 |
International Online Training Program On Intractable Conflict |
Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, USA |
|
International Online Training Program On Intractable Conflict |
Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, USA |
Opening Page | Glossary | Menu Shortcut Page
In fairness-based framing, the disputants define the conflict in terms of justice, fairness, and rights. This approach forces them to consider what is fair and how fairness or justice is determined, rather than simply defining "fair" in terms of "good for me."
Although definitions of justice vary widely, especially between different societies and cultural groups, most societies have some standard principles through which justice is measured. There is probably a constitution, a set of laws, or a less formal set of norms and traditions that govern how people are supposed to behave and how they are to be treated. If a group feels that it is being unjustly treated, it should first compare its treatment with its own societal standards. If there is a difference, defining the problem in terms of that difference can help clarify the issue for both parties–and can often lead to a remedy. (Such remedies do not occur quickly, but by framing issues in this way, problem solving becomes more possible than it might otherwise be.)
If the traditional standards also seem unjust (as they may well be in authoritarian or abusive governmental regimes), the group can look to international standards of human rights to develop a notion of what is widely considered "just" or "fair" outside their own country. They can then enlist the help of outsiders to pressure their own government to comply with international standards of fairness, justice, and human rights.
Joint Reframing/Assisted Reframing
Overly Competitive Approaches to a Conflict
Differing Definitions of "Justice"
Copyright ©1998 Conflict Research Consortium -- Contact: crc@colorado.edu