Mechanisms of Conflict Analysis
Conflict analysis or conflict assessment is the initial stage of conflict resolution. Conflict resolution is when parties seek to gain a deeper understanding of the dynamics in their relationship. Subsets of conflict analysis also exist. This includes environmental conflict analysis, which deals with specific types of disputes. Sometimes a conflict atlas is used to show graphically the analysis of the conflict. (Conflict analysis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_analysis, retrieved 18 April, 2011.)” The mediator uses the information gathered in the conflict analysis to help the parties to move towards a settlement.
Conflict analysis is an essential however extremely challenging process. The aim is to gain a comprehensive and shared understanding of potential or ongoing violent conflicts. This usually involves an evaluation of key conflict factors (sources of tension and root causes of conflict, including linkages and synergies), actors (interests, potential spoilers, capacities for violence and peace, incentives required to promote peace), and dynamics (triggers for violence, local capacities for peaceful and constructive conflict management, likely future scenarios). Analysis is undertaken at local, national, regional and international levels. Conflict analysis should inform decision-making with the aim of improving the effectiveness of conflict prevention, conflict management and peace building interventions, including the effectiveness of development and humanitarian assistance (see the following section on conflict sensitive development). It is important to emphasize that conflict analysis is an ongoing process and not a static, one-off exercise. As such, process design is very important. (Conflict Analysis: Framework and tools. http://www.gsdrc.org/index.cfm?objectid=3133E975-14C2-620A-277DFFB9CA069184, retrieved 18 April, 2011.)”
In order to conduct a conflict analysis, a mediator must gather as much information as possible from the parties involved in the transgression. This is done during the interview stage prior to the parties going to the table. The mediator must have a clear understanding of the different components to the conflict by the time the parties sit at the table. Data collection is usually done through the use of open-ended questions. This allows the party being questioned to relate everything they think is important, rather than simply answering yes or no.
Parts of a Conflict Analysis:
“The Parties:
· Who are the parties to the conflict?
· Are there any other people who are not parties but should be (i.e. have a stake in the outcome, or have the power to affect the outcome)?
· Do the parties have settlement authority? If not, who does?
· Do the parties have constituencies? If so, who? What is the relationship between the parties and their constituencies?
Positions
· What are the parties stated positions?
· Why do they hold those positions?
· How strongly are they committed to their positions?
· Is there room for movement in their positions? What will it take to move the parties off their positions?
· If the parties are strongly committed to their positions, why? What is important to the parties about their positions?
Interests
· What are the interests behind each parties’ positions?
· How are the parties’ interests different? How are they similar?
· What common interests can be identified as the basis for settlement or agreement?
Power
· What power does each party have over the other?
· What is the source of each party’s power? (relationship, economic, physical, psychological, legal)
· What does the less powerful party need to have more leverage?
· Is each parties’ perception of their own power realistic?
· Have the parties used their power against each other? If so, how and with what results?
Psychological Aspects
· What emotions is each party expressing? What is the intensity of those emotions?
· Are there hidden emotions that need to be expressed?
· What is the impact of the parties’ emotions on their ability to negotiate?
· Are there values involved in the conflict? If so, what are they? How are they affecting the conflict?
· Can the values be reframed into interests?
· Are there cultural, religious or ideological differences between the parties? If so, what are they?
· Are these perceptions realistic?
· Are the parties perceiving the conflict in the same way? Are their perceptions of the conflict realistic?
· Do the parties understand the limitations of each other’s settlement authority?
· Do the parties trust each other? If not, why not?
· What is the level of trust between the parties?
· How do the parties communicate?
· What is their history of conflict? Of communication?
· What is each parties’ motivation to mediate?
Alternatives to Settlement
· What is each party’s: Best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA); Worst alternative to a negotiated agreement (WATNA); most likely alternative to a negotiated agreement (MLATNA).
· Are the parties informed about their alternatives?
· Are the parties misinformed about their alternatives?
· What steps have the parties taken toward these alternatives?
· Are the parties aware of each other’s alternatives?
· How realistic are the parties about their alternatives?
Options for Settlement
· What options have been explored in the past? What was the result?
· What are possible outcomes to the conflict?
· How realistic is each outcome?
· Do the available options meet eh parties’ needs?
· How realistic are the parties about settlement options?
· Are there options that one party will not consider? If so, why?
· Does any party feel there are no options that will satisfy their interests? If so, why?
(Conflict Analysis. https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cde.state.co.us%2Fcdeprevention%2Fdownload%2Fpdf%2FCONFLICT_Analysis.pdf, retrieved 18 April, 2011.)”
0 comments:
Post a Comment