Which of the following best explains why the case worker recommended conciliation?

Conflict Resolution in Public Participation 

Please watch this video before beginning this chapter: Partners for Democratic Change, “Social Conflicts: A Development Opportunity” Peru Conflict video (in English) [video attached].

If public participation and transparency is emphasized from the beginning of a process, it can be a method to reduce or avoid major conflict.  When conflict does arise, consider the conflict prevention and resolution techniques described in this section.

Conflict prevention and resolution refers to a broad set of practices and techniques aimed at reducing the likelihood of conflict and, if conflict emerges, developing effective solutions to those conflict situations. Conflict prevention and resolution can often be most effective with the help of impartial third parties such as a mediator or facilitator. 

Conflict prevention and resolution techniques can be applied in many contexts, including adjudications, administrative and civil judicial enforcement actions, permit issuance, protests of contract awards, administration of contracts and grants, , negotiations, and litigation.  In addition, these techniques can be used to prevent and resolve internal disputes such as workplace grievances and equal employment opportunity complaints, and to improve labor-management partnerships. Conflict prevention and resolution techniques, with the use of an impartial third-party, can also be effective in contentious collaborative processes, including those designed to build consensus, such as agreement-seeking rulemaking, policy development and stakeholder involvement. Such processes are addressed in the chapter titled “Tools for Consensus Building and Agreement Seeking” but, in a conflictual situation, can be overlaid with an impartial third-party who is skilled in conflict prevention and resolution strategies.

This section describes some common conflict prevention and resolution techniques and tools that practitioners from sponsoring agencies may consider in their public participation efforts. Faster resolution of issues

Identifying Conflict 

A conflict may arise in the public participation process when perspectives from two or more parties are incompatible. Conflicts may be due to a difference of belief, values, understanding, or interests. The nature of the conflict may be between two parties that are at the same level (state-to-state) or different level (federal government to state government), where the power implications may be the same, or different. Involving a mediator or facilitator as early as possible will help to avoid escalation of conflict. 

Conflict may show up in numerous ways, including: interpersonal tension, disagreements about facts, verbal arguments, being “stuck” on a problem, resistance to changes, or inability to reach decisions.

Conflict Management and Resolution 

Conflict management is the process, generally relying upon an impartial third-party, of using techniques to manage a specific conflict, or a “stream” of conflicts, in situations where conflict may continue to exist, but it is at a manageable level. Conflict resolution refers to the techniques used to resolve the conflict, which implies that the conflict is solvable. Both conflict management and conflict resolution involve techniques and tools that focus communication on identifying the issues and finding solutions that satisfy the parties involved. The general process involves becoming familiar with the landscape, setting the scene, gathering information, clarifying the problem(s), brainstorming possible solutions, and negotiating a solution. 

The decision to use a conflict prevention and resolution technique in a particular conflict must reflect an assessment of the specific parties, issues, and other factors. Some governmental and non-governmental organizations are subject to regulations or policies related to the use of conflict prevention and resolution. It is recommended that before employing a specific technique, an assessment should be completed regarding the applicable guidance on particular conflict prevention and resolution techniques for a particular type of dispute. 

The participants and the impartial third party should work together to establish a common understanding of how confidentiality protections apply in a specific process. In most cases, this understanding should be recorded in a written confidentiality agreement. This initial work will benefit all parties by clarifying confidentiality expectations before full initiation of the process.

Some of the most commonly used conflict management and conflict prevention and resolution techniques for environmental efforts are summarized in this table and further described later in this section. 

Convening

Convening is a process in which a conflict resolution professional engages with stakeholders – through interviews, research, focus groups, and other information-gathering techniques – to clarify important aspects of the conflict. Generally, once the conflict resolution professional has gathered all of the relevant information, they will prepare a report or presentation describing the findings. Key areas of focus may include:

• Identification of issues: what are the presenting and underlying issue(s) that seem to be causing the conflict?
• Identification of actors: who are the stakeholders, what are the relationships among them, and what are their values, interests, concerns, and needs?
• History/distribution: what is the history of the conflict and how is its impact distributed across affected parties or communities?
• Level and intensity: what is the level and intensity of the conflict?
• Political, economic, social, and institutional structures: what are the underlying political, economic, social, and institutional structures regarding this conflict? 
• Impacts: what are the impacts to the stakeholders?

The process may also involve the identification of conflict management or conflict resolution techniques, or even the design of a process that the conflict resolution professional believes would be best suited to improve the situation.

Consensus Building

Consensus building involves participants engaging in a process and working cooperatively to develop a solution to a problem that satisfies all parties. These processes may range in their degree of formality, length, number of participants, and complexity. Sometimes, consensus-building processes are contentious and can benefit from a impartial third party as a facilitator or mediator; some processes may be self-directed by the group members. Typically, one or more representatives from a range of different interest groups or stakeholder groups come together over a period of time to collaboratively set up guidelines or rules for how discussions will proceed and how decisions will be made. They then apply those rules and guidelines to developing information, sharing their views, and negotiating a solution that the parties find acceptable. It is important that participants agree upon the threshold for consensus – whether they must all, at a minimum, agree that they can “live with” a particular agreement, or whether they must all enthusiastically support the agreement, or somewhere in between. 

Facilitation 

Facilitation involves the use of techniques to improve the flow of information in a meeting or other process, among multiple participants. The techniques may also be applied to decision-making meetings where a specific outcome is desired (e.g., resolution of a conflict or dispute). The term "facilitator" is often used interchangeably with the term "mediator," but a facilitator may engage in a wide variety of collaborative processes, whereas mediators typically only engage in resolving conflicts that have already emerged between parties and helping the parties to reach an agreement. 

A facilitator focuses on the process involved in helping participants resolve a situation or achieve their goals. The facilitator typically works with all of the meeting's participants at once, although they sometimes meet with an individual party or small group of parties, and provides procedural directions as to how the group can move efficiently through the steps of the meeting and arrive at the jointly agreed upon goal. The facilitator is generally an impartial third-party who is not a member of one of the parties.  However, sometimes the facilitator can be a member of one of the parties if they have the buy-in from all parties, can engender a sense of trust in the facilitator’s impartiality, and is transparent about the role they are playing at any given time.  

Facilitators focus on procedural assistance and remain impartial to the topics or issues under discussion. Facilitating is most appropriate when: (1) the intensity of the parties' emotions about the issues in dispute are low to moderate; (2) the parties or issues are not extremely polarized; (3) the parties have enough trust in each other that they can work together to develop a mutually acceptable solution; or (4) the parties are in a common predicament and they need or will benefit from a jointly-acceptable outcome.

Mediation 

Mediation is the intervention into a dispute or negotiation of an acceptable, impartial third party who has no decision-making authority. The objective of this intervention is to assist the parties in voluntarily reaching an acceptable resolution of issues in dispute. Mediation is useful in highly polarized disputes where the parties have either been unable to initiate a productive dialogue, or where the parties have been talking and have reached a seemingly insurmountable impasse. A mediator, like a facilitator, makes primarily procedural suggestions regarding how parties can reach agreement. 

Occasionally, a mediator may suggest some substantive options as a means of encouraging the parties to expand the range of possible resolutions under consideration but the general goal is for the parties to derive their own solutions together. A mediator sometimes works with the parties individually, in caucuses, to explore acceptable resolution options or to develop proposals that might move the parties closer to resolution. 

Mediators differ in their degree of directiveness or control while assisting disputing parties. Some mediators set the stage for bargaining, make minimal procedural suggestions, and intervene in the negotiations only to avoid or overcome a deadlock. Other mediators are much more involved in forging the details of a resolution. Regardless of how directive the mediator is, the mediator performs the role of catalyst that enables the parties to initiate progress toward their own resolution of issues in dispute.

There are numerous types of mediation approaches.  More than one approach might be used in any given mediation.  Some of these approaches are described below:

• Interest based: focused on identifying the underlying needs, or interests, of the parties, and developing a mutually acceptable solution that addresses the interests that matter most to the parties.
• Facilitative: focused on guiding participants through a multi-phase process that is designed to result in the parties’ development of a resolution.
• Transformative: focused on the relationship between the parties, and supporting their ability to understand and share their views, regardless of whether a clear resolution is reached.
• Narrative: focused on the story or stories that participants understand about the situation and helping them to understand and forge a new story, or narrative, related to the conflict (more below). This approach can be used in both mediation and consensus building processes and is described in more detail, below.

Narrative Approaches

There are many types of collaborative processes that impartial third-parties can use (see box below).  One such process is a narrative approach to understanding and engaging with communities to provide a new framework for understanding conflict dynamics. In this approach, the key to conflict prevention and resolution lies in the elaboration of diverse narratives – or stories – that circulate within a community.  A narrative lens reveals how communities make meaning of their situations and allows us to see how people are rooted in the stories they tell. 

Narratives are not just devices for making storylines (descriptions of what happened); they also provide the frameworks we use for judging ourselves and others. These judgements can form the basis for collaboration, as well as conflict. Narratives are not just sense-making tools for ordering and sequencing events. They also they steer the judgements we make, of Self and Other, that then become the currency we use to manage relationships (“us”/“them,” “good”/“bad”). Narratives that contribute to collaborative relationships contain evaluations of others that frame, or position, them in the storyline as legitimate or good (positive). Narratives that lead to conflict contain evaluations that frame or position others as bad (negative).

In this framework, conflict resolution requires changing simplistic narratives in interaction with parties so that people who have been negatively positioned by others are more positively framed, leading to better, more complex, narratives. There are three core tools that are effective for changing narratives, creating more complex and collaborative dynamics:

• Positive Connotation (assign positive intention to a person)
• Circular Questions (questions that make comparisons)
• Externalization (naming a negative feeling or behavior and making it external to the person who may exhibit it)

These tools can nudge stories in the direction of “better stories” that are more complex, legitimize all the parties, and promote collaboration. Any of these tools can be used – separately or together in private interviews or public meetings – at any time where they seem appropriate and can support the evolution of narratives toward the development of collaborative and constructive relationships.  Narrative approaches can be used in both collaborative processes and mediation.

Contacts and Training Opportunities

Success in using impartial third parties, such as mediators and facilitators, depends on finding someone who has the training and experience necessary for the specific need. Likewise, building skills for unassisted collaboration, without a third-party, requires proper training. For assistance, visit https://www.epa.gov/adr/cprc-services. 

In which style of mediation is a mediator allowed to offer suggestions and opinions?

What is the best conflict resolution strategy and why?

Which of the following describes the collaborating conflict style?

In what way is conciliation different from shuttle diplomacy?