CONFLICT RESOLUTION TECHNIQUES: THEIR ORIGINS and THEIR FUTURE By Guy Burgess Co-Director Conflict Resolution Consortium Campus Box 327 University of Colorado Boulder, Colorado 80309 (303) 492-1635 March, 1989 Working Paper #89-4. This paper was written with a small grant from the Conflict Resolution Consortium, University of Colorado. Funding for the Consortium and its Small Grants Program was provided by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. The statements and ideas presented in this paper are those of the Resolution Consortium, the University of Colorado, or the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. CONFLICT RESOLUTION CONSORTIUM Funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the University of Colorado, the Conflict Resolution Consortium is a coordinated program of research, education and application on three of the University's four campuses. The program unites researchers, educators, and practitioners from many fields for the purposes of theory-building, testing, and application in the field of conflict resolution. Current focus areas include international conflict; environmental and natural resource conflict; urban, rural, and inter-jurisdictional conflicts; and the evaluation of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. WORKING PAPERS The Conflict Resolution Consortium working paper series includes a variety of papers written by our members as a part of their research. Usually these papers are in preliminary draft stage and are being prepared for eventual publication in professional journals or books. Other papers record discussions from Conflict Resolution Consortium seminars and plenary presentations. The purpose of the working paper series is to generate a dialogue about the work presented. Readers are encouraged to respond to the papers either by contacting the author directly or by contacting the Consortium office. Additional copies of this or other working papers can be obtained from the Conflict Resolution Consortium, Campus Box 327, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, 80309-0327. Phone (303) 492-1635. PROMISE OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH It is often the case that the most exciting scientific insights come when scholars look at old problems in new and highly interdisciplinary ways. For example, current advances in our understanding of the origins of the universe stem from collaborations between astronomers, cosmologists, and particle physicists. Likewise, advances in artificial intelligence involve the collaboration of psychologists, mathematicians, electrical engineers, and computer scientists. Important insights into drug abuse come from the work of physiologists, sociologists, psychologists, criminologists, economists, and The purpose of this essay is to highlight the benefits of another highly interdisciplinary and productive field--the scientific study of conflict and its resolution. This is a field which involves psychologists, sociologists, political scientists, economists, historians, and lawyers, as well as faculty from schools of environmental design, business, and public administration, and diplomacy. THE EVOLUTION OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION TECHNIQUES One can make a very strong case that one of the characteristics which has made the human species so successful is its ability to engage in large-scale cooperative behavior. Throughout history, the most successful societies were those which were able to mobilize the largest populations into the cooperative units which we call tribes, kingdoms, nations, empires, and the like. In each case one key to success was the ability to resolve or avoid the kind of divisive conflicts which make effective collaboration impossible. From civilization's earliest beginnings tyranny and military power played an important role in resolving conflict and insuring at least a minimal level of cooperation. Still, in these societies there was an understandable current of resentment and resistance which sharply undermined their long term potential for success. Against this backdrop the chain of events leading to the development of western capitalistic democracies can be seen as the development of a series of innovative conflict resolution strategies enabling larger groups of people to enthusiastically work together than ever before possible. These advances, which are seldom thought of as conflict resolution techniques, have made these societies the largest and most effective collaborative enterprises in human history. Communism, the only other potential contender for the prize, has found itself too vulnerable to the threat of exploitive dictatorship. CAPITALISTIC DEMOCRACY Capitalistic democracy's innovations in consensus building and conflict resolution techniques are both economic and political. While many innovations have evolved over the centuries, it is in these societies that these ideas have been refined to become a basis for a flourishing society. The most important of these innovations include: PRIVATE PROPERTY Most things are owned by somebody and that somebody has the unquestioned right to do whatever he wants with it. Where this doctrine applies (and there are important cases where it does not) there is seldom a conflict. If you don't like what somebody is doing with something, your choice is to buy it or be quiet. MONEY It is much easier to negotiate complex exchanges using money instead of barter. ENFORCEMENT OF CONTRACTS Collaborative agreements are are frequently specified in contractual form, making it very clear who has what rights and responsibilities. This helps eliminate the ambiguities and misunderstandings which can lead to protracted conflict. THE COURTS The courts lead us from economic to political conflict resolution techniques. They provide a precisely defined procedure with the full authority of the state behind it for resolving a broad range of disputes including the interpretation of contracts. MAJORITY RULE/REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY There are a broad range of public policy decisions, such as those involving protection of the commons, which are not governed by private property rules. These issues are resolved through majority rule and representative democracy. INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS In order to limit conflict between the majority and minority groups which disagree with the majority we have developed bills of rights which guarantee individuals the freedom to act as they please in a broad range of situations. MULTILAYERED JURISDICTIONS A system of multilayered jurisdictions, including local, state, and federal levels, have reduced conflicts by, to the greatest extent possible, allowing different communities to make and live by their own rules. This sharply reduces the number of cases in which large groups of people have to agree. THE NEED FOR BETTER CONFLICT RESOLUTION TECHNIQUES So, with all of these successes, is there any need to study better ways of resolving conflict? Unfortunately, the answer is an emphatic YES! As good as it is, the existing system has left numerous, gaping holes. For example, conflicts can still escalate to the point where they threaten our most personal social relationships. They can also threaten our ability to compete in an increasingly competitive economic system, or our ability to protect the environment in a way which will allow it to sustain future generations. Most importantly, conflicts can still threaten our ability to avoid the kind of military confrontation which could escalate into all-out nuclear war. The cost of litigation under the existing judicial system has become so high that there is good reason to believe that first class justice is only a right of the wealthy. We also do not really know how to fight for justice without the terrible costs which come from violent confrontation or even a highly polarized political struggle. The most serious failure in the existing conflict resolution structure involves situations in which the rule of law is absent and there is no all powerful state to enforce settlements. This produces a political vacuum in which military might becomes the ultimate conflict resolution authority. This is a situation which most commonly arises in international conflict because of the absence of a world government with any real authority. The result is frequently war. In the age of weapons of mass destruction the threat is catastrophe beyond our wildest dreams. This resort to violence can also lead to internal, civil war when a government loses its legitimacy. Even when all parties to a conflict acknowledge the ultimate authority of a judicial system, there are tremendous social costs which arise when conflicts escalate to the point where they must be resolved by litigation. In addition, to the direct financial burden, there are also psychological costs associated with anxiety and hostility as well as the costs associated with lost opportunities for productive, cooperative endeavors. Political conflicts over what the laws should be are frequently fought and resolved through no-holds-barred political struggles between competing interests groups. This kind of us versus them approach to policy making leads to either paralysis and stalemate or the victory of the powerful over the less powerful. This hardly achieves the democratic goal of the greatest good for the In other cases we have a failure, not of conflict resolution processes but, rather, their alter ego--consensus building processes. This can result in what Lester Thurow calls a zero-sum society in which everyone tries to get ahead by taking something from someone else rather than cooperating on mutually beneficial projects. One goal of the science of conflict resolution is to teach us how to beat this problem by encouraging more positive-sum interactions. THE CONTEMPORARY SCIENCE OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION What makes an interdisciplinary approach to the problems of conflict so important is that fact that highly similar problems arise at all levels of conflict ranging from psychological and interpersonal, through economic and political to international. Similar dispute handling techniques also apply at all levels. The following quick review of the field reveals areas of significant accomplishment as well as areas in need of creative new insights. NEGOTIATION THEORY Modern theories of negotiation have given us a much improved strategy for overcoming a broad range of social dynamics which can prevent parties from identifying and pursuing mutually beneficial courses of action. MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION THEORY There is now an extensive body of literature showing how third party mediators and arbitrators can intervene most successfully. ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION/ADR The ADR movement in the legal profession has developed, tested and implemented a broad array of strategies for improving quality and reducing the transaction costs associated with litigation. CONFLICT AVOIDANCE Techniques have been developed to help proponents of potentially controversial initiative anticipate and avoid unnecessary conflicts while constructively addressing essential substantive issues. TECHNICAL MEDIATION Techniques for reliably resolving disputes between experts over the expected consequences of policy options have also NOT IN MY BACKYARD YOU DON'T (NIMBY) CONFLICTS While important advances have been made in the development of techniques for siting critically needed facilities that nobody wants "in their backyard", this remains a serious problem. CONFLICT RESOLUTION TEACHING There is a well-established network of instructors and programs which teach conflict resolution techniques in a broad range of interdisciplinary settings. Still, most students never receive even basic instruction in modern conflict resolution techniques which can have so much practical, personal value. Therefore, the expansion of teaching programs is of major importance. CRISIS MANAGEMENT Many conflicts, especially those involving high tech military confrontations can escalate so quickly that there is literally no time to think. Crisis control centers represent the beginning a strategy for dealing with this problem. BEATING THE DOUBLE CROSS PROBLEM In situations where agreement is blocked by a party's fear that they will be double-crossed, independent verification of compliance with an agreement is required. JUSTICE WITHOUT VIOLENCE We need to develop better techniques for pursuing justice in difficult situations without having to resort to violence or highly polarized political confrontation. INTRACTABLE CONFLICTS How do you resolve conflicts which are not amenable to judicial or military settlement but which involve a destructive stalemate between uncompromising foes? COMMUNITY BUILDING How do you foster a sense of generosity and goodwill that will limit the selfish motivations that can exacerbate conflict? CONFLICT RESISTANT SOCIAL STRUCTURES How do you structure economic, social, and political organizations in a way which limits unproductive conflict? PROTECTION OF FUTURE INTERESTS How do you avoid the temptation to resolve conflicts at the expense of the one interest group which cannot be present e future. While an increasing amount of research, theory building, and experimentation, is now being undertaken on these and related questions, the field of conflict resolution is still very young and much additional work on all of these questions is still needed. Copyright (C) March 1989 by Guy Burgess. All rights reserved. Single copies of this paper may be reproduced for personal use with the following conditions: - All information concerning copyrights, authorship, acknowledgement of grant support, and publication must not be deleted from printed or electronic copies. - Any use of this material must be fully cited and in compliance with all copyright statutes and ethical fair use principles. - The paper may be reproduced only in its entirety. This paper may not be reposted on any other electronic bulletin board or retrieval system without formal permission from the Consortium or the author. This paper is provided free of charge and may not be offered for sale by anyone other than the Consortium or the author(s). Graphic images are not included in this file. For information on how to obtain graphics contact the CRC at the address below. All correspondence related to this paper should be addressed to: CRC@CUBLDR.COLORADO.EDU -or- Conflict Resolution Consortium Campus Box 327 University of Colorado Boulder, CO 80309 -or- (303) 492-1635