabilitation projects
design of livelihood violent conflicts among
projects community groups, and
between community • structural and legal
• local capacity building in groups and c'l-iers reform
conflict management skills
• multi-tracking • processes of re-
negotiations conciliation
,.
,i- ..
~ -...., ~
~ l«1®\
1\~ERE.' ) HE.'/,T\-tfl..fS WHAT?.'I 8\\1 \T Wt-S O", All RIG\-\,, A GOOt> COt-i\\'ROM\5£
.' TERRIFIC.'W~t.N
FIN\S\-lED D\OA\.L™E MY GRE~T BE 5£.L\:=\'SI-\
.' M~O.
LEi\'lE"St.'lE.R'{~Ot;)'{
'«£. YUN.PRST ORAWH'lG ! \DEA..'
PR\7.E l'U. G\\J\:.
I YOU51-to\)L
D Wtll SPLIT \
"{O\)2'5"/. Df T\-U:. GIT 2S1/.! G0-40,
Wlt-\N\l'lGS.
~
At first sight the likelihood of achieving a 'win-win' outcome from a conflict situation
can seem wholly improbable. The conflicting parties have often entrenched positions, are
hostile towards one-another, and view the other party's demands as totally unacceptable
and often diametrically opposed to their own. However, human nature is such that these
conflict situations carry with them a high degree of 'perception' rather than 'fact'. What
consensus-building seeks to do is to transform these perceptions by steering the
conflicting parties:
• away from negotiating over their immediate demands, towards addressing the
'underlying needs' that are the true motivating factors behind people's decisions;
• away from thinking about only one solution, towards considering the widest
possible and most creative range of 'options' for meeting the people's underlying
needs;and
• away from personalised and often exaggerated demands, towards clarity and
precision in describing both people's 'underlying needs' and the range of
proposed 'options'.
Assuming the chosen 'most practicable strategy' for conflict management contains some
process of consensual negotiation, before entering the process it is important for each
party (community group, NGO, private company or government agency) to understand
their Best Alternative To A Negotiated Agreement (BATNA). In other words, what will
each party do if the attempt at consensus breaks down. For example, could the party tum
to the legal system; use economic or political force to achieve what they want; withdraw
from the project all together etc; or will each party choose to concede some of their goals
by compromising. Or, further still, will the parties elect to accommodate the other
parties' goals without compromise because of some deeper desire to maintain good
relations. In short, no party should enter into a negotiation, mediation or other process of
consensus-building without having weighed up the consequences if the process fails to
reach agreement.
less
effective structural
different
inequalities
identities
different
values
more
effective
conflicting
unsustainable demands
resource use
The key lesson from Part 1 of this Manual is that consensus-building should not be
applied as a panacea. It should only be used if it forms part of the most practicable
overall strategy. Earlier, Box 1.5 and Figure 1.5 outlined the range of factors and options
that should be considered in constructing this overall strategy.
Part 2 of this Manual sets out the core 'principles' of consensus-building. The detailed
'process' is described in Part 3. Both Parts 2 and 3 will be useful to those who have
decided that part of the most practicable strategy for managing a live or potential conflict
situation is the tactic of consensual ''win-win'' negotiation.
Conflicting demands Most demands are negotiable in that the underlying need that is driving
the demand can be satisfied in more ways than the initial ideas suggested
by the individual or group. A process of consensus-building should:
identify a wide range of options for meeting the parties' underlying needs;
make use of objective criteria to evaluate the merits of different options;
and formulate integrative solutions.
Conflicting 'values' Different human 'values' are often considered non-negotiable, however it
may be possible to find common underlying needs or an overriding mutual
goal that steers formulation of an agreement away from the need to
resolve different values.
Different identities In managing conflicts linked to differences in ethnic identities, the process
of consensus-building should place a strong emphasis on procedural
ground-rules during negotiations. In addition, conflicting parties are
encouraged to be specific in their negative perceptions of each other (i.e.
not to make generalisations), and to recall times when different ethnic
groups have lived without conflict. The aim is to maximise the
opportunities for building positive perceptions and solutions.
Strnctural inequalities Where structural inequalities underlie or enflame a conflict situation, the
process should target disenfranchised parties with specific assistance in
building an understanding of their and the other parties' perceptions of the
conflict. For structural inequalities that are 'moveable', the aim is to
transform conflict into a mutual force for social change, such that
resolutions are sustainable in the long run. 'Public pressure' and the
involvement of women can also be used to keep the parties at the
negotiating table. This approach is best used in conjunction with national
level projects and events.
Principles of Consensus-Building
2.1 Introduction
accommodate
cultural
difference acknowledge
perceptions
I
test agreement
for feasibility ensure good
~
communications
achieve
mutual gains
clarify /
--- Principles of
consensus-
building
/
create a level-
playing field
for
negotiations
motivations /
and options
build and
widen the maintain
options rapport
focus on satisfying
underlying
motivations
26
Overseas Development Institute
2.2 Accommodate Cultural Differences
With regard to attitudes towards conflict, in the highlands of Papua New Guinea for
example, some local groups view violence not as something to be resolved but as a means
of conflict resolution itself. Similarly, with regard to how different parties define a
successful outcome to managing conflict, some groups place greater importance on verbal
agreements, whilst others, such as some commercial companies, respect only legally
binding written agreements. There cases in the Fiji Islands, for example, where
commercial logging companies have reached what indigenous Fijian groups thought were
satisfactory agreements over the distribution of profits from forestry operations, only to
find that the verbal nature of the agreement was not the 'culturally acceptable' way that
logging companies did business.
Box 2.2 identifies some of the characteristics of culture that often differ for different types
of conflicting parties (indigenous groups, immigrant settlers, government agencies,
commercial companies, donor agencies etc.).
• Attitude to conflict - the attitude of each party towards the issue of conflict ( dispute or violence) in
general, e.g. positive, something to be avoided etc.
• Communication Style - the way in which each party communicates information and ideas, and the
potential this holds for misunderstandings between parties.
• Willingness to Disclose - how comfortable each party is in stating objectives, discussing emotions,
acknowledging fears, needing to 'save face' etc.
• Method of Reasoning - the basis upon which each party solves problems, e.g. quantitative information,
qualitative information, personal experience, examples, case-studies, theories, proven principles,
reciprocity, 'pay-back', opinion of leader (elected, elders etc.).
• Decision-making - how each party reaches a collective decision, e.g. voting, consensus, autocratic.
• Acceptable Outcomes - what form an agreement has to take for it to be acceptable to each party, e.g.
legal judgment, verbal agreement, written contract, approval of a particular individual or institution etc.
27
Overseas Development Institute
The issue of cultural difference becomes critical in
conflict situations where the-conventional mechanisms Training Exercise 3
of conflict management have broken down. Ineffective
conventional mechanisms might include cases where Cultural Differences
indigenous customary approaches no longer have the
respect and confidence of the village youth; legal Objective
systems that are unable to be accessed by one or more
parties; or institutionalised forms of conflict To understand how cultural
differences between the key
management such as arbitration that have been
stakeholder groups can affect a
politically manipulated. In these cases there may be process of consensual negotiations.
justification for looking to some form of systematic
consensus-building. In introducing this new approach
a key decision will be whether to build this onto the
1. with the participants working
existing conventional mechanisms or to establish new individually, for one known
independent mechanisms. conflict situation identify two or
three of the key stakeholder
One factor in this decision will be the degree of cultural groups.
diversity there is between the different stakeholder
2. Map the cultural differences of
groups involved in the conflict. By cultural diversity is each stakeholder group against
meant the diversity with which the different conflicting the criteria in Box 2.2.
parties view conflict and conflict management.
Applying the criteria in Box 2.2 against all the main 3. in plenary discuss whether the
stakeholder groups will give some indication of the extent to which the differences
identified might obstruct a
degree of cultural diversity. From this analysis two process of consensual negotiation,
general 'rules' can be applied as follows: and if so how these differences
might be accommodated.
• where cultural diversity is low the emphasis should
lie first with strengthening the relevant conventional
mechanisms, be they customary, institutional or
legal;
• where cultural diversity is high, the emphasis 'might' lie with developing
'independent' approaches to conflict management, but as far as practicable,
approaches which contain elements 'familiar' to all parties (such as a third-party
impartial facilitator, and/or agreements based on consensus).
Note that high levels of cultural diversity can derive from many sources, including:
diverse ethnic cultures (such as in the highland regions of PNG); diverse social status
(such as within mixed caste communities in southern India); and diverse livelihood
strategies (such as between the 'gift' economies of the rural poor and the 'market'
economies of the wealthier poor and commercial companies).
28
Overseas Development Institute
2. 3 Acknowledge Perceptions
A second dimension to the issue of 'perceptions' is to avoid an arrogance that says that "if
they knew what we /mow then they would not be demanding these things". This attitude
is often prevalent in the attitude of 'outsiders' to community development (NGOs,
commercial companies and government agencies) and is based on perceived superiority
in technology and knowledge. This outsider's perception can be dangerous because it
often ignores some very valid reasons why community groups are behaving the way they
are. Techniques for analysing and working with indigenous technical knowledge and
community perspectives are covered extensively in the various literature on 'community
participation' and 'participatory analysis'.
---------------------------------
Overseas Development Institute 29
2.4 Ensure Good Communications
Training Exercise 4
As a co-ordinator, facilitator or participant it is Listening Skills
essential to develop and maintain good
Objective
communications between all those involved in a
process of consensual negotiation. Part of this To develop better listening skills.
communication will be to convey the perceptions Tasks
of one party to another in a way that is faithful to
that party. 1. divide the participants into pairs
• the ability to listen (see Exercise 4); 3. the listening party is instructed to sit
opposite the speaking party but act
• positive body language; disinterested and refrain from
• punctuality; and making any comment
• honesty.
4. the speaker is allowed to talk for one
minute, no more (this information
More practiced personal skills include: should be kept secret from the
participants)
• recognising different patterns of behaviour in
oneself and others (see Exercise 5); and 5. once the minute is up, the speaker is
asked to repeat the same speech but
• employing appropriate assertiveness. this time the listening party must use
all his/her communication skills,
such as eye contact, body language,
2.5 Create a Level Playing Field nodding agreement, asking
questions, seeking clarifications etc.
30
Overseas Development Institute
Other techniques for creating a level
playing-field include training of Training Exercise 5
community representatives in negotiation
skills, and awareness raising of Building Trust
government agencies and commercial
companies of the value of consensus for Objective
improving the long-term sustainability of
To learn about developing trust so that stakeholder
projects. groups can exchange and share their ideas
31
Overseas Development Institute
2. 7 Focus on Satisfying Underlying Motivations
In general it is easier to begin the search for solutions by starting with 'common'
underlying motivations. This approach helps to maintain momentum towards consensus
(it also carries with it the possible benefit of inadvertently addressing some of the parties'
'specific' underlying motivations, thereby avoiding the need to confront the issues
directly). Once some common ground has been found, for example through
32
Overseas Development Institute
brainstorming a range of options for meeting 'common' underlying motivations, work
can begin on resolving the outstanding 'specific' motivations. Figure 2. 7 seeks to
represent the potential value of concentrating negotiations on underlying motivations
rather than immediate demands.
conflicting parties
I \
IMMEDIATE DEMANDS
'common'
underlying
motivations
UNDERLYING MOTIVATIONS
'specific'
underlying
motivations
Too many individuals and groups, whether from rural communities, government
departments or the private sector, enter into negotiations with only one demand or
solution in mind. That is, they have identified the 'position' they wish to take rather than
the underlying motivations that they wish to have satisfied. This can quickly lead to an
impasse. As Fisher (1994) argues:
2.8.1 Creativity
In conflict situations the different stakeholders often get stuck, unable to move forward.
Creative thinking provides opportunities to get things moving again. The problems arise
because the parties:
• do not know what it is that they
want;
• believe that the only solutions are Training Exercise 6
those currently in front of them;
and/or Conventional Patterns
• do not realise the possible long-
Objective
term negative consequences of
achieving their demand. To demonstrate the importance of thinking outside of
conventional patterns
Part of the reason why people get stuck
is because they organise their thinking
processes into patterns which limit the draw a 3 x 3 matrix of nine dots, as so:
range of actions that can be taken (see
Exercises 6 and 7). Conventional
Benefit-Cost-Analysis (BCA) is an
• • •
example of this. The art of creative
thinking is to move outside of these
• • •
restrictive patterns. • •
'Brainstorming' is a common term 1. instruct participants: without taking their pen off the
used to explain a basket of methods page, to draw no more than 4 straight lines in such a
way that each dot is passed through by one of those
designed to generate a wide range of lines.
options. All the methods share the
same basic objective of encouraging 2. compare the answers to solution below:
creativity. Brainstorming is governed
by some simple but important 'rules',
as follows:
34
Overseas Development Institute
2. when time is up, the options are brought together and any duplicates deleted
3. at no time is criticism of someone's ideas allowed by others - all ideas are valid;
5. at this stage ideas should be kept simple, written in no more than three words (the
detail can come later);
6. the options should be written large enough for
all participants to see. This is critical since
creativity is inspired by seeing the ideas of Training Exercise 8
others. For example use marker-pens on "Post-
its" or flip-chart paper. Enable the participants Lateral Thinking
to see the ideas of other as and when they are
generated. Objective
Edward De Bono has put forward a number of 1. divide participants into pairs
techniques to help people structure their thinking
processes. He called this lateral thinking and his 2. ask one of the pair to select a conflict
Six Thinking Hats is one example. Each hat situation that he/she is knowledgeable
represents a different way in which a topic could about
be discussed, as follows. 3. the other party then selects a 'hat'
(other than 'blue') and within that
White Hat mode put questions to the other
White suggests paper. The white hat concerns participant. These questions should
information. When we consciously put on the explore the 'underlying motivations'
which are driving one of the
white hat we ask ourselves questions like: "What stakeholders in the conflict
infom1ation do we have?"; "What information do
we need?"; "What questions should we be 4. after ten minutes the questioner
asking?". The white hat draws our attention to chooses a different 'hat' and carries on
questioning. If time allows, the
what we know and what we do not know.
questioner continues working through
the different 'hats'
Green Hat
Green suggests energy and life. The green hat is 5. end the exercise with the 'blue' hat,
for creativity and new ideas. When we wear our which is about reflection and planning
a way forward
green hat we try to be as creative as we can.
6. in plenary discuss the results and the
Grey Hat relative utility of the different 'hats'.
Grey suggests authority and judgement. The grey Which mode worked best and why?
hat is for caution. When we adopt the grey hat we
35
Ovcn,cas Development Institute
evaluate ideas to look for the
weaknesses, limitations and Training Exercises 9a and 9b
dangers.
Clarification - I'
Yellow Hat
Yellow suggests sunshine and Objective
optimism. The yellow hat
To learn some of the clarification skills of consensual
stimulates us to look for the negotiation
positive aspects of the matter in
hand. When we are wearing the
yellow hat we explore the
1. divide the participants into pairs
benefits and advantages of an
idea. 2. allocate one member of each pair one of the two
characters in the Briefing Notes in Annex Aa (Exercise
Red Hat 9a)
Red suggests fire and warmth.
3. instruct the participants to role-play the negotiation
The red hat is to do with process outlined in the Briefing Notes. Do not allow
feelings, intuition and emotions. the participants to see each other's Briefmg Notes. The
When we chose to put on the red objective is to arrive at a consensus, i.e. a 'win-win'
hat we take an opportunity to outcome. The outcome should be recorded by one of
explore our feelings about the the pair
matter. 4. in plenary, the participants report back the different
outcomes of the various negotiations.
Blue Hat
Blue suggests water and 5. discuss the different types of outcomes, for example:
those that focused on the number of oranges and/or the
reflection. The blue hat is for
price to be paid vs those that realised that that one party
managing the whole thinking wanted to use the 'husk', whilst the other only the
process by reflecting on where 'pulp'
we are, where we want to be and
what we need to do next. When 6. discuss the relevance of the way in which questions
were asked during the negotiations, and the importance
we chose the blue hat we are of clarifying the other side's underlying motivations 'in
signalling a period of review and detail'.
summary.
7. run through steps 2 to 5 again using the second set of
Of course, it is not necessary to Briefing Notes in Annex Ab (Exercise 9b).
have to talk about coloured hats
8. this time emphasise to the participants the importance
to think in a particular way. The of (a) exploring the underlying motivations of each
'hats' need only suggest a other, (b) identifying both the 'common' and 'specific'
particular type of approach to a needs (see Section 2. 7); and (c) using clarification
negotiation and a way to questions to create room for finding a 'win-win'
solution (After the negotiations, explain that one party
formulate the right questions
wanted only to explore the lower reaches of the reserve
(see Exercise 8). whilst the other wanted to protect the upper reaches).
36
Overseas Development Institute
2.9 Clarifying Motivations and Options
Section 1. 7.5 identified the importance of transforming conflict situations from matters of
perception and exaggeration into matters of fact. This is part of the overall concept of
're-framing' - common language to mediators and facilitators 1• Processes of consensual
negotiation are helped by encouraging the conflicting parties to be specific about the
conflict, in particular about each parties' underlying motivations and the options
proposed for its management. Note that such clarification can only take place once
sufficient rapport has been built and the parties' perceptions have been acknowledged
without prejudice.
The first attempt to clarifying underlying motivations may be more safely undertaken by
consulting with each stakeholder group independent of the others, rather than in a
workshop setting or in plenary. Permission may then be asked to allow these underlying
motivations to be explained to the other parties. If time is short, and rapport between the
parties particularly good, it may be possible to conduct these sessions with the
participants together.
• "very briefly, what is the problem here?" (ask the participant/s to be brief to prevent
them from focusing on the negative perception of the conflict, and enflaming the other
participants)
• "why is it a problem?"
then:
• "do you think this fundamental problem is shared by any of the other stakeholder
groups?"
1
Other aspects of ·re-framing' include: each party understanding each others' perception of the dispute,
their personal history of how the dispute came about, and their underlying needs and fears, as well as
realising that there may be more than one way to resolve the dispute than that first articulated.
37
Overseas Development Institute
Now try to clarify the detail: ask, for example:
The purpose of exploring the underlying motivations of the different stakeholders and
then widening the options that might satisfy these needs, is to enable a consensus to be
reached in which each stakeholder perceives to have benefited. This 'perceived mutual
gain' outcome is the goal of consensus-building. It is what sets consensus-building apart
as a negotiation strategy based on compromise, trade-off, accommodation, force or
withdrawal.
The approach is possible because consensual negotiation is about explicitly increasing the
basis upon which individuals and groups reach decisions. It is about seeking to change
the mies of the game in ways previously unimagined by the negotiating parties. In rural
livelihood terms this may mean discussing new technologies, redefining resource access
arrangements (eg extending the length of land leases), changing attitudes and levels of
tolerance to alien behaviour and cultures, and enabling individuals and government
officials to 'save face'. Above all it is about finding solutions which overtake the
immediate concerns leaving them redundant. In essence, the aim of any process of
consensual negotiation is to ensure that when the time comes to reach a settlement, the
size of the available 'pie' is substantially larger than when it started out (see Figure 2. I 0).
The approach is possible because in a conflict situation the basis for agreement is
severely constrained by emotive and personalised demands. This limits options and
stifles creativity. First building the trust of the conflicting parties, then drawing out their
true motivations and interests, clarifying these factors to remove exaggerations and
modify false perceptions, and then brainstorming to generate the widest and most creative
possible range of solutions, provides a pathway to achieve mutual gains.
Therefore, contradictory as it may seem, it is precisely because individuals and people are
in conflict that a 'win-win' outcome is possible. The greater the conflict the more
entrenched are peoples' positions and thus, potentially the more scope there is to widen
the basis for reaching an agreement. It is by slowly broadening people's understanding of
38
Overseas Development Institute
their own and other's demands, and encouraging them to think outside their entrenched
and emotional positions, that 'win-win' outcomes are entirely plausible.
initial available
gains
"win-lose" "win-win"
Amidst the enthusiasm surrounding the final stages of a process of consensual negotiation
it is easy to omit to test the feasibility of the agreement. Some of the feasibility issues
will, or should have been, addressed by the various previous clarification activities.
However the final agreement will need to be tested again before it can be finally
accepted.
Some of the factors to consider when testing for feasibility are as follows:
• the expectations which each party has of the agreement are realistic;
39
Overseas Development Institute
• consideration has been given to delivering rapid gains and/or 'milestones' such that
momentum for longer term changes is maintained;
• those stakeholder representatives who accept the agreement have the support of the
remainder of their supporters and the wider constituents;
• mechanisms are in place to ensure that each party maintains its side of the agreement.
----------------------------------
Overseas Development Institute 40
Part 3
Process of Consensus-building
Once it has been established that a component of the Most Practicable Strategy for
conflict management is to enter into a process of consensus-building (see Section 1.5), the
parties (and/or facilitator/mediator) must decide on the detail of how this process will be
undertaken. The process will be different in every case. It will also evolve and change
over time. There are, however, certain components or 'building blocks' that tend to
comprise all processes of consensus-building. This is so whether the goal is to manage
'live' conflicts arising within existing projects, or to integrate conflict prevention
strategies into a project design. The key building blocks of consensus-building are shown
in Figure 3.1.
70%
Conflict Analysis .Consensus-Buil~ing Plan.
~/ 30%
__ ,--/_ ....
Conflict ..~···
/
The linkages between the components are not linear; that is to say the process does not
happen in strict sequential steps. For example, there are aspects of Conflict Analysis
which seek to identify the underlying motivations of the different stakeholder groups.
Such analysis may be undertaken both at the outset of the process, as an office-based
study, and/or as one of the initial exercises in an actual process of consensual negotiation.
Similarly, Capacity Building - such as strengthening the analytical skills of the most
disenfranchised stakeholder groups - may be integral to participatory analysis and/or may
With all three activities complete, a process of Consensual Negotiation can be begun in
the certainty that all possible avenues have been visited to:
The following sections desc1ibe a variety of tools and techniques for undertaking each of
these four activities. The tools are divided into those for:
1
••• and from this to prepare a provisional Consensus-Building Plan outlining the Most Practicable Strategy
of conflict management to be adopted, what steps to take next and what Capacity Building to undertake.
" ...and to use this participatory analysis to revise the Consensus-Building Plan.
• for the prioritised conflict/s, the key stakeholder groups and their prospective
representatives;
• initial identification of the way in which the project might appear to oppose these
'positions' and underlying 'motivations'
• cases where the project is willing to concede certain objectives in return for
maintaining good relations with certain stakeholders;
• cases where some type of force or threat of force might be used on the part of the
project to achieve its objectives or mitigate its risks.
A series of tools for achieving some of these outputs are discussed below.
Initial conflict mapping is essentially a tool based on the use of Venn diagrams. These
are constructed to build a picture of how an initial conflict interacts with other conflict
and potential conflict situations within a project. The example in Figure 3.2.1 is drawn
from an Integrated Conservation and Development Project (ICDP) in an upland major
watershed in Papua New Guinea. The size of the circles represents the relative magnitude
of each conflict to the others. The degree of interdependency of the conflicts is
represented by the extent to which the circles overlap. Where the conflict is one that is
'predicted' rather than being 'live', this is shown by a dotted line 3 • In this example, the
overall perspective taken in preparing the diagram is that of an NGO involved in the
ICDP. As such, the magnitudes of the different conflicts tend to reflect the degree to
which the dispute will adversely affect the NGO's objectives for the project.
In accordance with the 'clarifying' principle described in Section 2.9, it is important to try
to provide some detail to the spatial distribution of the initial conflict mapping exercise.
Community-based natural resource projects in particular lend themselves to geographic
scrntiny. At this early stage of the Conflict Analysis it usually suffices to develop a
sketch map of the area concerned, and to try to demarcate the areas affected by each type
of conflict. Such sketch-maps will be relevant to both projects exhibiting 'live' conflicts,
and projects in their planning phase. In each case the office-based sketch map will need
to be revised on the basis of consultation with the affected stakeholders (see participatory
Conflict Analysis, Section 3.4).
The example given in Figure 3.2.2 is taken from a community-based Eco-Forestry project
in Fiji. The project involved forest management by land-owning groups using portable
sawmills, timber processing and product marketing. In this example the project was in its
late planning stages. The list of conflicts mapped were those 'predicted' to occur by the
NGO sponsor within the context of the current project design.
3
For projects in their planning phase the same exercise would draw a distinction between current conflicts
( ie those occurring before the onset of the project) and conflicts predicted to occur or be exacerbated as a
result of the project.
Office-based Conflict Analysis is the 2. ask one member of each group to choose a
research and analysis phase of the process community-based natural resource project
of consensus-building. It involves within which conflict has become an issue
( only one of the group need know about the
mapping the conflict (or the potential project, the others can ask him/her questions
conflicts) based on information already about it)
available or which can be readily gathered.
Outputs of this phase include: 3. list the different conflicts going on in this
project at a particular point in time
• initial mapping of the known or 4. identify conflicts that may arise in the future,
predicted conflict or disputes, including for example that have a history of emerging
their type, scale and any cause or effect from time to time; that are known to be
interrelations; dormant; that are to do with structural
inequalities in society; and/or that are likely to
result from the introduction of new economic
• the historical context of the conflict/s pressures
including:
• the past and predicted escalation of 5. draw these conflicts as circles, with the size
representative of the scale of the conflict.
the conflict/s;
Overlap the circles where the conflicts inter-
• the underlying structural causes; relate. Use dotted circles to denote future
• the relative contributions of conflicts
structural causes vs development
pressures;
• past efforts at conflict management; and
• why these efforts were less than fully effective;
• for projects currently affected by 'live' conflict: the impacts of the conflict on the
project schedule, activities, outputs, assets, staff time, beneficiaries, etc;
1) Political
interference
4) Oil palm vs
conservation
goals 6) Lack of Co-
5) Land operation between
ownership community groups
disputes
8) Mining VS
conservation
goals
in
PntPrnri<:::PC::
0 participating in project
1. disputes over boundary demarcation
2. disputes over distribution of income and profits
3. disputes over access rights across none-project
- - main road
6. disputes over distribution of income and profits
arising from unequal quality of forest resource
between different participating land owning units
7. family disputes
··········· access road 8. disputes between landowners arising from
'approaches' of commercial logging companies
3. Individual requests for finance and material goods from NGO ..... . *** **
• difficult people - to identify known 'difficult' individuals and groups and the types of
assistance they will need in order to bring them into a process of consensual
negotiation;
• underlying 'needs' - human values and interests, for example: income generation,
children's education, family welfare, social status; respect; and
• underlying 'fears' - human concerns, for example: loss of 'face' or status; threat of
violence; loss of land or investments; loss of employment; lost opportunity etc.
As discussed in Section 2. 7, it will often be possible to divide both needs and fears into
two categories:
• those 'common' to two or more stakeholder groups; and
• those 'specific' to only one stakeholder group.
To construct a provisional picture of the underlying 'needs' and 'fears' which are motivating
the different stakeholder groups within a conflict situation
I. instruct the participants to maintain the same groups and to work with the same conflict
situation used to identify stakeholder groups in Exercise 13
3. agree among the group what the motivating 'needs' and 'fears' are behind these demands
Figure 3.2.Sa Example of a Needs and Fears Analysis for a Conflict over
Coastal Fish Stocks
Fears: size of catch declining; may be forced to Fears: stocks running out; boats damaged by
practice agriculture when not experienced local fishermen
Needs: cash income for school fees; cash for Needs: repay loans on fishing boats;
consumables; employment security ...-- ~ employment security
unsustainable
Village Leaders
( competition over
coastal fishing )
NGO
Fears: status undermined; increased youth crime Fears: conflict over fishing undermines other
in village
.......
---community projects
Needs: youth to be employed; elders to be Needs: needs to find new community
looked after in old age development projects to fund.
Local NGO
/
Third Ethnic Group
Civic Committee of local • ambivalent towards NGO • maintain status within community
town • consider themselves to be excluded • protect local resources
Inter-Institutional • CIR only recently formed but favourable • CIR strongly promoted by union movement
Committees of local districts • CIY in opposition to NGO • CIV strongly influenced by another NGO
Vice Ministry for Forests, • supports further NGO/Reserve separation • amendments to chain-saw provisions in
Natural Resources and • consider NGO to be insensitive Forestry law 'non- negotiable'
Environment • avoidance of political partisanship at local
level
• attract donor funds
• upholding of conservation, bio-diversity and
'public interest works' legislation over-and-
above indigenous NR use rights inside Reserve
• maintain departmental interests
Vice Ministry for • favours technical support to assist • seeks to uphold indigenous rights over NR use
Indigenous Affairs indigenous administration and inside Reserve
management of Reserve • demobilisation of indigenous groups
• support for NGO ambivalent
• a combination of one, some, or all of the following types of conflict management: force, withdrawal,
compromise, accommodation, consensus;
• consideration of available time, resources, urgency, consequences etc. (see Box 1.6);
• if some form of consensual negotiation is to be adopted, the BATNA that will be employed if consensus is
not possible.
• a plan outlining how to verify the office-based identification of stakeholder groups and representatives;
• a plan outlining how to verify the office-based analysis of stakeholder groups' underlying motivations;
• a programme of initial consultation (including how to avoid enflaming the conflict and being perceived as
bias; how to build rapport such that questions about underlying under motivations will be able to be
discussed etc.);
• a plan outlining how to solicit the key elements of the current customary (and ifrelevant institutional and
legal) approaches to conflict management for either:
• the most urgent and/or significant conflict/sunder analysis (for projects exhibiting 'live' conflicts)
• the range of current and predicted conflicts (for projects in their planning phase)
Capacity Building
• internal skills training for the co-ordinating agency (NGO, government department etc.):
• enhanced personal communication skills;
• participatory analysis skills (e.g. PRA);
• mediation and facilitation skills etc.
• provisional ideas for capacity building of conflicting stakeholders (for discussion by co-
ordinators/facilitators in 'field' as and when appropriate). Options include:
• training in personal communication skills;
• training of stakeholders in direct consensual negotiation skills;
• training of community leaders in third-party negotiation skills; and
• training of ·outsiders' in third-party facilitation skills.
• Targeting of disenfranchised stakeholders in order to create a 'level playing field' for subsequent
negotiations. For example, how to use the forthcomingparticipat01y Conflict Analysis to build local
understanding of the conflict, in particular how to 'clarify' motivations.
Consensual Negotiations
• Very provisional ideas for the intended process of consensual negotiation, including ( if appropriate):
• whether to promote direct ('face-to-face') negotiation between the conflicting parties, or to use a
'third-party' facilitator;
• whether this facilitator should be from 'inside' or 'outside' the community, and whether 'impartial'
or ·partial'; and
• the timing, duration, location, format and general methods of the negotiation process.
• the Most Practicable Strategy is to employ a process of consensual negotiation, combined with the
development of alternative and additional community-based enterprises;
• the general approach to the consensual negotiation will be to build the facilitation and negotiation
capacity of the whole community rather than targeting just the immediate conflicting parties;
• the cultural diversity of conflicting parties may be too great to be able to build these facilitation and
<.:onsensualnegotiation skills onto existing customary/traditional approaches, suggesting that some
sort of independent mechanism of conflict management is needed; and
• the BA TNA for the process is to comprise a 'threat of withdrawal' (by the co-ordinating NGO),
which will be executed if required.
WHAT HOW
• verify full range of stakeholder groups and • use of focus groups based on stratified
their initial legitimate representatives sampling through wealth ranking
• then: verify underlying fears and needs of • consultation with representative sub-groups
stakeholder groups taken from each stakeholder group
• consult on idea of building community skills • informal discussions - consult with a wider
in consensual negotiation (facilitation and range of people than simply the current
negotiation), and the benefits that this might 'opinion formers' in the conflict
bring for conflict management
• informal discussions to introduce idea of communities managing their own conflicts through
consensual negotiation;
• community groups to manage Guest House disputes themselves (perhaps with incentive of
expanded or further enterprises)
The office-based Conflict Analysis can be thought of as the first step in a "Needs
Assessment" of the conflict situation. One option at this stage will be to leave the
conflict situation as it is, i.e. to do nothing. There are at least two reasons why this
decision might be taken. The first is that the existing approaches to managing conflict
(the customary, institutional and legal) are assumed to be effective and should be left to
take place naturally.
The second is that leaving the conflict alone will bring benefits to the parties that
outweigh any negative effects that the conflict might be exhibiting or exhibit in the
future. For example, the conflict may encourage the various parties to form a new
institution or mechanism which will solve both the immediate conflict and future
(previously unmanageable) disputes. Alternatively, the conflict may help to publicise
certain social or political injustices which with the intervention of conflict management
would be perpetuated. As indicated, for both the proposed co-ordinator or facilitator of a
process of conflict management, and the conflicting parties themselves, the key criterion
for deciding if a conflict should be managed will be whether the benefits of management
outweigh the benefits of leaving things as they are.
Assuming that the office-based Conflict Analysis does not recommend the status quo, but
identifies an Most Practicable Strategy that includes some form of consensual
negotiation, the findings of the analysis will need to be tested in the 'field'. At the same
time it will be necessary to begin to build rapport with the different stakeholder groups.
The act of setting aside time to think about a provisional Consensus-Building Plan should
have encouraged a degree of sensitivity in the order and manner in which different people
and groups are spoken to during this early participatory Conflict Analysis. For example,
1. Build rapport;
4. Consult on the Most Practicable Strategy for conflict management (this should include the
'no-conflict management option');
5. Clarify the conflict/s in terms of geography, timing, quantification, affected people etc.;
6. If consensual negotiation is to form part of the Most Practicable Strategy, model the existing
customary, institutional and legal approaches to conflict management relevant to the conflict
situation/s:
7. Consult on whether to try to build a process of consensual negotiation onto the existing
customary, institutional or legal approaches, or to manage the conflict/s through some
independent system; and
8. Consult on the capacity building options available to support the proposed consensual
negotiations.
In essence, the point in time at which 6. instruct each stakeholder pair to adopt their specific role and
agree (a) their immediate positions concerning the conflict
underlying motivations are clarified situation and (b) their underlying motivations (i.e. the
and the findings conveyed to the other motivating goals, values, needs and fears driving their
stakeholder groups will be a matter of immediate positions)
judgement. It may take place at the
same time as the verification of 7. assign each facilitating pair to one of the stakeholder pairs.
The facilitating pair then spends 30 minutes trying to
stakeholder groups; after completion develop an understanding of the underlying motivations of
of capacity building; or during multi- the stakeholder pair
stakeholder workshops. Regardless of
this timing issue, clarifying conflicts in 8. instruct the facilitating pair to take things slowly, i.e. to first
build some rapport, but refrain from lingering on the
terms of underlying motivations is
stakeholder's immediate positions
essential to an effective process of
consensual negotiation. This is the 9. each pair presents back its findings in plenary
case whether seeking to analyse 'live'
conflicts or when predicting and 10. select one of the facilitation pairs to cluster the areas of
'common' underlying motivations and to isolate the different
analyse the range of conflicts that may 'specific' underlying motivations
affect a project in during the planning
phase.
river
')l
women's group
J F M A M J J A s 0 N D J
Women's Group
• collection of non- mopane fuelwood 25% H
timber forest
products marula fruit 50% L
• collection of
drinking water village standpipe 50% M
In those circumstances where the range of conflicts is wide and the interplay between the
stakeholder groups more complicated a more systematic approach to spatial and temporal
clarifying may need to be employed. Such complexity commonly exists in area-wide
rural livelihood projects, such as coastal zone management or protected areas
management planning. An example of managing this type of complexity is given in
Annex B. The example is based on an analysis of current and expected conflicts between
community stakeholder groups and the government conservation authorities over the
management of resources in a wildlife management area in Zambia.
The role of video is another consideration. In both simple and complex conflicts over the
use of community-based natural resources, preparation of short video films by the
different stakeholder groups can be a powerful medium to focus stakeholders on the true
parameters of their perceived conflict. Community video can also help inform other
parties of the community's views, in particular their needs and fears, and their ideas for
solutions. Experience has shown that video can be useful not only in clarifying conflicts
between community groups and external organisations, but also among different
community groups.
Customary Approaches
Within the context of managing conflicts which affect rural livelihood projects, the
existing customary approaches of community leaders and groups can be, and often are
dfective. Many of these are based on consensus and arbitration methods and primarily
target family, labour and civil disputes, with environmental disputes the new growth area.
Examples include: the Barangay Justice System in the Philippines; Sri Lanka's village
level mediation panels; the Lok Adalats (People's Courts) in Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh,
India; and the taha system of the Maoris, New Zealand.
Overwhelming Conflict
The problem with customary forms of conflict management comes when new
development pressures generate (or 're-awaken') conflicts which overwhelm the
capability of these mechanisms to cope. In such situations the conflicting parties may
well be creative enough to modify their customary approaches or develop new institutions
or mechanisms in order to manage these potentially overwhelming conflicts. However,
there are many cases where this is not possible (or at least not possible within the time
scale of the natural resource project in question). It is for these cases that this Manual has
been developed, namely: for conflicts which overwhelm both the immediate and adaptive
capability of community groups to manage conflict.
Cultural Scenarios
• cultural uniformity - where the different stakeholder groups (who may or may not be
from different cultures) view conflict and its management in a way that is uniform;
and
• cultural diversity - where the different stakeholder groups have different and/or
mutually incompatible ways of viewing and managing conflict.
Cultural Uniformity
There are certain types of conflicts which overwhelm not only the existing customary,
institutional and legal approaches, but also the capability of the parties to adapt these
existing approaches or to develop new conflict management institutions. Such conflicts
can include:
• disputes over the degree of project participation afforded to different land owning
groups;
• disputes between project participants and non-project participants; and
• the effects of 'off-site' environmental impacts arising from various project-related
forest management activities.
Cultural Diversity
The problem with the use of these 'institutional' and 'legal' approaches to conflict
management is that the solution is often either too expensive, too prolonged, and/or
viewed by one or more of the parties as biased. As with the Fijian examples, there are
therefore certain development pressures which simply overwhelm the capability of the
Where these weaknesses are identified, the next step is to begin to explore whether the
existing approaches to conflict management can be strengthened. Figure 3.4.4a is
designed to enable a rapid modelling of these existing approaches. As an example, Table
3.4.4 shows how the results of this modelling might be used to identify weaknesses in the
effectiveness of customary approaches; the alternatives currently available; and the
effectiveness of these alternatives. From this analysis it should be possible to identify
which components of the customary and/or institutional and legal approaches to
strengthen, or whether to adopt an independent system of conflict management. Figure
3.4.4b shows how the results of the modelling exercises might be used to inform this
decision.
HIGH
I
Cultural
diversity of
independent-but-
familiar alternative
no intervention
conflicting
parties
no intervention
strengthen existing
approaches
LOW
LOW HIGH
►
Effectiveness of
existing approaches
!direct 'person-to-
jperson' insider
l'
type. of. I legal representative . preferred status of
impartial
___.,outsider
negotiation~ facilitator/s
government
\ / representative
partial --...........
j3;·d party facilitationfi, _.. respected community
'--..
outsider
members insider
L"""7'"
I ~cooodl ofeldm
individual negotiations with conflicting parties
hereditary
leaders
t elected leaders .--------,
prioritised
by status all eligible consensus arbitration
panel of peers
one person at a time
judgement
!eligibility!
/ _.,,,:,, overlapping speakers .-----------"\
i:_________
process il verbal
t i~s-tr_u_c_tu-re-,,l
third-party
process of
dialogue
.............. multiple small discussions
I __,,!! decision !
verification
\
indirect and unconfrontational, eg exchange Memorandum of
talking through proposed solutions of gifts Understanding
(MOU)
!enforcement!
none ~legal enforcement
/ observers
MOU enforceable
participation of ~ advisors
peer/social
pressure
constitutional
fines and
under contract law
parties not involved punishments
---.. process
in the conflict
~ recorders
implementation monitors
\ implementation evaluators
Potential Conflict
NGO-sponsored communitv-based eco-forestrv proiect, Fiii - the process of project planning identifies
potential disputes between community groups over the demarcation of boundaries between land owning
units. Custommy and institutional approaches are commonly used and are often effective. The occasions
when such disputes are resolved through the Courts is extremely rare, therefore legal approaches have
been omitted from the analysis.
process of dialogue all eligible; one person all eligible; one person 'Mataqali Heads' and
at a time; at a time; Provincial
unconfrontational unconfrontational Commissioner trained in
facilitation skills
participation of parties area Chief as observer area Chief as observer Addition of NGO
not involved in the and advisor and advisor project-sponsor as
conflict observer
• built rapport between the conflicting parties and between these parties and the
facilitator if one is to be used;
• led to agreement on an Most Practicable Strategy for managing the current conflict
(and/or for managing future conflicts);
• clarified the key stakeholder groups and their representatives;
• clarified the conflict into:
• the underlying motivations (including 'needs' and 'fears') of the different
stakeholder groups; and
• their spatial, temporal extent and any relevant quantification;
• determined whether to strengthen the existing customary, institutional and/or legal
approaches, or to develop a new independent system of conflict management; and
• consulted on the available options for capacity building.
On the basis of these finding the provisional Consensus-Building Plan will need to be
revised. In particular, it should now be possible to plan for a programme of capacity
building and to develop in more detail plans for a process of consensual Negotiation.
There are some key differences in the way in which office based and participatory
conflict analysis is undertaken for 'live' conflicts afflicting projects midstream, as against
projects in their planning phases. These differences are summarised below in Table
3.5.2.
For 'live' conflicts, deciding how to begin a Deciding how to approach stakeholders in
dialogue with the conflicting parties is new projects need only be informed by a
informed primarily by a detailed office-based 'rapid' office-based stakeholder analysis - one
stakeholder analysis and identification of designed to identify who should be
common ground between the different approached to evaluate the effectiveness of
parties' underlying interests, needs and fears existing customary, institutional and legal
approaches.
3. 6 Capacity Building
Options for building capacity of existing approaches Options for building capacity for an
to conflict management independent approach based on modern
techniques
With regard to preventing or managing conflicts among community groups, there should
be a presumption in favour of the following hierarchy of priorities. Attention should be
focused first on the possibility of strengthening the direct (consensual) negotiation skills
of the stakeholders involved in the conflict. Where this approach is unlikely to be
effective, consideration should then be given to training community leaders in the basic
skills of 'third-party' facilitated negotiation. Only where this second approach is unlikely
to work should consideration be given to training or using some 'outside' agency
(government or non-government) to offer assistance as an 'outside' third party facilitator.
A sound case will need to be made if it is intended to deviate from this hierarchy.
3. 7 Consensual Negotiation
Referring back to Figure 3.2, a process of consensual negotiation should not be entered
into until all other activities are as complete as is practicable. Consensual negotiations
themselves will involve the following broad activities 5 :
i. each stakeholder group to develop an understanding of the other groups' underlying
motivations;
2. the widest possible range of options generated for satisfying these motivations;
3. options prioritised and combined to deliver perceived mutual gains for all parties;
4. consensus reached over the final agreement; and
5. satisfaction that implementation of the agreement is feasible.
The overall process that binds these activities can vary. Some of the more common
processes of consensual negotiation are indicated in Box 3. 7 below.
• partial facilitation (brokering) - One of the stakeholder groups facilitates a process of consensual
negotiation between itself and the other parties. This group may be perceived as being partial to one
cause or another, but nethertheless is acceptable as a facilitator (for example, because the they hold the
power to withdraw project funding). Options for managing the process include:
• rotational 'one-on-one' facilitation with the facilitator negotiating with each stakeholder
representative (or group or sub-groups members) in turn;
• a workshop environment where all stakeholder representatives negotiate together under
guidance of the facilitator;
• some combination of the above two options.
• Impartial third-party facilitator - The conflicting stakeholder groups agree to allow a third party to
facilitate a process of consensual negotiation. The facilitator is perceived as being impartial and may
known (ie an 'insider') or not known ('outsider') to the parties. The same options for managing the
process apply as above.
5
Some of these may have already been undertaken during the participatory Conflict Analysis
Note that in the context of sustainable rural livelihoods, direct 'face-to-face' consensual
negotiations can take place both:
In the context of rural livelihood project in developing countries, the 'cultural diversity'
of the different parties may make it impossible to constructively manage such a
workshop, not least because of the different languages involved. In addition, the mistrust
of 'outsiders' by community groups, and the legacy of imposed interventions, may mean
that 'outside' third-party facilitation of a dispute will be ineffective, and that someone
familiar to the parties will be needed.
Much of the analysis of a conflict situation should have already taken place prior to a
process of negotiation being entered into. The first phase of the negotiations will
therefore be to take this analysis forward, for example by sharing the results with the
other parties and developing a common understanding of the dynamics of the conflict.
The overall aim of the process at this early stage is to find points of' common interests'
between the conflicting parties This could include:
Some of the tools that can be used to build towards 'common interests' are as follows:
• warm up;
• agenda building;
• metaplan of underlying motivations; and
• objective verifiable indicators.
The second broad phase of the process is about identifying the widest possible range of
options, and then narrowing these down to those that are most promising. The overall
approach is based upon certain assumptions, as follows:
• that the conflict situation has caused an entrenchment of the different parties demands
and objectives, encouraging them to look only at a very narrow set of options;
• that together the stakeholder groups possess a great deal of creativity and that this can
be unleashed to transfom1 a conflict situation into a positive force for change;
Section 3. 7.8 discusses some of the tools available for developing a range of options and
for focusing these down towards those most promising. These include:
• brainstorming techniques;
• SWOT analysis; and
• ends-means analysis.
The third broad phase is where the skill of the negotiator, broker, facilitator or mediator is
most critical. Essentially it is about bringing together the most promising options into an
agreement which delivers a 'win-win' outcome. Note that the final agreement may need
to encompass a wide range of amendments and conditions, i.e. items needed by one party
or other in order for them to accept the outcome.
Important early stages of this phase are the identification of 'uncertainties' and
'assumptions' pertaining to each promising option. These might include a lack of data,
the risks of adverse side-effects, and assumptions about the magnitude of benefits. Thus
at this stage various scientific and economic studies may be required to fill in data gaps,
reduce risks and verify assumptions. Studies may include evaluations of different options
or scenarios within one option (e.g. sensitivity analysis); clarifying certain options in
terms of location, timing, quantity and quality; and/or exploring the technical, economic,
social or environmental feasibility of new ideas. It is at this stage, for example, that
Benefit-Cost-Analysis might be employed to calculate exactly who gains and who loses
from a particular option. For the losers a way will need to be found to transform this
result into a 'win-win' outcome, for example, by offering compensation in a form that is
perceived by the stakeholder group as contributing to the satisfaction of their underlying
motivations.
With these uncertainties, risks and assumptions reduced to acceptable levels, the
promising options are then brought together into an overall agreement. Note that the
agreement itself may include requirements for testing options, reducing uncertainties and
proving assumptions, with particular decisions linked to particular outcomes.
It is also important for the agreement to be 'reality tested', i.e. tested for its technical,
political and economic feasibility, and to decide on the roles, responsibilities and
monitoring arrangements that will be required.
The last stage is to seek commitment from the constituents of all the stakeholder groups.
For more prolonged processes of consensual negotiation, such commitment may need to
be sought on a continuous basis. What should be avoided is a process of consensus-
Conflicts and disputes over access to rural livelihood assets rarely involve only two
stakeholder groups. As the number of stakeholders increases the capacity for the dispute
to be managed through direct 'face-to-face' consensual negotiations becomes more
difficult. It is likely that conflicts involving multiple stakeholders will require some sort
of facilitator or broker.
• controls the flow and pace of questions brought before the group;
• sets the tone for discussions; and
• helps the group focus on important items and get the work done.
Listed in Box 3. 7.4 are the specific ethics and functions of a facilitator. These functions
can change over the course of a negotiation. For example, in a prolonged workshop
setting, where there are two facilitators the functions of intervener and recorder are likely
to alternate between the two people.
• Explain what you are doing at each stage ; intervener - this is the function most usually
associated with a facilitator. It involves
• Demystify the techniques you use; guiding the process by encouraging the
participants to do the work. Specific activities
• keep your ego out of the process so that the include: directing questions to persons or
participants can develop their own dialogue and people who will move the process forward;
agreement; providing a role model for 'good listening'
and clarifying; reflecting back to the
• facilitate, don't manipulate; participants difficult questions; relating what
they say to their underlying motivations; and
• never ask someone to repeat or give details of their watching out for distorted information and
demands and immediate positions - ask instead 'why' meaningless generalisations
they have these demands, and from there develop an
understanding of their underlying motivations 6 ; designer - this is the function of planning each
session in the process and preparing ideas and
• avoid becoming an advocate for any particular materials Designing may involve re-
outcome; presenting the information recorded during the
previous session, for example, clustering
• avoid becoming an ally of any individual or sub- options or presenting draft agreements more
coherently. Designing requires attention to the
group;
pace of the process, the dynamics of the
participants, the time available, the objectives
• avoid the temptation to become a psychotherapist -
that need to be met, and the tools to be used.
you have no authority to give individuals advice or
guidance;
recorder - this is the function of publicly
capturing discussions: of meetings with
• if it becomes apparent that you have a view (i.e. that
individuals; the outcome of small group
you become partial rather than impartial), ask the
discussions; and the progress and outputs of
group to judge if you should continue in your role,
multi-stakeholder workshops. Recording is
and if so how to manage this change;
usually done whilst the sessions are taking
place. As far as possible the way that the
• avoid jargon, technical terms and references which information is recorded should be consistent
provoke expressions of surprise or disagreement; with the intention, language and individual
words of the participant/s, such that they feel
• help the participants to slow down so as lo avoid ownership of what is being summarised.
facilitating unfeasible and unworkable agreements -
control the 'pace' of the process; don't rush to an supporter - this functions includes: informing
agreement; and people of the arrangements for each session
and making sure everybody can attend;
• learn to recognise the times when some degree of translating or organising translators;
fudging may be essential if there is to be progress, e.g. organising venue arrangements; catering and
an agreement which incorporates conditions for transport; registering participants; writing up
additional technical studies and which are required to etc.
show a particular outcome for the agreement to be
valid
(adapted from IUCN, 1995)
6
Asking 'why' is considered by some facilitators as a sign of immaturity. They would argue that soliciting
underlying motivations is more subtle and protracted, involving mush story-telling and dependent upon a
high degree of trust and rapport.
Workshops (both those that are part of a process of consensual negotiation and those
convened for capacity building such as training) are common. Workshops may be held
with groups of individuals from a single stakeholder group, or take the form of multi-
stakeholder workshops designed, for example, to reach a provisional agreement. Getting
the workshop design right and choosing the right methods are important and will need to
take account of these factors as well as the phase that the process is at. For example, a
different design will be required for developing common interests, or widening options,
or reaching agreement; and will be different again if all three phases are to be collapsed
into one workshop. Note that a workshop may be either a one-off activity, lasting a few
hours and reconvened periodically over time; or be continuous over a number of days,
weeks or months.
3. the objective of the workshop'? - for example, is it to introduce ideas of conflict escalation and management; or to begin
to look for common interests between different options; or to review the effectiveness of the implementation of agreements
etc.
4. which stakeholder groups? - for example, one group at a time ( e.g. as part of a 'shuttle' to begin to expose conflicting
parties to the other sides demands and underlying motivations), or all together (e.g. when the level of mutual understanding
enables the sides to meet without violence).
5. which representatives? - should the representatives be chosen by the stakeholder group, or selected by a third-party.
6. how the representatives will keep their group informed and supportive of the process? - for example, should options
developed at the workshop be voted on by the wider group; and/or could 'observers' from each stakeholder group attend
the workshop to monitor and report back.
7. group management? - for larger and longer processes of conflict management, specialised sub-groups may need to be
formed with their distinctive roles and responsibilities defined. Sub-groups might include a core group (of key stakeholder
representatives with whom the overall process is conducted); within this core group a number of smaller base groups
(which meet regularly within the workshop settings and which provide an opportunity for participants to share and discuss
their thoughts and feelings privately); one or more working groups (which may be permanent or temporary and which are
charged with looking at particular issues, such as the technical verification of different options); a steering committee (to
oversee changes in a process of consensual negotiation and to track progress); a decision-making forum (which may or may
not be the same as the 'core' group); and an implementation group (to verify implementation and adherence to agreements)
8. who to facilitate/mediate? - considerations will need to include: who is available; how they are perceived by the
participants (e.g. their class, religion, gender, outsider/insider appropriateness etc); the workshop location; the different
'cultural' characteristics of the stakeholder groups).
9. where, when and for how long the workshop will be held? - such that people will be able to attend, and that the setting
is conducive to collaborative negotiation (for example, an outside third-party facilitated workshop within a village and in
full view of other community members may give the negative impression of the community leaders' authority being
undermined)
I 0. which language and how best to use translators? - the problems of translation (slowing down workshops and changing
the workshop dynamics) can sometimes be turned into a positive force, for example, by using it to reduce the risk of
arguments between conflicting parties, and by encouraging small break-out groups to work in their local languages and
then report back through a translator.
11. record and monitoring'? - for example, two facilitators might take it in turns to facilitate and record, or there might be one
permanent recorder and one permanent facilitator. Also, how will brainstorming and decision-making be re-presented
back to the participants at the beginning of each new session, for example, in the form of flip charts, hand outs,
photographic record etc.
12.other resources required? - for example, flip charts, slide projectors, video, overhead projectors, tape-recorders etc.)
Plenary sessions gather all participants together. They are used at the beginning and end of workshops
and at significant points in the middle, and work best when introducing ideas, reviewing progress, or more
specifically, prioritising options and demonstrating common ground across a whole group. If used too
much, plenaries can make a workshop monotonous, and may encourage one or two people to dominate the
available time.
Presentations are a good way of building the participants' understanding of the overall process and the
role of the facilitator. For example, where each stakeholder group takes turns to present the findings of a
session on 'brainstorming' options this can instil awareness of the need to consider others' perspectives and
to adapt options accordingly. However, care will need to be taken in deciding if enough goodwill has
developed between the parties for such presentations to be effective.
Mini-lectures may be useful in getting across condensed information in a short space of time. It is more
beneficial if, soon after the lecture, the participants begin to apply the theory to their own experiences.
The mini-lecture may also provide a format for participants to present their perceptions of the conflict to
others.
Small groups of four or more participants encourage intensive creative study of one subject, where ideas
can be expressed, discussed and developed quite freely. A limited time, with a specific focus on one or two
issues may work best. Often one is asked to act as a time-keeper and the other a recorder to report back in
plenary. To prevent creativity being stifled it is often best to keep separate those individuals who are less
able to work together.
Pairs encourage new and closer relationships to be formed, and are suitable for sharing personal
information and feelings. Facilitators often use pairs early in a workshop so that all participants feel they
have related more closely to one other person, which tends to build confidence
Triangles are used in Sessions where a third-person acts as an observer of the other two, and then the roles
alternated so that each of the three people plays observer. This introduces the mode of neutral observer and
gives participants experience in watching what it is that causes tension between parties.
Role playing can assist the working of triangles, by asking participants to act out conflict situations.
Usually these situations are different to those that the process of conflict management is actually about.
Role-playing needs to be handled sensitively and time allocated to bringing people out of their roles.
Visualising is a workshop method of a different sort. Facilitators often find ways of visualising the
concepts~ processes and options that are being discussed, for example as flcv1 diagrams, maps, cluster
diagrams etc. The process of selecting the type of diagram and its development should be participative,
with each participant reflecting on his or her own beliefs and values.
Physical Session, songs, dances and games may be appropriate in certain circumstances, and will be
influenced by the culture and cultural mix of the participants.
I. don't react - control your own behaviour; wait; regain your mental balance; and clarify
in your mind what it is you ultimately want to achieve.
2. disarm the participant - next you need to help the difficult person regain his or her
own mental balance. You need to defuse his/her negative emotions (defensiveness, fear,
annoyance, suspicion, and hostility). Note that these emotions may have already been
defused by the participant's initial outburst, and thus the matter is effectively over. If
this is so, don't react and re-ignite the problem. However, if the hostility seems likely
to continue, you need to try to break through his/her resistance and get him/her to
listen. For example, apologise for any misunderstanding; agree to consider the
demands and arrange a time for this to take place etc.
3. change the game - once you have created a favourable negotiating climate you need to
get the participant to stop bargaining over demands and start exploring ways to meet
both sides' underlying motivations. Thus, engage the participant in problem solving,
recognising that your needs as a facilitator are now part of the process of consensual
negotiation. For example, ask the rest of the group for time away from the workshop to
develop these ideas; and/or consider allocating him/her one of the facilitation support
roles suggested in the diagram in Figure I.
4. make it easy to say yes - work to try to overcome his/her scepticism and guide him/her
to a mutually satisfactory agreement. Begin by identifying solutions to which it is easy
for both sides to agree. It may be important here to help him/her save face (i.e. to
"build golden bridges for the enemy to retreat over';.
5. make it hard to say no - the participant may still believe that he/she can prevail
through superior power. In these cases you need to enhance your own negotiating
power and use it to bring him/her into collaborative negotiations - but do this without
making an enemy who resists even more. For example, you may need to return to the
'ground rules' and ask the whole group for these to be strengthened; re-state our own
objectives for the workshop; and/or discuss the implications for all concerned if a
consensual negotiated agreement fails to materialise.
cynic/critic bully/aggressive
roles
advisor performer/recorder
victim/hurt show-off/
over-talkative
'Warm-up' Sessions aim to introduce people to each other in a way that leads them to develop some
relationship and hopefully some immediate common interests, however tentative. They are also designed
to make the parties appreciate the need to work slowly, and provide a low risk opportunity to meet others
and feel safe among them.
In a highly hostile environment, or in one where a high level of formality is usually observed, 'warm-ups'
must be designed with care. If they encourage the participants to be too intimate people will resist them.
The critical criterion in deciding whether to use a warm-up is whether it will work. If in doubt, don't.
If is often beneficial to have the group create the workshop agenda, or at least have an input to
amending and approving that already prepared. The idea is to give the participants a strong feeling of
involvement from the outset. The overall aim is to generate a list of what the group feels ought to be
done, and then to analyse it using two criteria:
• Urgency - i.e. that an opportunity will be missed if the item is not discussed soon; and
• Significance - i.e. the overall impact of the item on the management of conflict.
The intention here is to avoid the 'urgent' items leading to those that are most 'significant' being left
out of the process.
The facilitator/mediator can start off with one or two items previously agreed with the stakeholder
representatives (such as agreeing that each party presents the findings of the participatory conflict
analysis). Specific attention should be paid to 'timing', i.e. that items do not get included with which
it is impossible to manage with the time available. The facilitator/mediator should try to integrate the
items mentioned into the overall "three-phase" strategy that is likely to govern the workshop process,
i.e. conflict analysis; widening options; and reaching agreement. Note that these three phases may not
need to be described as such to the participants, at least not at the outset.
'Ground rules' are what the group needs in order to function well. They comprise the basic
expectations of individual and group conduct appropriate to what is trying to be achieved. In setting
these rules the facilitator may list their favourite ground rules and invite discussion and acceptance of
them. More preferable is where the facilitator invites suggestions from the participants. This
encourages the group to think about the importance of conduct and collectively create its own rules to
live by for the duration of the workshop. Some common ground rules are given below.
Given the cultural diversity of stakeholders involved in conflicts over community-based natural resource
management (different values, language, wealth, status, decision-making etc.), it is difficult to find
common indicators that could be used to evaluate the mutual acceptability of promising options. There are
two options for dealing with this situation.
• Grand indicators - this is the process of identifying very broad goals for which one or more
'objectively verifiable indicators' can be found. For example, that the option will reduce tension as
measured by no further sabotage to property.
• Individual acceptable indicators - this is where those parties with the most different cultural ethos
agree to set their own OVIs but to choose those that are acceptable to the other parties.
• to provide a 'bench-mark' against which modifications to options and/or their synthesis into agreements
can be measured to ensure that the overall objectives of conflict management are achieved; and
• to provide a means of monitoring the effectiveness of agreements over time that provide a rationale for
bringing parties back into negotiation where agreement fails to live up to expectations.
The more potential solutions there are on the table, the easier it is to find one or more which will work.
While an adversarial approach to negotiation encourages parties to demand a single pre-determined
solution, a process of consensual negotiation seeks to generate as many options as possible in a way that
increases the very basis on which an agreement is developed.
Brainstorming in small groups - the key 'rules' for brainstorming are as follows (see also Section 2.8.J):
• Participants begin by brainstorming individually; then move to working in small groups; finally the
ideas are amalgamated in plenary and a discussion held to see if it is possible to widen the ideas yet
further;
• the activity should be time-bound to encourage creativity, and yet should remain flexible enough to
accommodate situations where new ideas are still flowing;
• ideas should be kept simple, written in no more than three words (the detail can come later);
• the ideas should be written large enough for all participants to see. This is critical since creativity is
inspired by the ideas of others.
• When time is up, the options are brought together and duplicates deleted;
• at no time is criticism of someone's ideas allowed by others - all ideas are valid;
• options in common should be clustered, such as those which address the same specific problem, or
share the same level of uncertainty or impact in common;
Carousel - this technique is useful for brainstorming on a number of different topics at the same time.
The technique also uses small groups, but rotates these groups around a number of topic-specific 'sites'.
As the groups rotate, each group reviews the results of the other groups' work, and then adds their own
ideas. Either a facilitator or one member of each group remains at each site to explain the thinking behind
the ideas and to cluster options suggestions that are similar. The time period of each 'visit' should be
constrained, however, more time will be required for the first group at each site since ideas sometimes take
a while to get flowing.
One benefit of arriving at options through 'brainstorming' is that when the parties all perceive that every
possible options has been identified, this list will encourage people to be realistic about what can be
achieved since there will be no where else to tum but the options before them.
'SWOT' is an acronym for §.trengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats. The analysis is carried out
on any situation, but usually on a policy, strategy or plan, or the lack of one. It may be carried out:
• at the beginning of a project, when it will be about the current situation and developing a common view
of the problem or conflict; or
• it may be carried out to evaluate the likely effectiveness of a proposal or option, and is about
developing monitoring arrangements and cementing an emerging agreement.
The analysis aims to investigate the problem or proposal from both the inside and outside perspectives and
is conducted in two rounds:
1. identification of the 'internal' strengths, weaknesses, and the external 'opportunities' and 'threats' -
often using brainstorming techniques; and
2. identification of ways to avoid or reduce the negative aspects (e.g. the weaknesses and threats) and to
build on the positive aspects (strengths and opportunities).
'Ends-Means' analysis is a way to identify options for reaching a desired end 'goal'.
The analysis starts with identification of a desirable end state of affairs, i.e. a 'goal' ( e.g. a secure cash
income). This could be, for example, some underlying need or value common to one, some or all the
parties. The question is then posed:
"If this is the end goal, what are the means of achieving it?"
income
diversification
agricultural
training
When the brainstorming begins to slow down (i.e. all options arc identified), ask:
"Now, if this original goal is thought of as a 'means' and not an 'end' point, what is the new 'goal' that is
trying to be achieved:
secure cash
----+!income
payment of
school fees
When the discussion slows down the focus returns to identifying the means to achieve this new 'end'.
new MEANS
payment of
loan from i------Pischool fees
credit Union
lease of land
Prioritising the most promising options can be achieved in a number of ways, for example:
• PNI - once all the options are collected in, either within their stakeholder groups or in small
cross-stakeholder groups, the participants are asked to decide whether they see the option as a
Positive, Negative, or just Interesting. If agreement cannot be reached, the option is put into
Interesting. The aim is to identify options where there is common ground, either Positive or
Negative. The Positive ones can be taken forward, the Negative ones rejected or modified
• traffic lights - similar to PNI, except that rather than small groups reaching consensus, each
individual is encouraged to identify the option that they see as positive, negative, or undecided.
Coloured stickers are given out (no limit on the number of stickers) - red for negative (i.e.
STOP), green for positive (i.e. GO) and amber/orange for undecided. The technique is useful
when it is too early in the process, or the level of hostility too high, for small groups to be able
to reach a consensus.
• limited voting - the participants place stickers against their three (or some other limited number)
of favoured options. With this tool the facilitator must explain to the parties that this is not
normal voting (i.e. it is not about majority rule), but simply a way of finding those options where
some of the parties share a positive interest.
• direct ranking - ranking the options on the basis of the results of the above limited voting.
• pros and cons - each option is analysed in terms of its advantages (pros) and disadvantages
(cons). These qualifications can be listed in two columns against each option and is best done
on an individual basis, with no direct criticism allowed of each person's suggestions
• pair-wise ranking, small groups rank the options by: ( 1) comparing them against each other in
'pairs', (2) using this process to develop a set of evaluation 'criteria', (3) judging each option
against the criteria, (4) sitting back and looking for options that 'stand out'.
Uncertainty is always a key element in complex conflict situations. Analysing uncertainty in relation to
options is therefore an important step in building towards an agreement. If uncertainties are not discussed
and understood then this can weaken agreements and bring the process of conflict management into
disrepute. Uncertainties can be divided into four types:
• uncertainties over detail - the timing, place, scale and type of action being promoted by the option;
• uncertainty over effect - what is precise magnitude and significance of the beneficial effects of the
option;
• uncertainties over negative impact - what else is going on that may be negatively affected by the
option; and ·
• uncertainties over required support - what needs to be put in place for the option to be effective.
Once the uncertainty has been classified into one or more of the above, it can be analysed against two key
criteria, as follows:
• reducibility - the amount of effort (time or money) necessary to reduce the uncertainty (e.g. through
studies, public participation, risk analysis, impact prediction etc.)
• relevance - the extent to which an uncertainty makes it difficult for parties to support an option. Some
uncertainties will be fundamental to this support, whilst others will be negligible.
In narrowing further the promising options, the task is to look for uncertainties that are both relevant and
readily reduced. The figure below can be used to decide whether the uncertainty is manageable and
therefore the option can be taken forward.
REDUCE IT
1
less relevant LOW PRIORITY IGNORE IT
This technique is used to get acceptance on those options that have proven to be most promising. It involves
(a) amending options so that they receive mutual acceptance from all parties, and/or (b) bringing together
different options into a single 'package'. The Common Grounding Matrix is probably the most important
tool for a workshop approach to conflict management, since it is the focal point for developing a lasting
agreement.
The matrix requires the parties to say whether they can accept the refined options before them as stated, or
whether acceptance requires modifications to the options as currently stated. For each option the parties have
three choices:
The parties are first asked to assign only A (acceptance) and R (rejection). The output of these choices is
displayed on a matrix. Initial 'common ground' is easily identified as being where all parties choose the
same option or all choose to reject the same option. The focus then moves to building common ground
where there is least difference, for example, where only one party has rejected the option. The party is then
asked:
Frequently the changes needed are quite minor, such as requests for changes in wording or a named agency
or individual to verify the option's implementation. Other times the changes are significant such that they
may affect the acceptability of the option to one of the other parties. Examples might include requesting that
the option be piloted over a defined time period or in a specific location, or asking for some form of
compensation or mitigation to be granted. In these cases the amended option may need further to counter
these changes. The conditions associated with all changes are recorded and the option shifted from a
position of rejection (R) to on one of conditional acceptance (Ac).
i A A R-+ Ac A
1 R R R
11 R
.. .... . ······················---···· ·················--· ··············--------------
.........
i A A A A
2 11 R A A A
lll A R-+Ac R-+Ac A
······ ··················
....... ···········•·········. ·······························-------------
3
R R A R
Where options appear to need complete restructuring, the facilitator can break up the plenary session into
sub-groups. The sub-groups are charged with revising the difficult options in a form that actively seeks
mutual acceptance from all parties. The options are then placed back in to the domain of the whole
workshop and the matrix Session continued.
The effective implementation of those options where mutual acceptance has been
reached needs to be tested. Some of the criteria for this 'reality' testing are listed
below. Some of the more rapid testing can be carried out within the period of the
workshop. The results are then presented to the participants and any changes to the
options and their conditions made accordingly. Where testing involves more time these
activities may need to be built into the overall agreement. For example the agreement
may be implemented as pilot study, with the outcome presented back to the participants
at a later date.
• whether the expectations that each party has of the agreement can be fulfilled;
• whether consideration has been given to rapid gains and/or 'milestones' to support
momentum for longer term changes is maintained;
• whether the agreement includes mechanisms to ensure that each party maintains its
side of the agreement, e.g. independent monitoring, verification etc.
A 'commitment package' is one way to present the agreement. Its strength lies in making the following
specific:
• the actions (i.e. the accepted options) that are to be implemented immediately;
• those that need further exploration before being implemented;
• who is responsible for what;
• when it is to be achieved.
COMMITMENT
PACKAGE
action exploration responsibility delivery date
Your name is Simon West, you are a biologist/environmental chemist and you work for a
multi-national chemical company.
Your latest success has been the discovery of a chemical foam which when sprayed onto
spillages not only neutralises the toxins but also facilitates the cleaning up process
afterwards. In recent trials it demonstrated enormous potential against a whole range of
toxic by-products including dioxins and the diabolically dangerous
polytetrahydroxyphenols.
It has recently come to light that an enormous quantity of the latter substances have been
accumulated in the former Soviet Union as part of their chemical warfare programmes.
Your firm has been contacted by the Minister of Foreign Affairs who has requested that
you mass produce the new foam to place at the disposal of the Russian Government.
They have secretly revealed that a storage facility is in immediate danger of releasing
large quantities of the poison into the environment, threatening the lives of hundreds of
thousands of the inhabitants of the city of Novo Sibirsk and the important Taiga National
Park which was recently designated a site of world heritage by the United Nations. The
assessment is that you have less than one month to get the foam on site.
Your firm has invested large sums in the development and patenting of this foam, which
takes only four days to produce. Now you and your firm are about to reap the rewards of
your hard work and dedication. You are standing at the threshold of a golden future as
the firm's leading scientist and you are looking forward to being acclaimed as a hero by
the Russian people.
After some considerable trouble you have found an importer, Mr Corleone, who has
cornered the market and has a supply of 4,000 SUNNY oranges for sale at an exorbitant
but affordable price of £12,000. You need only 3,000 to ensure a sufficient supply of the
foam for the current crisis.
Unfortunately when you contact Mr Corleone he informs you that a Dr Jack Smith is also
interested in purchasing the oranges for his firm, Drugintemat Ltd, who are competitors
of your firm and with whom you have clashed in the past. There was even one matter
over a disputed patent that led to a long and bitterly fought court case which cost your
firm a lot of money.
Your name is Jack Smith, you are a biologist/pharmacologist and you work for a multi-
national drugs company. Your latest success has been the discovery of a drug which
when injected gives protection against Rozenella, a new disease which is extremely
dangerous for women in the later stages of pregnancy and which invariably causes brain
damage to the unborn child.
Unfortunately the disease is on the increase and an epidemic is forecast for this winter in
the South of the country. The Minister of Health has requested that your firm mass
produces the drug in order to combat this outbreak. It is quite clear that without it many
hundreds of women will die and thousands of infants will be born with defects.
Curiously enough, the drug is produced by a combination of natural products, the main
ingredient of which is found in the juice of oranges, but only that of the old variety
SUNNY which is still grown in small quantities in rural parts of Sicily.
Your firm has invested large sums in the development of this drug, which takes four
months to produce. Now you and your firm are about to reap the rewards of your hard
work and dedication. You are standing at the threshold of a golden future as the firm's
leading scientist and you are looking forward to being a National celebrity.
After some considerable trouble you have found an importer, Mr Corleone, who has
cornered the market and has a supply of 4,000 SUNNY oranges for sale at an exorbitant
but affordable price of £12,000. You need only 3,000 to ensure a sufficient supply of the
drug for the current campaign.
Unfortunately when you contact Mr Corleone he informs you that a Mr Simon West is
also interested in purchasing the oranges for his firm, Envirochem Ltd, who are
competitors of your firm and with whom you have clashed in the past. There was even
one matter over a disputed patent that led to a long and bitterly fought court case which
cost your firm a lot of money.
Your managing director has given you carte blanche to negotiate a deal with Mr West,
and Mr Corleone has indicated that he is happy to go along with any agreement your two
firms care to make, as long as he gets his money. You have £25,000 which you could use
to buy the oranges that you need.
One week ago Mr West sent you an invitation to meet at this office to sort things out, and
today is the day!
In a hidden valley high in the tropical forests of the French protectorate of Papa Noveau
lies the newly gazzetted 240 km 2 "Flora Wildlife Reserve". Management of the reserve is
the sole responsibility the Department of the Environment. Very recently a domestic
mining company - Enterprise Associates - has begun to show interest in the possibility of
mining valuable minerals within the reserve. As we speak, a representative of Enterprise
Associates is on his way to visit the Department of the Environment to discuss the matter.
You are Mr Brown - representative of the Enterprise Associates and their principal
public relations officer. You have a pleasant manner and are someone people generally
like the first time they meet you. You have come to visit Dr Green of the Department of
the Environment to seek permission for your company to explore for minerals within the
"Flora Wildlife Reserve". Your company's satellite imagery (remote sensing) data tells
you that rich deposits of minerals are likely to be found in the lowland alluvial
floodplains of reserve. At this point in time you are only asking permission to explore the
mining 'potential' of the area. There is no decision as yet to actually mine the minerals.
You are well aware that Dr Green will be reluctant to allow you permission to explore for
minerals. However, you think that you might work around this by offering to grant his
department a one-off payment. You have up to Kl 00,000 to use for this purpose, but you
know that your boss would like you to keep the amount as low as possible.
In a hidden valley high in the tropical forests of the French protectorate of Papa Noveau
lies the newly gazzetted 240 km 2 "Flora Wildlife Reserve". Management of the reserve is
the sole responsibility the Department of the Environment. Very recently a domestic
mining company - Enterprise Associates - has begun to show interest in the possibility of
mining valuable minerals within the reserve. As we speak, a representative of Enterprise
Associates is on his way to visit the Department of the Environment to discuss the matter.
You are Dr Green - Director of the Department for Environment. Ultimately all
decisions regarding conservation within the country rest with you. You are particularly
happy that the reserve has been gazetted since the upper reaches of the watershed within
the reserve are home to the habitat of the very rare One Footed Blue Parrot. There are
however no other species of particular rarity or importance within the reserve.
You have been told that Mr Brown has come to visit you about mining for minerals in the
reserve. You are extremely unhappy about this. You therefore have very little interest in
talking to him, except that you are aware that he may be about to offer your department
some sort of financial 'incentive'. This 'incentive' is most definitely of interest to you
since your department's budget is soon to be drastically cut. Without a rapid injection of
around KI00,000 it will be impossible for your department to manage those upland
habitats within the reserve which are so critical to the longterm protection of the One
Footed Blue Parrot.
and Institutionalisation
Number27
October 1996
IIED
INTERNATIONAL
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE PROGRAMME
INSTITUTE-FOR
ENVIRONMENT AND
DEVELOPMENT
PLA Notes 27 _______________ _
-----------------October1996
10
(
\.
42
PLA Notes 27 _______________ _
-------------------:October 1996
perceive to exist between their use of natural include contaminated drinking water or local
resources (wildlife, fish, water, timber, fertile labour shortages.
land, fuelwood etc.) and the use of these
resources by other external stakeholders (e.g. The importance of analysing "concerns" is to
government conservation authorities, tourist provide the policy formulation process with
and safari operators, forestry and water additional options. In its simplest terms, this
resource departments, district council etc.). takes the form of introducing additional
bargaining chips to the policy formulation
Table 1 shows an extract from one of the process.
summary matrices generated in the Zambia
pilot studies. The exploded cell demonstrates For example, a programme of well construction
the importance of providing a full, and where could be initiated in return for local people
possible quantified, explanation of the conflict restraining from wildlife hunting. However,
or concern (see below). experience has shown that such unrelated
arrangements are invariably unsustainable. It
The first column in the matrix summarises the is better practice to develop implementation
principal livelihood activities of local people. programmes that are clearly associated with the
The second, those natural resources important proposed policy. An example would be
to each activity. PRA techniques useful in creating an administrative structure to deliver a
completing this analysis include historical policy of wildlife protection, based on safari
profiles, time trends, transects, resource village hunting revenues being paid directly into the
maps, institutional Venn diagrams, daily hands of those attracted to poaching (e.g. the
routine and seasonal calendars. Information Zimbabwe CAMPFIRE programme).
about the timing, location and users of
resources are documented separately.
Prioritising
To bring the community perspectives alongside
those of external stakeholders, it is necessary to The final column of the matrix prioritises the
precede the PRA fieldwork with an early and community's resource conflicts and concerns.
separate institutional stakeholder assessment. Drawing on the discipline of environmental
This is the idea of combining PRA (essentially impact assessment, each conflict/concern is
an assessment internal to a community) with an divided into its "magnitude" and "importance".
external assessment of the conservation, The "magnitude" of the conflict is a percentage
economic and political forces acting upon the figure in the top-left of the end cells, e.g. 50%
resource base of local people (see Warner 1995 (see Table l). Working with major users of the
in PU Notes 23). Where external conflicts resource, the aim is to reflect the proportion of
concern resources that are also the root of a resource or service that is collectively
community perceived conflicts, the issue 1s perceived to be lost or absent as a result of the
entered into the matrix in the third column. conflict. For example, if, on average, 50% of
farmers' maize crops are lost to elephant,
bushpig or buffalo trampling each year, then
Conflicts and concerns the magnitude of the conflict is 50%.
Conflict resolution emphasises the need to find If there is no direct conflict, but instead the
"common ground" to build consensus between community perceive a development "concern"
stakeholders. Thus, the forth column in the (such as poor firewood supplies in the wet
matrix records not only community-perceived season), it is still possible to identify the
conflicts, but also "concerns". "Concerns" are associated % magnitude of the problem. For
resource issues of importance to local people, example, taking the dry season fuelwood
but which are not the cause of direct conflict supply as the norm, it might be estimated by
with external stakeholders. Examples might those regularly involved in collecting firewood
that only two thirds of domestic fuel needs are
43
PLA Notes 27 ________________ _
-----------------_October1996
met in the wet season from December to April. L indicates resources of low importance
( Thus the magnitude of this concern entered in to sustaining livelihood security or
the matrix would be 33%. A full explanation protecting human welfare.
of the seasonality and nature of the concern
would also be documented. These definitions are intentionally open ended.
This leaves room for the primary stakeholders
The % figures simply indicate the scale of the (or community as a whole) to determine what
conflict or concern. However, to arrive at the the criteria for importance should be. PRA
figure, it is necessary to explore the impact of techniques useful for prioritising conflicts and
the problem on the lives of those affected by it. gauging "importance" include: pairwise
On its own, the single % figure is a clear and comparisons, direct matrix ranking and cluster
simple way of raising the awareness of external ranking. As with the "magnitude" figures, the
stakeholders as to the impact of the "importance" classifications are indicative only.
community's existing resource conflicts. Associated with each classification,
explanatory documentation is provided. This
The heterogeneity of any community means details the types of resources affected, their
that different groups of local people are likely location, the periods of their collection or use,
to be involved in the utilisation of different issues of uncertainty and risk and the rational
natural resources. However, for ease of behind the magnitude and importance
interpretation the summary matrix gives only classifications (see Table I).
the primary community stakeholders - those
directly dependent upon a particular resource in
terms of either employment, gender, wealth etc. Resolutions
Other cases may require different divisions or
levels of disaggregation. The Conflict Analysis Framework is not a tool
for policy formulation. It is a means to bring
The second means by which a resource the community perspective into a wider process
conflict/concern is described is to identify its of consensus-building between all stakeholders
"importance" to these primary stakeholders likely to be affected by, or influential in, the
(bottom-right of the end cells, see Table I). policy. However. it can be used to encourage
This figure is required because the magnitude local people to investigate options for resolving
of a conflict does not necessarilv reflect its their perceived resource conflicts.
significance. For example, the hungry season
may coincide with the onset of the wet season The idea is that these options can then be used
(e.g. before the maize crop can be harvested). as starting points for \..,.ider negotiations over
Elephant trampling of the annual cassava crops policy. The Conflict Analysis Framework
at this time may be considered highly categories conflict resolutions into one of three
important, even though the crop loss, in terms types. These are indicated in the middle of the
of annual yield may be small, e.g. I 0%. end cells (see Table l) as follO\s,,·s:
44
PLANotes 27 __________________ _
-------------------~October 1996
(
Table 1. Extract from a Summary Matrix
~
Pemzanent Fertiliser Late delivery 40%
agriculture (I month) Re -
H
* see Table 2
-----
Supporting Documentation
;_,;.--
Community
Activity
Community Resource Conflict/Resolution
\
Permanent Fertiliser - according to .Hagnitude - Land holders are dependent upon the delivery of fertilisers by
Agriculture the elders in the outside agencies, and over the last few years the lack of status of the village has
village, in the mid meant that fertilisers arrive late (average delay I month). This has lead to a
1960s cheap Sjlllhetic decline in the yields produced and a corresponding reduction in the cash earned
fertilisers were from maize sales. Participants suggested that the late arrival of fertilisers leads
introduced to aid the to a 40% reduction in maize yields which more than wipes out their profit
cultivation of maize. margins. In addition, fertiliser costs have risen steadily, which when combined
This led to a switch \vith the reduced yields, has lead to an increasing number of villagers talcing on
away from organic debt.
(grasses and manure)
fertilisers, resulting in Importance - As the primary source of cash income, the late arrival and
a gro'wing dependency increasing price of fertilisers for maize is of critical importance. Given that
upon s}nthetics. maize production (and to a certain ex-tent household income expenditure) is the
preserve of men in the village, the critical importance of this concern is
perceived less by the women and waged labourers of the village. The concern of
the former is more 'with food security, and therefore cassava.
45
_________________ PLA Notes 27 ________________ _
October 1996
46
PLANotes 27 _______________ _
------------------:October1996
wish to review their regional policies or lend Thirdly, the matrix is intended to be simple and
their support to implement the specific yet meaningful. In order to achieve this a
resolutions forwarded by the communities. trade-off needs to be made between promoting
meaning (by disaggregating each community
At the time of writing, NPWS are awaiting into all stakeholder groups) and promoting
confirmation from USAID of funding for a simplicity, by limiting the disaggregation to the
programme of GMA management planning major social divisions, e.g. gender, wealth,
across Zambia. If granted, there is every education.
possibility that the Conflict Resolution
Framework will play a role in strengthening the Fourthly, we feel that the introduction of a
participation process. more systematic approach to PRA (by drawing
on conflict resolution and environmental impact
assessment techniques), improves the quality of
• Lessons learned the information generated. The matrix enables
the relative importance of different conflicts to
Some of the key lessons learned from the pilots be made explicit.
are as follows. First, before its application,
screening criteria should be employed to Outsider interpretation of local perspectives is
determine the feasibility of applying the a problem that currently faces efforts to link
technique. Most of these criteria would apply PRA to policy. It is important that facilitators
to all uses of PRA for policy formulation, and faithfully represent iocal perspectives in both
include: the summary matrix and background
documentation.
• adequacy in skill and expenence of PRA
facilitators 2 The Conflict Analysis Framework is part of a
• a pre-arranged process whereby the results of wider participatory framework methodology
the PRA rapidly feed into policy called the Framework for Consensus
formulation; Participation in Protected Areas (FCPPA).
• political willingness for policy to be This broader methodology builds the Conflict
influenced by the local level; Analysis Framework into a comprehensive
• a capability for external stakeholders to process of strategic resource management
negotiate collaboratively; planning for protected areas.
• adequacy of human and financial resources
for the CAPs to be implemented. • Dr. Michael Warner (lecturer in
environmental planning}, Caroline Robb
Secondly, the Conflict Analysis Framework (consultant with the World Bank, Poverty and
highlights the debate over the extent to which Social PoOcy Deparbnent); Angus Mackay
(consultant with Environmental Resources
PRA should exclusively promote "indigenous Management); and Mary-Ann · Brocklesby
knowledge", or alternatively encourage the (technical officer with Overseas Development
transfer of "outsiders" knowledge to local Administration).
people. When introducing the resource
conflicts perceived by external stakeholders to Correspondence should be sent to •Or;
the community, care needs to be taken not to Warner, The Bartlett School of Planning,
unduly influence the goal of presenting the University College London,22 Gordon Street.
London WC1H OQB. FuH versions of the
local perspective.
Conflict Analysis Framework and the FPPAP
are also available from 1his address. ·
2
Fact·1·1tators may be the conservation authorities. If
antagonism with local people is too great, other
facilitators, viewed by local people as independent. may
be used in collaboration with conservation authorities.
To raise awareness and build trust, it is important that
the facilitation team should include conservation
authorities, if possible.
47
• Putman, R. (1993) Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy,
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
• Ury, W (1991) Getting Past No: Negotiating with Difficult People, London: Century
Business
• Warner, M. and Jones, P. (1998) Assessing the Need for Managing Conflicts in
Community-Based Natural Resource Projects, ODI Natural Resources Perspective
Paper, 35, London: Overseas Development Institute.
• Warner, M. and Robb, C (1996) Strategic Development Planning at the Project Level:
A Modification to Participatory Planning, Community Development Journal, 31(4)
The Project
On the small island of Atol in the Indian Ocean, a local NGO - the Social Concern Agency (SCA) - has
been funded by the Swedish aid agency to provide environmental management skills and opportunities to
communities in the coastal district of Coralbay. The issues to be addressed by the two-year programme
relate to coastal resource management, and are likely to include forestry management, fish stock
rehabilitation, livestock husbandry, coral acquaculture, and mangrove protection. Coralbay district has its
main centre at Cook town, which in turn has good transport links to the island's main commercial centre at
Atol city. Income for the people living in the rural area comes from logging, fishing and dairy cattle.
Because of its close proximity to Atol city, the natural resources of the district (forests, various non-timber
forest products, fish, coral, shells and grazing lands) have been exploited by government agencies and
private companies with little return to the land owners or those who use the resource at the local level. The
project aims to put the management of these resources into the hands of the traditional land owners and
resource users, and through this to build employment opportunities, promote sustainable natural resource
management, and add value to the use of resources prior to their export from the district.
The Conflict
The district of Coralbay comprises five dispersed settlements and Cook town (population 2,500). The
settlements are scattered along the coast around Coralbay. The bay is a shallow, coral-rich body of water,
fringed by mangroves three years ago. A total fishing ban was placed on the bay by the area Chief under
guidance from the Fisheries Department. The ban lasted one year. Since then fish species that have been
absent for many years began to be observed. The total ban has now been lifted for all but the breeding
season (October to February), however only nets of a specific hole size are allowed on the bay to give the
re-emerging fish stocks a chance to reach adulthood. Fish wardens, people appointed from these
settlements are authorised to police the waters for illegal fishing and undersized nets. Conflict has arisen
between those community groups who want to fish during the breeding season and use smaller sized nets,
and those who wish to respect the restrictions. Other conflicts have arisen as certain individuals have been
found to be using undersized nets. Two fishermen have been attacked by a mob for fishing at night during
the breeding season, and a number of boats have been damaged. The situation is in danger of escalation,
not least because there are land disputes outstanding which until the recent troubles had lain dormant.
Stakeholder Groups
An initial analysis of the conflict by SCA identified six key parties with which it might be possible to
negotiate to end the violence and prevent its escalation.
Other parties who were considered potentially important to the management of the conflict (i.e. in
providing opportunities or blocking any proposals), included: landowners; council of elders; Women's
Association; Forestry Department. These parties will not be part of the initial collaborative negotiation, but
may be called upon as and when needed.
Existing Approaches
Representatives of those members of the Fishing Association who are in favour of the continuing
restrictions have been to the Chief to ask him to solve the difficulties and stop the violence. His response
is that the cash incentives of fishing during the breeding season are insurmountable since no other cash
income opportunities are available at this time. On approaching the District Council, the Association was
advised to try to bring those breaking the ban infront of the local magistrate, however, this was seen as too
divisive and would probably cause further bad feeling. Under normal circumstances such conflicts would
be resolved through the Chief convening a meeting of the council of elders drawn from the five
settlements, and this group reaching a consensus as to how to break the deadlock. The council are
generally viewed by Lheconflicting parties as impariial, and consensus reached in three steps: an initial
meeting where the elders speak to each group separately and encourage the parties to be 'reasonable' in
their demands; a second meeting where each side puts its case and ideas for resolution; and a final meeting
where elders make their deliberation. Agreements reached over the last few years have usually been
documented.
Consensus-Building Plan
SCA have already analysed the conflict in a participatory way with each of the stakeholder groups, with an
emphasis on enabling each party to identifying their underlying motivations (needs, fears etc.)'. Each party
has agreed to send representatives along to a two day workshop. The workshop is to be facilitated by two
staff from SCA, both viewed by the communities as outside and impartial. At this point in time, it is not
considered necessary to train community leaders in facilitation and mediation skills. If the workshop
proves successful, then it will be used as a spring-board for demonstrating the benefits of a programme of
community training in conflict management that could be implemented at a later date. In an effort to create
a level playing field for negotiation, the two-day workshop will begin with each party presenting its
understanding of the conflict. However, there are additional issues that are likely only to come to light
during the two-days (see individual briefings).
1. IMPORTANT - Periodically throughout the two day role-play, the participants should be encouraged to
mingle with each other within their roles (eg over coffee) in order to share each others' underlying
motivations, needs and fears - thus recreating the level of knowledge that would have been known as a
result of the earlier participatory analysis.
Background
Coralbay is a coastal area of about five square miles and subject to declining fish stocks.
Over the last twenty years, fishermen have experienced reduced catch volumes, a loss of
species diversity, a reduction in the average size of fish per catch, and a reported slowing
of the growth rate of individual fish. The Coralbay Fishing Association was registered
five years ago to co-ordinate fishing in and around Coralbay to try to turn around this
decline. The onset of the total fishing ban three years ago loosened the friendship and
mutual co-operation between the members. Although the total ban was lifted two years
ago, kept in place has been a ban on fishing in the main breeding season (from October to
February). In addition, net sizes have been limited to a minimum of 100mm.
No member in the Association admits to breaking the breeding season ban or net size
restrictions, but at least a third of the members are involved in one or other of these
activities. Frustrated by the those breaking the ban, a minority of members have been
responsible for acts of aggression towards those who are flouting the restrictions, and
have sought to damage a number of fishing boats.
Role Playing
Chairman of the Association (Mr Rich) - well educated, generally supports the fishing
restrictions, and wishes to see stocks returned to their historically high levels. As well as
his two sons continuing to fish for the family (outside of the breeding season), he has a
secure year-round income from dairy farming interests. He is not really concerned one
way or the other about resolving the conflict, except that he rather enjoys his privileged
position in the community and would not like to see this undermined by escalating
violence.
Association secretary (Mr Poor) - spokesman for those disillusioned members of the
Association who wish to see the continuing restrictions lifted. Mr Poor will not admit
that he himself has ever broken the ban or net size restrictions, or is involved in violence
or damage to boats, but he does "fully understand and emphasise" the motives of those
who do. Like many of those breaking the restrictions, he has a family to feed, clothe and
send to school, and has no alternative secure income available during the period of the
fishing ban from October to February. He also knows nothing of the SCA's Coralbay
coastal resource management project.
Background
The District Council comprises elected members from each of the five settlements along
the coast, as well as three representatives from Cook town. The council is the main local
institution involved with the SCA in planning the Coralbay Coastal Resource
Management.
The council members are aware that their positions are due for re-election soon. Each is
therefore keen to demonstrate active support for those likely to vote for them. About
half of the area's eligible voters are in favour of the continuing restrictions, and half are
against.
Role Playing
Chairman of the Council (Mrs Left) - has a strong constituency with the poor of the
coastal settlements. As such she is a vocal advocate of the need to reduce the allowable
fish net sizes so that smaller sized fish can be caught, thereby boosting fish sales and
local incomes. However, she recognises that the restrictions currently have the support of
the Department of Fisheries and therefore are unlikely to be changed. She calculates that
if she can secure 'alternative' income earning opportunities for the poor in her
constituency to cover the period October to February (i.e. when the ban is still in place),
then she may be able to hold on to her position on the council. Hence she is currently
working closely with the SCA to see if they can help.
Other leading voice on the council (Mr Right) - is hoping to be re-elected by being seen
to support the fishing restrictions currently in place. His real motivation for this is that if
he can show that over the next two years his support for the restrictions helped regenerate
fish stocks in the bay, then when the next election comes around in two years time he will
emerge as "the one who saved the bay" and be elected to the position of Chairman. In the
mean time, he will not support any arrangement that he thinks will mean that he is voted
out of the council in the elections next month.
Background
The Area Chief and the sub-chiefs have seen their traditional authority eroded over the
last few years, as those with cash (such as Mr Rich) become perceived as more important
and influential. However, the Chief still commands a great deal ofrespect, especially
from the poorer families in the district.
Role Playing
The Area Chief (Chief Honcho) has agreed to represent the sub-chiefs at the two day
workshop. Though he would never say so in public, he does not object to his people
fishing during the breeding period, and has been known to accept small gifts for his silent
support of these actions.
The reason he is attending the workshop is because he believes that it might offer a way
for him and the sub-chiefs to enhance their declining importance. In particular, he
expects to secure a good deal for the poorer families of the district, and thereby sow
indebtedness amongst these people that who raise his status. The Chief is not corrupt by
nature. He is driven by a desire to bring back some of the traditional values and respect
that he and his forefathers once enjoyed. Enhancing his wealth through the receiving of
gifts or owing of favours is the only way that he can see of achieving this. If questioned
on the subject ofreceiving gifts he will however strongly deny the acquisition.
Background
The Fisheries Department is responsible for the fish stock surveys and quantitative
analysis that led to the decision to lift the total fish ban two years ago, but to retain limits
on net size and a ban from October to February during breeding. The period October to
February was chosen because this is the breeding period of the Bubble fish - that species
most in need of rejuvenation in the bay. However, there are other fish (particularly Tuna,
which can be caught with 500mm nets) that are present in sufficient numbers to be
harvested all year round if the overall volume of 'take' is kept low.
Role Playing
Field Officer (Mrs Calculus) - visits Coralbay every week to find out from the Chief and
the Fish Wardens how the restrictions are working and to collect survey data. She is
concerned to see the restrictions working properly, but is ultimately interested only in the
numbers of Bubble fish, since this is the species most in need ofrejuvenation. If she
fails to bring about a measurable increase in the population of Bubble fish by the year
end, she is unlikely to receive promotion within the Department.
Background
There are six fish wardens employed by the Department of Fisheries, each paid a small
wage to ensure that no one fishes during the period October to February. Three of these
six are retained year-round to ensure that net sizes meet the restrictions laid down when
the total fish ban was lifted. The wardens all come from the poorer households in the
district, and are all fishermen themselves. Rumour has it that the reason why some of the
members of the Coralbay Fishing Association are breaking the restrictions in one way or
another is because some of the Wardens are doing the same.
Role Playing
Spokesmen for the Fish Wardens (Mr Baton) - is content that he and his wardens are
doing everything in their power to enforce the restrictions. He is, however, upset that the
amount of money they are paid is so small, and that the work takes him away from his
family for such long periods of time. He will fiercely defend himself and his wardens
against any charges of colluding with other fishermen to break the restrictions, although
he is secretly suspicious that two of his men may be doing just that. The reason why he
and the other wardens took the job is for the status that it gives them in their settlements,
as well as the cash that it brings during the period October to February when other
sources of cash are not available. If some way could be found to increase the pay of the
wardens, he feels sure that any collusion between the wardens and the fishermen would
cease.
Background
SCA is a long-standing and well respected NGO. It is staffed by local people and funded
from both domestic and international donors. SCA has a good track record in the
implementation of community-based natural resource management projects, particularly
in the forestry, fishing and livestock sectors. The NGO also manages a number of
community health care projects, including a fully funded construction programme of
small health clinics. The latter programme has yet to reach the Coralbay area.
The Coastal Resource Management Project is intended to return the Coralbay natural
environment around - from one where resources are continuously degrading, to one where
their utilisation is sustainable. At the same time the intention is to economically 'up-lift'
the poorest households around the bay by, for example, encouraging the processing of
timber, non-timber forest products, fish and milk products prior to their distribution to
Cook town and beyond. The project is designed to be 'process-led'. That is to say,
although the overall objectives of the project are defined, the pathways to achieving them
will be determined as the project progresses. There is therefore a considerable degree of
flexibility in the way in which the funds of the project can be allocated.
Role Playing
The Project Manager (Miss Care) - is a dedicated individual, highly educated and
energetic. This is her first appointment as a project manager and she is fearful that the
project might not be successful. As such she dearly wishes to see the current fishing
conflict resolved, not least because it is preventing her building rapport with the
fishermen which she needs to be able to begin the project.
Her style of management is one of actively encouraging individuals and groups to come
up with their own ideas. As such she will give due consideration to all ideas for the
rehabilitation and management of the various natural resource sectors which fall under
the objectives of the project. Funds can be arranged to be released quickly, but only if
these are to be used for investment purposes, e.g. in equipment or as loans. Her budget
cannot be used for wages. In addition, she also has developed a good working
relationship with the project manger of SCA's Health Clinic programme and has had
some success in placing Coralbay as next on the list for a community health clinic.
In a remote comer of Pigeon Island in the South Pacific, "Agricultural Enterprise Limited" (AEL) wishes
to establish a 5,000 ha rubber plantation by clear-felling an area of tropical lowland forest. The site
selected falls within the boundaries of the Tukubu Conservation Area - a 250krn2 river basin 'proposed' as
a legally recognised protected area by the government's Department of Environment. The plantation site
covers approximately half of the lowland flood-plain of the Tukubu river basin. Although the full bio-
diversity value of the Tukubu Conservation Area is not yet known, it is expected that the majority of the
area's critical habitats will fall within this same lowland zone (see map). In particular, bird surveys
conducted by Dr Strangelove in the 1950's suggests that as much as 20 of the world's 43 species of
endangered 'Birds of Paradise' are to be found within this one lowland forest. As a direct result of hearing
about the AEL proposals, the land upon which the rubber plantation is to be established is now the subject
of a dispute between two indigenous clans (the Tukubu-west people and Tukubu-east people). After many
months of consultation and negotiation between all parties, a local NGO skilled in conflict management -
the Agency for People and the Environment (APE) - has been jointly invited by the Department of
Environment and the Ministry of Agriculture to determine whether it is feasible to prepare a Resource
Management Plan for the Tukubu Conservation Area. Development of the Plan is to be the subject of a
two day facilitated workshop.
Stakeholder Groups
An initial analysis of the conflict by APE identified six key stakeholder groups. These groups need to be
involved in preparation of the Resource Management Plan ifit is to have any chance of being effective and
sustainable. APE has already undertaken five months of office-based conflict analysis, participatory
conflict analysis and community training with the Tukubu communities, consultation with all other
stakeholder representatives, and awareness raising through the local media 7. It has now been agreed that
everything is in place for the workshop to be held to develop the Resource Management Plan. Prior
approval has been give by each of the six stakeholder groups for named individuals to represent their
interests at the workshop. Drawing on recent training in negotiation skills, the two land owning groups
involved have each been able to form a common position on their land claims. Each group has delegated
two representatives to attend the workshop. The list of stakeholder groups and their workshop
representatives are as follows:
• Agricultural Enterprise Limited • Ministry of Agriculture
• Mr Bruce Outback (Director) • Mr Walter Palmer (First Secretary to a Junior
• Dr Kafa Mubi (Technical Minister)
Specialist) • Mr Stanley Busse (Technical advisor)
• Tukubuwest Landowners Association • Department of the Environment
• Mrs Elizebeth Araho (Chairman) • Mr Tori Kanion (Deputy Director)
• Mr Pahai Maboroga (Secretary) • Dr Simon Fawn (Conservation Specialist)
• Tukubueast Landowners Association • Delegation of the European Union
• Mr Sirigi Mano (Chairman) • Mrs Simone Blanch (Assistant to Head of
• Ms Ira Wagara (Secretary) Delegation)
• Dr Luigi Dolomite (Natural Resource
advisor)
7
I. IMPORT ANT- Periodically throughout the two day role-play, the participants should be encouraged to mingle
with each other within their roles (eg over coffee) in order to share each others' underlying motivations, needs and
fears - thus recreating the level of knowledge that would have been known from the earlier participatory analysis.
Your company has recently completed a survey to identify the suitability of land across
Pigeon Island for establishing plantations of "rubber" trees. A 5,000 ha site within the
Tukubu Conservation Area came was identified by the survey as 'the highest quality land
available'. Close to this site were identified three alternative sites of slightly lower
quality. All three alternatives lie outside the Tukubu Conservation Area, and each is
predicted to return a 15% net annual profit over 20 years. In contrast, the Tukubu
Conservation Area site is expected to return a more healthy 30% profit per year.
Although you would like to establish the whole 5,000 hectare, you could still make 30%
profit on anything over 2,500 ha. Below 2,500 ha and the profit margin would slip to
25%.
AEL' s survey only considered bio-physical data and did not take account of social or
environmental factors. It is for this reason that your company has decided to attend the
workshop. You are interested in seeing whether there are social and environmental
problems in the Tukubu Conservation Area that indicate that you should move your
investment to one of the three alternative sites. However, you maintain the hope that the
proposed Resource Management Plan for the Tukubu Conservation Area will enable you
to establish the plantation in this area. You therefore intend to keep your knowledge of
the alternative sites quiet unless the need arises.
The process of managing rubber plantations requires labour in the form of"rubber
tappers". This is a semi-skilled job and you hope to be able to train local people and
employ them to do this work on the plantation. You see the offer of 'employment' to the
local population as your most effective incentive for their co-operation and acceptance of
the plantation.
You are not expecting such "rural" people to argue for a percentage share in the profits of
the enterprise. However, if this matter is raised, you intend to do your best to push the
discussion away from profit-sharing and towards the offer of employment.
The Tukubu-west Landowners Association have recently taken legal advice from an
independent land mediator from outside the province on their land ownership claim in the
Tukubu Conservation Area. The advice suggests that the Tukubu-west people have a
stronger claim to the area proposed by AEL for the rubber plantation than the people of
Tukubu-east. The Association has also decided that, in line with what has been taking
place in other areas of the country, they want to strike a deal with AEL to lease their land
for a 5% share of the rubber profits. The members intend to hold out for both the full
land claim and 5% share of profits. However, if the pressure becomes too great they are
willing to give a little on both counts. This is because some of the Association members
are related by marriage to the Tukubu-east people and do not want to cause unnecessary
conflict by keeping the Tukubu-east Landowners Association out of the profit sharing
altogether. The Association will however 'fight to the end' to stop the Tukubu-east
people from claiming that they own the land belonging to the Tukubu-west people.
The Association's interest in AEL is not only about cash. The Tukubu-west people
desperately want to be able to earn a sustainable income with which to support their
families. As a community they also need education and better health services. A share of
the profits from the AEL rubber plantation offers the best opportunity they have yet seen
for these services to be become a reality.
Field staff from the Department of the Environment have recently been in the region
raising awareness over the advantages and disadvantages of AEL's proposal. As a result
the Association has noted concern among its members that although the land will only be
'leased' to AEL, the intended clear-felling means that their hunting lands will be lost for
ever. In addition the Department tells them that they will no longer be able to collect
fruits, wild crops, medicinal plants and other non-timber forest products. It has further
come to their attention that the pesticides to be used on the plantation may mean lead to
problems with fishing stocks in the rivers adjacent to the plantation.
The Tukubu-east Landowners Association have heard about the proposed AEL rubber
plantation and are keen to receive a share of the profits by leasing AEL their land.
Although the Tukubu-east people have historical evidence supporting their claim to the
land upon which the proposed plantation is to be established, they are aware that the
claim of the Tukubu-west people is far stronger. Despite this, they are still expecting to
gain some share of the rubber profits. Their hope is for a cut of around 5% of the profits
per year.
The Association's interest in AEL is not all about cash. The Tukubu-east people
desperately want to be able to earn a sustainable income with which to be able to support
their families. As a community they also need education and better health services. A
share of the profits from the AEL rubber plantation offers the best opportunity they have
seen yet for these services to become a reality.
Field Staff from the Department of the Environment have recently been in the region
raising awareness of the advantages and disadvantages of AEL's proposal. As a result,
the Association has noted a concern that although the land will only be 'leased' to AEL,
the intended clear-felling means that their hunting lands will be lost for ever. In addition,
they are told that they will no longer be able to collect fruits, wild crops, medicinal plants
and other non-timber forest products. The Field Staff have also pointed out that the land
may be unusable for agriculture when it is returned to the landowners in 20 years time.
The Ministry is keen to see the development of rubber as an export crop. The world price
for rubber has remained consistently high and is predicted to do so for the foreseeable
future. In particular, the climate of Pigeon Island makes it ideal for the establishment of
rubber, the highest yields for which come from plantations established on lowland flood-
plains.
Two years ago the Ministry held secret talks with Expat Industries Incorporated (EII).
This joint public/private venture (which operates under the name of "Agrex Holdings
Limited") has secured borrowings ofK25 million, half in the form of a loan, halfraised
through a share flotation. This capital is to be used to construct a rubber processing and
refining plant at Port Idyllic on the island's remote south coast. To repay the loan and
return dividends to the share holders, "Agrex" will need a substantial supply ofraw
rubber.
Construction of the plant is ahead of schedule. The Ministry, as the main investor, is
keen have meet its target of 75,000 ha of viable rubber plantations across Pigeon Island
within the next two years. This is the land area needed for the plant to return a profit.
The AEL proposal in the Tukubu Conservation Area is important to the Ministry since of
late the target of 75,000 ha has seemed unlikely to be met in time.
The Department of the Environment has proposed the Tukubu Conservation Area as a
"Wildlife Preserve", thereby affording it legal protection under government legislation.
The legislation states that clearfelling in "Wildlife Preserves" is strictly prohibited. The
only protected areas legislation that allows for clear-felling is where the area is designated
as a "Nature Reserve". In these cases a Resource Management Plan must be drawn up
detailing the zones to be targeted for clear-felling, and outlining how the funds so
generated would be used to promote nature conservation within the Reserve.
When asked to defend the Department's desire for the Tukubu Conservation Area to be
designated a "Wildlife Preserve", their staff proudly point to the country's National
Environmental Management Action Plan (NEMAP), prepared by the Department after
Pigeon Island signed the Bio-Diversity Convention in Rio in 1992. The key passage of
text usually cited is as follows:
"lowland rain-forest constitutes our country's greatest wealth and yet is under the greatest threats. It is
probably the most valuable long-term natural asset the country possesses. Research has shown that
hunting for food for the protein it provides, and harvesting wild plants, brings immesurablely more value to
the local community than selling off the logging rights or converting the forest to cash crops" (Pigeon
Island NEMAP, 1993, page 87).
As well as being home to a number of rare species of 'Birds of Paradise', it is known that
the type of lowland tropical forest present in the Tukubu Conservation Area is likely to
host many plants of medicinal value. As such the Department is currently engaged in a
programme to survey the commercial value of medicinal plants in the Tukubu
Conservation Area. It has begun the survey by focusing on the same area proposed by
AEL for the rubber plantation.
The EU Delegation has a K60 million, five year, development co-operation agreement
with the Government of Pigeon Island. These funds are to be spent on an agreed
programme of projects primarily in the construction, agriculture and mining sectors.
Most recently the EU has provided financial assistance from the fund to develop the
export potential of Pigeon Island for processed agriculture products. For example, the
EU has loaned the Ministry of Agriculture KS million for the construction of a rubber
processing and refining plant at Port Idyllic. It is expecting a return on its investment.
There is little flexibility for the EU to be able to shift funds in the development co-
operation agreement from the pre-established programmes. However, the EU Delegation
in Pigeon Island has an in-country "Small-Scale Project Initiative" budget line available
to support local community development projects up to a maximum ofKS0,000 per
project per year.
Sources of Information
• Camey, D. (1999) Approaches to Sustainable Livelihood for the Rural Poor, ODI
Poverty Briefing, 2, London: Overseas Development Institute
• Conroy, C. Rai, A., Singh, N. and Chan M-K (1998) Conflicts Affecting Participatory
Forest Management: Some Experiences from Orissa. (Revised version of a paper
presented at the Workshop on Participatory Natural Resource Management in
Developing Countries: Mansfield College, Oxford, 6-7 April, 1998.)
• Craig G., Hall, N. and Mayo, M. (1998) Editorial Introduction: Managing Conflict
through Community Development, Community Development Journal, 33,2 pp77-79
• Hobley, M. and Shah, K. (1996) What Makes a Local Organisation Robust? Evidence
from India and Nepal, Natural Resource Perspectives, 11, London: Overseas
Development Institute
• Moore, C (1996) The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict,
Jossey-Bass
• Ury, W (1991) Getting Past No: Negotiating with Difficult People, London: Century
Business
• Warner, M. and Jones, P. (1998) Assessing the Need for Managing Conflicts in
Community-Based Natural Resource Projects, ODI Natural Resources Perspective
Paper, 35, London: Overseas Development Institute.
• Warner, M. and Robb, C (1996) Strategic Development Planning at the Project Level:
A Modification to Participatory Planning, Community Development Journal, 31(4)