Distinguishing Resolution Terms
"Terminology that dominates a field or discipline evolves with the changing conceptual processes of its practitioners. Such is the case particularly in the area of conflict resolution." -- John Paul Lederach, in Preparing for Peace: Conflict Transformation Across Cultures, p. 16-17
|
Explaining the meaning of resolution, in the arena of conflict research, demands a discussion of several terms that refer to different ways of dealing with conflict.
Conflict scholars draw distinctions between certain terms that others often use interchangeably. For example, disputes and conflicts are often considered to be different phenomena, based on their nature and duration (see conflicts and disputes). Scholars also draw distinctions between dispute settlement, conflict management, conflict resolution, and conflict transformation. The first three terms are commonly used and have fairly straightforward meanings, while conflict transformation represents a departure from the other approaches.
Dispute Settlement
Disputes are generally considered to be disagreements that involve negotiable interests. Such issues can be settled through negotiation, mediation, or adjudication. They are generally short-term and, given the right process, lend themselves to the development of mutually satisfactory solutions. Dispute settlement therefore refers to the working out of a mutually satisfactory agreement between the parties involved. Dispute settlement is primarily concerned with upholding established social norms (of right and wrong) and is aimed at bringing the dispute to an end, without necessarily dealing with its fundamental causes.[1] Thus, although the particular dispute might be settled permanently, another similar or related dispute may arise again later if the underlying causes are still there.[2]
Conflict Resolution
Incompatible interests are not the only things at issue in more severe conflicts. Conflicts last longer and are more deeply rooted than disputes. They tend to arise over non-negotiable issues such as fundamental human needs, intolerable moral differences, or high-stakes distributional issues regarding essential resources, such as money, water, or land. To truly resolve a conflict, the solution must go beyond just satisfying the parties' interests as in dispute settlement. To end or resolve a long-term conflict, a relatively stable solution that identifies and deals with the underlying sources of the conflict must be found. This is a more difficult task than simple dispute settlement, because resolution means going beyond negotiating interests to meet all sides' basic needs, while simultaneously finding a way to respect their underlying values and identities. However, some of the same intervention processes used in dispute settlement (i.e., mediation) are also used to achieve resolution.
True conflict resolution requires a more analytical, problem-solving approach than dispute settlement. The main difference is that resolution requires identifying the causal factors behind the conflict, and finding ways to deal with them. On the other hand, settlement is simply aimed at ending a dispute as quickly and amicably as possible. This means that it is possible to settle a dispute that exists within the context of a larger conflict, without resolving the overall conflict. This occurs when a dispute is settled, but the underlying causes of the conflict are not addressed
There are many reasons why underlying causes of conflict may not be addressed. Often, the underlying causes of conflict are embedded in the institutional structure of society. Achieving complete resolution of a conflict can require making significant socioeconomic or political changes that restructure society in a more just or inclusive way. Changing societal structures, such as the distribution of wealth in society, is a difficult thing to do and can take decades to accomplish.[3] Thus, fully resolving conflict can be a long, laborious process. As a result there are other conceptions of ways to deal with, but not necessarily "resolve," conflicts.
Conflict Management
Conflict management involves the control, but not resolution, of a long-term or deep-rooted conflict. This is the approach taken when complete resolution seems to be impossible, yet something needs to be done. In cases of resolution-resistant or even intractable conflict, it is possible to manage the situation in ways that make it more constructive and less destructive.[4] The goal of conflict management is to intervene in ways that make the ongoing conflict more beneficial and less damaging to all sides. For example, sending peacekeeping forces into a region enmeshed in strife may help calm the situation and limit casualties. However, peacekeeping missions will not resolve the conflict. In some cases, where non-negotiable human needs are at stake, management is the most feasible step.
A Critique and Alternative: Conflict Transformation
Additional insights into settlement, resolution, management and transformation are offered by Beyond Intractability project participants.
|
A number of conflict theorists and practitioners, including John Paul Lederach, advocate the pursuit of conflict transformation, as opposed to "conflict resolution" or "conflict management." Conflict transformation is different from the other two, Lederach asserts, because it reflects a better understanding of the nature of conflict itself. "Conflict resolution" implies that conflict is bad, and is therefore something that should be ended. It also assumes that conflict is a short-term phenomenon that can be "resolved" permanently through mediation or other intervention processes. "Conflict management" correctly assumes that conflicts are long-term processes that often cannot be quickly resolved. The problem with the notion of "management," however, is that it suggests that people can be directed or controlled as if they were physical objects. In addition, "management" suggests that the goal is the reduction or control of volatility, rather than dealing with the real source of the problem.[5]
Conflict transformation, as described by Lederach, does not suggest that we simply eliminate or control conflict, but rather that we recognize and work with its "dialectic nature." First, Lederach argues that social conflict is a natural occurrence between humans who are involved in relationships. Once conflict occurs, it changes or transforms those events, people, and relationships that created the initial conflict. Thus, the cause-and-effect relationship goes both ways -- from the people and the relationships to the conflict and back to the people and relationships. In this sense, "conflict transformation" is a term that describes the natural process of conflict. Conflicts change relationships in predictable ways, altering communication patterns and patterns of social organization, altering images of the self and of the other.[6]
Conflict transformation is also a prescriptive concept. It suggests that the destructive consequences of a conflict can be modified or transformed so that self-images, relationships, and social structures improve as a result of conflict instead of being harmed by it. Usually, this involves transforming perceptions of issues, actions, and other people or groups. Conflict usually transforms perceptions by accentuating the differences between people and positions. Lederach believes that effective conflict transformation can utilize this highlighting of differences in a constructive way, and can improve mutual understanding. From the perspective of conflict transformation, intervention has been successful if each group gains a relatively accurate understanding of the other. In the end, improving understanding is the objective of conflict transformation, in spite of parties differing or even irreconcilable interests, values, and needs (for a more in-depth discussion, see the essay on conflict transformation).[7]
[1] John Burton and Frank Dukes, Conflict: Practices in Management, Settlement & Resolution (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990), 83-87.
[2] John Burton, Conflict: Resolution & Provention (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990), 5.
[3] For a more in-depth discussion of the challenge of changing social and economic institutions in ways that would help societies avoid conflict, see Chapter 5 of: John Burton, Conflict: Resolution & Provention (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990), 66-82.
[4] For a more in-depth discussion of constructive and destructive conflict resolution processes, see: Morton Deutsch, The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Processes (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973). Deutsch's introduction offers a brief explanation of the difference and the ensuing chapters offer in-depth examinations of constructive and destructive aspects of conflict and its resolution.
[5] John Paul Lederach, Preparing for Peace: Conflict Transformation Across Cultures (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1995), 16-17.
[6] Ibid, 17.
[7] Ibid, 18.
Use the following to cite this article:
Spangler, Brad. "Settlement, Resolution, Management, and Transformation: An Explanation of Terms." Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: September 2003 <http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/meaning_resolution/>.
Sources of Additional, In-depth Information on this Topic
Additional Explanations of the Underlying Concepts:
Online (Web) Sources
Berghof Handbook for Conflict Transformation. Berg of Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management, December 2007.
Available at: http://www.berghof-handbook.net/.
This Handbook consists of many different articles on conflict transformation. It gives practitioners and scholars an overview of the currently available approaches, methods, techniques and theories of conflict transformation. The Handbook documents and assesses the state of the art in the field, as well as offering opportunities to reflect on and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches. The topic structure of the Handbook is organized according to the conceptual preconditions, the different social levels, and the various dimensions of conflict transformation.
Negowetti, Nicole. "Reconciliation: Central Component of Conflict Transformation." , April 4, 2003
Available at: http://www.skynet.ie/~peacesoc/read/reconciliation.html.
This essay examines the concept of reconciliation as central to Jonh Paul Lederach's theory of conflict transformation. It asserts that contemporary intra-state conflicts require innovative approaches that consider the subjective experiences of both victims and perpetrators, for their transformation. The piece includes discussion of Lederach's distinction between conflict transformation and the concepts of conflict resolution and conflict management.
The Surprising Preponderance of Peace. 2003.
Available at: http://www.aworldofpossibilities.com/details.cfm?id=107.
An interview by Susan Collin Marks, Frank Deford, Robert Fuller, and William Ury. Peace, it turns out, is actually the norm throughout human history. War, though, is far from extinct. In this, the first of a four part series, we ask, "What would it take to eliminate war as a means of settling conflicts?" and, "Is there a better game than war?"
Offline (Print) Sources
Fisher, Roger, Elizabeth Kopelman and Andrea Kupfer Schneider. Beyond Machiavelli: Tools for Coping with Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, April 1, 1994.
This work provides advice and guidelines for handling disputes of any kind. Conflict management is discussed in the context of multiple arenas, from international politics to corporate issues. The work specifically focuses on the concept of conflict management, rather than conflict resolution. Click here for more info.
Jeong, Ho-Won, ed. Conflict Resolution: Dynamics, Process and Structure. Brookfield, VT: Ashgate Publishing Co., September 1999.
The essays compiled in this edited volume are meant to offer further conceptual development of some approaches to conflict resolution. The aim is to develop approaches that consider the broader context of conflict in a more realistic way, especially in terms of recognizing larger social process and structure. The volume examines ways in which adversarial relationships can be transformed and reconciled in diverse settings.
Burton, John W. and E. Frank Dukes. Conflict: Practices in Management, Settlement, and Resolution . New York: St. Martin's Press, October 1990.
Conflict: Practices in Management, Settlement, and Resolution describes different types of conflicts and different approaches to conflict management. It attempts to match the different types of conflict with the most appropriate management process. This work includes some very influential definitions of key terms in the field of conflict resolution . Click here for more info.
Burton, John W. Conflict: Resolution and Provention. New York, NY: St. Martin's Press, Inc., July 1990.
This work presents an historical and theoretical perspective, and a framework for consideration of theory and practice in conflict resolution. It represents a shift in the field, from approaches to conflict that emphasized deterrence and conflict management to those that emphasize conflict prevention and resolution. The author's perspective on conflict is grounded in human needs theory. Click here for more info.
Lederach, John Paul. Preparing for Peace: Conflict Transformation Across Cultures. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, August 1, 1996.
In this book the author draws on his personal experiences in order to examine the practice of teaching conflict resolution. Lederach seeks to address the problem of universalized techniques that are falsely assumed to work across different cultural contexts. Instead, Lederach explores the purpose of dispute resolution training and its relationship with culture. The author promotes a framework for peace that is based on the notion of conflict transformation, which differs in its principles from "conflict resolution" and "conflict management." Click here for more info.
Pruitt, Dean G., Jeffrey Z. Rubin and Sung Hee Kim. Social Conflict: Escalation, Stalemate, and Settlement, 2nd Edition. New York: McGraw Hill College Division, January 1, 1994.
This work seeks to develop a comprehensive theory of conflict by describing the various strategies that parties involved in conflict use. The author discusses the nature of conflict and its primary causes, the causes and stages of escalation, stalemate and de-escalation, and conditions that foster problem solving approaches to dealing with conflict. The book is oriented toward a problem-solving approach to conflict and includes a discussion of the role of third-party interveners. Click here for more info.
Deutsch, Morton. The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Processes. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1973.
This work provides a set of theoretical essays and research papers that deal with the nature of conflict and discuss various strategies for resolving conflict. Coming from the point of view of social psychology, the author focuses heavily on the concepts of cooperation, competition, and trust in explicating constructive and destructive conflict resolution processes. Click here for more info.
Return to Top
Examples Illustrating this Topic:
Online (Web) Sources
Nathan, Laurie. "Crisis Resolution and Conflict Management in Africa." ,
Available at: http://ccrweb.ccr.uct.ac.za/archive/staff_papers/laurie_bank.html.
This paper argues that in the context of Africa violence may be the predominant concern from a humanitarian perspective, but that it should be viewed as a symptom of intra-state crises from an analytical perspective. The piece identifies four specific structural conditions that are argued to give rise to crises: 1) authoritarian rule; (2) the exclusion of minority or majority groups from governance; (3) socio-economic deprivation combined with inequity; (4) and weak states which lack the institutional capacity to manage political and social conflict. The author argues these conditions are the primary causes of mass violence in Africa, and that sustainable peace is possible only if they are addressed satisfactorily. The distinction between addressing symptoms of conflict and causes of conflict, closely parallels the conceptual differences between "conflict management" and "conflict resolution."
Dukes, E. Frank. "Why Conflict Transformation Matters: Three Cases." , November 1999
Available at: http://www.gmu.edu/academic/pcs/Dukes61PCS.html.
This essay begins with an examination of the importance of conflict transformation. The failings of an ideology of conflict management currently dominating the conflict resolution field, are contrasted with components of a transformative practice. The author then offers three cases from personal experience and draws lessons from them to illustrate the potential of conflict resolution in three distinct areas: fostering community, building a responsive governance, and resolving public conflict.
Offline (Print) Sources
Hauss, Charles (Chip). International Conflict Resolution: International Relations for the 21st Century. New York: Continuum Publishing, 2001.
Part one of this work focuses on theories about how to resolve conflicts in the international arena. The author emphasizes new approaches to conflict resolution that stress win-win outcomes, reconciliation, and stable peace. The second part of the work presents a series of case studies that demonstrate the range of conflicts that exist at the dawn of the 21st century. Some of the studies illustrate cases in which progress has been made toward resolution and others in which it has not. The case studies are intended to give readers a look at the conditions under which win-win conflict resolution and stable peace are most, and least, likely to occur.
Return to Top
|
