Understanding Intractable Conflicts Barbara Gray

1
Understanding Intractable Conflicts Barbara
Gray

• Center for Research in Conflict and Negotiation
• Pennsylvania State University
• and
• TIAS Business School
• Tilburg University
• Wageningen University
• 28 September 2004

2
Overview

• Why are conflicts intractable or resistant to
  resolution?
• What do we mean by frames and framing of
  conflicts?
• How does the framing of the conflict affect
  intractability?
• How can understanding framing help you the
  address
• conflicts in your work?

3
Characteristics of Intractable Conflicts

• Two key characteristics
• Long term
• Elude resolution
• Additionally they are often
• Highly polarized
• Value-based
• Dispute resolution efforts tried and failed
• Sometimes involve complex array of stakeholders
• Rekindled by political shifts

4
Frames Framing

• Framing Constructing and presenting
• interpretations of our experience
• We impart meaning and significance to what is
• framed by distinguishing it from what is not
  framed.
• By framing we locate ourselves in the experience
  and
• We attribute responsibility (blame) for what
  occurs

5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
How Frames Affect Conflicts

• Determine how people define issues
• Affect the risks they perceive as real and info
  they believe is relevant
• Influence preferences for dispute resolution
  process
• Shape parties views of themselves and others
• Influence solutions they deem acceptable

8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
Examples of Frame Conflicts

• Opposition to nuclear waste disposal by African
  American communitiesframed as environmental
  justice issues
• (Bullard Wright, 1989)
• In Western water disputes State law frames
  conflict in terms of rights tribal law frames it
  in terms of sovereignty
• (Folk-Williams, 1988)

11
Types of Frames

• Whole Story
• Identity
• Characterization
• Conflict Management
• Views of Nature
• Views of Social Control
• Power
• Loss/Gain
• Ethics
• Risk

12
Whole Story Frames

• Sum up the essence of the conflict in a few
• sentences
• Shorthand for what the dispute is about

13
Identity Frames

• One key factor underlying what frames we use is
  our identity
• Identity Who am I
• Our identities
• Give us a sense of belonging
• Are closely aligned with values
• Give meaning to our lives
• Help us determine what actions to take

14
Characterization Frames
Characterizations pointed descriptions of
others They can be - or
neutral. Negative characterizations often
stereotypes  
Theyre snobs.
Hes stupid!
15
(No Transcript)
16
Conflict Management Frames

• Collaborative
• Non-collaborative

• joint problem solving
• fact finding
• authority decides based on expertise
• authority decides after consultation

• Avoidance
• Adjudication
• Appeal to political action
• Appeal to market economy
• Struggle, sabotage and violence

Adapted from Keltner (1994)
17
Views of Nature
18
Power Frames

• Authority/Positional
• Resources
• Expertise
• Personal
• Coalitional/Relational
• Sympathy/Vulnerability
• Force/Threat
• Legal/Legitimate
• Moral/Righteous
• Voice

19
Social Control Frames
High
Individualist Egalitarian
Fatalist Hierarchist
Degree of Ownership
Low
Degree of Consensus
Low
High
(Wildavsky Dake, 1990)
20
Analyzing Conflicts via Frames

• Conflicts are usually analyzed using
• Frames provide an enhanced approach to
  understanding intractable conflicts
• Suggests new basis of intervening in these
  conflicts

• issues
• parties
• history
• interests/positions
• process

21
Voyageurs National Park Case

• One of newest U.S. national parks--authorized in
  1971--land acquisition began 1975
• Located on Canadian border of Minnesota
• Largely water--3 large many small lakes and a
  wooded peninsula
• Key Issues in the conflict

• Resentment over acquisition of personal property
  for the park
• Controversy over wilderness vs. recreational use
• Debate over local vs. federal control of the
  land/water

22
Research Methodology

• Data Collection
• 45 interviews with all stakeholder groups
• Verbatim transcripts prepared member checked
• News articles/editorial archives also collected
• Observations of some disputant interactions
• Content Analysis
• Transcripts coded for various types of frames
• News/archival data used as supplementary

23
Intractability of the Conflict

• Longstanding conflict
• --1891 Park originally proposed
• --1964 Re-proposal by governor re-ignited
  conflict
• -- 1975-1987 Protests, lawsuits over land
  acquisition
• -- 1995 Attempt to decommission the park
• Resistant to resolution efforts
• -- 1996-7 Federally supported mediation ended
  w/no deal
• -- 1998-2000 GMP challenged by local county
• Frozen frames
• -- Issues remain unchanged
• -- Argued by same and different people

24
Key Issues in the Conflict

• Economic Issues
• --Local residents perceived land acquisition
  wasnt fair
• --Expected economic gain has not materialized
• Interests
• --Wise use proponents (prefer motorized uses,
  e.g.
• snowmobiles, floatplanes) vs. wilderness
  protection
• Political Issues
• --Heavy involvement by local, state national
• politicians in parks initiation and
  recent history
• --Local politicians used leverage in D.C. to
  force
• reexamination of parks status in 1995

25
Whole Story Frames

• Fundamentally you have those who want to maintain
  the park in its present condition with all
  motorized uses allowed and those whose real
  agenda is to turn it into Boundary Waters West.
• The real conflict is about differences in
  philosophies, the constant desire of the Park
  Service to manage all national parks the
  samethey ought to be more creative and
  sensitivity to the local culture and local needs.
• So, I think some of the problems we have today
  relate to what I would call arbitrary
  decision-making or arbitrary implementation of
  rules by a park service who has been less than
  considerate to the individual indigenous peoples
  concernsAnd thats kind of a thumbnail sketch.

26
Identity Frames

• Frankly, people are upset because they feel like
  the Federal government, in conjunction with those
  environmental communities, are tying to take away
  the culture of the people here, much like what
  happened to the Native American community. The
  government destroyed their culture, and the
  people that live here, that grew up here,
  immigrated here, have developed a culture here.
  Frankly, what they (environmentalists) dont
  understand is that every time they push that
  agenda, they are taking away from the culture of
  the people who live here.
• local park opponent

27
Identity Frames

• I believe very strongly in the national park
  system. One of my goals is that I would like to
  achieve-- protection and conservation are a very
  important part of our planet and I believe that
  the people that work at the park have that same
  kind of feeling that I do.
• Environmentalist
• The reason that I do that is there is an
  Endangered Species Act, and the park has a
  responsibility and obligation to inventory,
  monitor, and protect endangered species.
• Natural Resource Manager

28
Characterization Frames

• A lot of people were under the impression that
  they had to sell. And they used certain kind of
  pressure tactics on the people. Especially like
  the old people. It was Gestapo tactics.
• I find that most of the stuff coming from the
  major environmental organizations is so full of
  chicken little hype, the send us some money and
  well save you kind of thing, that they are
  almost like a parallel to television evangelists.

29
Freeze Framing

• Language used in interviews matches text of
  newspaper articles from 20-30 yrs. ago
• Even characterization frames are frozen in time
• Some players have become mythologized
• Parties talk about the conflict continuing (or
  dissipating) after current generation dies

30
Freeze FramingFreedom Economy

• Voyageurs National Park is another example of
  expanding government control, once again taking
  away the right and freedom of individuals to
  truly make decisions regarding their lives and
  livelihoods in their own backyards (business
  person1964)
• make sure that peoples freedoms are protected
  and not stripped away from them. (park
  opponent1998)
• This is all part of the process of
  incrementalism used by the park service which
  will slowly erode personal freedomsThen locals
  will be forced to move on due toan economy that
  cant survive. (Newspaper article, 2000)
• damage the areas economy and drive tourists to
  Canada and curtail timber production in the area
  (newpaper article, 1965)