INTRODUCTORY SESSION.
This Course Element constitutes a general introduction to the theory of Conflict Management.
Change almost always brings about conflicts between the needs and wishes of different
stakeholder groups. Conflict prevention by consensus building and when applicable conflict
resolution, are needed to win the support of a maximum of stakeholders. Conflict Management
offers approaches that help in preventing or resolving conflicts. It is important to note that
conflict management has a cultural dimension as different cultures will have different ways of
perceiving, acknowledging and approaching a conflict. In short, conflict management recognises
that conflicts are a normal part of life but that well managed they can be an important force for
positive change allowing people to fully express their views in a peaceful setting and to learn
about each others perception of the same questions. A facilitator may be required to match these
different perceptions and to express the perception of the conflict per group of stakeholders.
Stakeholder analysis (e.g. Stakeholder Conflict and Partnership Matrix, Social Mapping) is
therefore an important part of the process. Power issues appear when specific groups (e.g.
women) have a less access to resources or to decision making. Sometimes this may even be
embodied in the policies or legislation of the country.
THE CIRCLE OF CONFLICT
One approach in conflict identification is known as the circle of conflict. Positioning the problem
in the circle helps analysing causes and finding solutions. Five categories of conflicts are
recognised as described hereunder.
Data Conflicts are caused by lack of information, spreading of misinformation, different views on
what are relevant data, different interpretations of available data, or different assessment
procedures. The point is to reach an agreement on what data are important, to agree on data
collection procedures, to develop common criteria for data assessment by for example relying on
third party experts to gain outside opinion or break through bottlenecks and deadlocks.
Needs and Interest Conflicts are due to perceived or actual competition between substantive
(e.g. the land), procedural (e.g. incentives, fees or charges) or psychological (e.g. environmental
awareness) interests. Possible solutions are reached by focusing on interests instead of on the
positions, looking for objective criteria, developing integrative solutions addressing the needs of
all parties, searching for ways of expanding options or resources, and by developing trade-offs
satisfying interests of different strength.
Structural Conflicts proceed from geographic, physical or environmental factors as well as time
constraints that hinder co-operation. The lack of appropriate procedures and legislation is here
often to blame. But also, from the general set up and role distribution of a situation, from unequal
power and authority in the decision-making process, form negative patterns of behaviour and
interaction, or from the unequal control, ownership or distribution of resources. Possible solutions
comprise the clear definition and acceptance of roles and levels of authority when needed with
external mediation or arbitrage, the reallocation of rights and entitlements, the relocation of the
negotiation platform at a convenient distance from the field, the establishment of a fair,
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 1
transparent and acceptable decision-making process. This involves the replacement of negative
behaviour and positional attitudes by interest-based persuasive trade-off bargaining negotiation
in an appropriate timeframe.
Cultural differences bring about Value Conflicts of various kinds. Next to the economical value of
nature, goods and services, there is the difficulty to define criteria for evaluating ideas or
behaviour, the variability in ways of life or perception of what is important in frame of the
prevailing local ideological or religious context. Values are in fact part of the indigenous
knowledge and at the basis of people choices and priorities. Direct attempts to change the values
of a group do usually face strong opposition. Challenging values is thus not the appropriate
approach but issues should be redefined in other terms than cultural values. Parties should agree
to disagree on their own values while looking for a common (“superordinate”) goal they all can
share.
The most useless conflicts probably are those grouped under the name Relationship Conflicts.
These involve strong disagreement between deciders on the basis of strong emotions or dislikes,
misperceptions or stereotypes, poor communication leading to an accumulation of wrong
assumptions, and repetitive negative behaviour. Therefore, appropriate communication channels
should be installed, people should learn to control their expression and build positive perception
skills in order to develop a positive problem-solving attitude. People with a negative attitude
should whenever possible be removed from their position or made harmless.
The distinction between unnecessary and genuine conflicts is quite artificial. The circle of conflict
can be used in a participatory manner with all stakeholders. It should be noted that there is a
possible overlap between categories and that a given conflict does not necessarily perfectly fit
into one category. Different tools can be used in support of the approach. For example, listing
Resources, Constraints, Risks and Investments per stakeholder (Resource and Constraints Analysis)
or performing a SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Trends) per activity.
To make full use of the population’s indigenous knowledge of traditional land use practices based
on limited use of external inputs value restoration and consensus building will be the first priority.
Good communication and information exchange is here vital. In order to discuss and test possible
new conservatory practices, Participatory Technology Development (PTD) could be tried. For the
evaluation of the application of new solutions, an integrated approach involving participatory
alternative building and comparison is recommended.
INTEREST-BASED BARGAINING
Stakeholders will want to confront their interests in satisfying their needs. They bargain for a
better possibility to achieve their goals. Most often they will express their interests in terms of a
single solution (their position) to the problem. In Interest-based Bargaining it is important that
all interests be addressed and that stakeholders be stimulated to come up with their views. The
facilitator should aim at understanding the emotional dynamics beyond the statements of
interests, identifying the values and interest that underlie positions and separating them so as to
defuse value conflicts, bringing parties to review the history of the conflict in a neutral setting
under a new “positive” light. Through common brainstorming, options and alternatives can be
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 2
listed regardless of their practical feasibility, and assessment criteria can be discussed that will be
agreed upon to evaluate solutions. Starting with higher level general requirements makes a
general agreement more likely. The further detailing should justify the legitimacy of the needs of
the various groups. The conflict will only be satisfactorily resolved if none of the groups of
interests is left out of the process. Moreover, it is vital to avoid focusing on positions, as this could
block the process. Instead, creative solutions can be found when the focus is on identifying and
satisfying legitimate needs and interests.
THE CONTINUUM OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION APPROACHES
Various representations of the Continuum of Conflict Management can be found in literature. One
example is given below. From left to right there is a general increase of coercion and likelihood of
reaching a win-lose situation. The decision-making is private by the parties or with help of a third
party, authoritative under control of a third party often with legal enforcement powers, extralegal
when the decision is forced by direct or violent action.
Avoidance
Discussion
Negotiation
Private, by the parties themselves, or
Mediation
Administrative
Decision
Arbitration
third party
Authoritative, by third party
Judicial
Decision
Legislative
Decision
Legal authoritative
Direct
Action
Violent
Action
Extralegal coercive
More information on conflict management theory can be found in Annex 1, which is extracted
and adapted from a report presented to ESCAP in Bangkok in 1998.
GLOSSARY
Access to resources. A series of participatory exercises that allows development practitioners to
collect information and raises awareness among beneficiaries about the ways in which access to
resources varies according to gender and other important social variables. This user-friendly tool
draws on the everyday experience of participants and is useful to men, women, trainers, project
staff, and field-workers.
Advisory non-binding assistance. This type of assistance, often arbitration or expert panels, shifts
the bulk of the authority over the conflict, i.e. determining a solution and recommending what is
“fair”, to the outside experts. The communication pattern is between the arbiter/panel and the
parties. Parties retain the power to accept or reject the recommendations.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to a variety of collaborative approaches that seek to
reach a mutually acceptable resolution of issues in a conflict through a voluntary process. Such
approaches were developed as alternatives to adversarial or non-consensual strategies, such as
judicial or legal recourse, unilaterally initiated public information campaigns, or partisan political
action. All of these latter strategies might also be appropriate and legitimate means of addressing
disputes, depending upon the context. Alternative conflict resolution approaches complement
these more adversarial strategies, and broaden the range of tools available to communities and
interest groups who are involved in conflict (FAO, 1994).
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 3
Arbitration: "a process that involves the submission of a dispute to an arbitrator (anyone
mutually agreeable to the parties), who renders a (binding or advisory) decision after hearing
arguments and reviewing evidence." (NIDR no date)
Binding Assistance. Binding assistance, through arbitrage or judging, passes authority over the
conflict completely over to the outside party.
Collaborative Planning: "a process in which parties agree to work together in anticipation of a
conflict, and work collaboratively to plan and manage ways to avoid the conflict." (NIDR no date)
Conciliation: "an attempt by a neutral third party to communicate separately with disputing
parties, for the purpose of reducing tensions and agreeing on a process for resolving a dispute"
(Pendzich et al. 1994:8-9).
Conflict Anticipation: "the identification of disputes at their early stages of development,
targeting and educating potential interest groups, and attempting to develop cooperative
responses to the future problem, thus avoiding or lowering the destructive effects of conflict."
(CDR Associates 1986:3)
Conflict Management is a multidisciplinary field of research and action that seeks to address the
question of how people can make better decisions collaboratively. It is an approach that attempts
to address the roots of conflicts by building upon shared interests and finding points of
agreement that accommodate the respective needs of the various parties involved (Anderson et
al, 1996).
Consensus Building or conflict prevention: a process leading to "an agreement (or synthesis) that
is reached by identifying the interests of all concerned parties and then building an integrative
solution." (CDR Associates 1986:3). This group of approaches, often linked to participatory
planning methods or stakeholder participation, focuses less on the resolution of a specific conflict
than on fostering a cooperative (planning) process for complex, multi-issue, multi-user situations.
Focus group meetings. Relatively low-cost, semi-structured, small group (four to twelve
participants plus a facilitator) consultations used to explore peoples' attitudes, feelings, or
preferences, and to build consensus. Focus group work is a compromise between participant
observation, which is less controlled, lengthier, and more in-depth, and preset interviews, which
are not likely to attend to participants' own concerns.
Mapping. A generic term for gathering in pictorial form baseline data on a variety of indicators.
This is an excellent starting point for participatory work because it gets people involved in
creating a visual output that can be used immediately to bridge verbal communication gaps and
to generate lively discussion. Maps are useful as verification of secondary source information, as
training and awareness raising tools, for comparison, and for monitoring of change. Common
types of maps include health maps, institutional maps (Venn diagrams), and resource maps.
Mediation: "the use of a neutral third-party in a negotiation process, where a mediator assists
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 4
those in a conflict situation in reaching their own agreement, but has no power to direct the
parties or attempt to resolve the dispute" (Pendzich et al. 1994:8-9).
Needs assessment. A tool that draws out information about people's varied needs, raises
participants' awareness of related issues, and provides a framework for prioritizing needs. This
sort of tool is an integral part of gender analysis to develop an understanding of the particular
needs of both men and women and to do comparative analysis.
Negotiation: "a voluntary process in which parties meet face to face to reach a mutually
acceptable resolution of a conflict" (Pendzich et al. 1994:8-9).
Non-Binding Arbitration. Non-Binding arbitrage is finding out what a neutral third party or a fair,
impartial person or panel would think of the dispute. The opinion is advisory but normally carries
a great deal of weight if the parties have confidence in the arbitrator.
Participation; Development practitioners use a wide variety of different methods, tailored to
different tasks and situations, in support of participatory development. Bellow ten methods are
introduced that have been used in different development situations to achieve various objectives.
These include: workshop-based and community-based methods for collaborative decision
making, methods for stakeholder consultation, and methods for incorporating participation and
social analysis into project design. Further on, each method is compared and contrasted with the
others and their advantages and disadvantages noted to help Task Managers choose those most
useful to them. A glossary of available tools, many of which are components of the methods,
follows the summaries. More details on both the methods and the tools can be found in the
Participation Sourcebook (World Bank, 1996).
Participant observation is a fieldwork technique used by anthropologists and sociologists to
collect qualitative and quantitative data that leads to an in-depth understanding of peoples'
practices, motivations, and attitudes. Participant observation entails investigating the project
background, studying the general characteristics of a beneficiary population, and living for an
extended period among beneficiaries, during which interviews, observations, and analyses are
recorded and discussed.
Preference ranking. Also called direct matrix ranking, an exercise during which people identify
what they do and do not value about a class of objects (for example, tree species or cooking fuel
types). Ranking allows participants to understand the reasons for local preferences and to see
how values differ among local groups. Understanding preferences is critical for choosing
appropriate and effective interventions.
Partnering. Based on the principle that traditional adversarial relationships can better be replaced
through team-building activities by a co-operative approach preventing disputes. The approach
requires personal relationships and commitment, common goals and dispute prevention
processes. It supposes improved communication and on-time performance.
Procedural assistance. Facilitators or mediators may also provide procedural assistance to the
communication process among the parties in conflict, ranging from joint brainstorming sessions
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 5
to parlaying information back and forth. When providing procedural assistance the facilitators
explicitly do not involve themselves in the substantive issues, however, and do not suggest
solutions or negotiating positions. The responsibility both for designing solutions and for finding
agreement remains with the parties in conflict.
Relationship building. A relatively “light” form of intervention is when outside facilitators arrange
some activities to (re-) build a working relationship among the parties, in cases of conflict where
this does not exist or has deteriorated during the conflict. This leaves the responsibility for the
conflict resolution process to the parties themselves, i.e. identification of and negotiation over
solutions.
Role playing. Enables people to creatively remove themselves from their usual roles and
perspectives to allow them to understand choices and decisions made by other people with other
responsibilities. Ranging from a simple story with only a few characters to an elaborate street
theatre production, this tool can be used to acclimatise a research team to a project setting, train
trainers, and encourage community discussions about a particular development intervention.
Stakeholders are people who may –directly or indirectly, positively or negatively – affect or be
affected by the outcome of projects or programmes. This means that stakeholders are likely to
outnumber project users. (p. 5/15, section I, IDB, 1997a).
Substantive assistance. Mediators can also involve themselves in the fashioning of the solutions,
i.e. provide substantive assistance as well. In this case the parties share with, or turn over to, the
mediator the responsibility for identification of the solutions, but maintain direct communication
and retain the authority to determine what constitutes an agreement.
Surveys. A sequence of focused, predetermined questions in a fixed order, often with
predetermined, limited options for responses. Surveys can add value when they are used to
identify development problems or objectives, narrow the focus or clarify the objectives of a
project or policy, plan strategies for implementation, and monitor or evaluate participation.
Among the survey instruments used in Bank work are firm surveys, sentinel community
surveillance, contingent valuation, and priority surveys.
Village meetings. Multiple use meetings in participatory development, including information
sharing and group consultation, consensus building, prioritisation and sequencing of
interventions, and collaborative monitoring and evaluation. When multiple tools such as resource
mapping, ranking, and focus groups have been used, village meetings are important venues for
launching activities, evaluating progress, and gaining feedback on analysis.
Workshops. Structured group meetings at which a variety of key stakeholder groups, whose
activities or influence affect a development issue or project, share knowledge and work toward a
common vision. With the help of a workshop facilitator, participants undertake a series of
activities designed to help them progress toward the development objective (consensus building,
information sharing, prioritisation of objectives, team building, and so on). In project as well as
policy work, from preplanning to evaluation stages, stakeholder workshops are used to initiate,
establish, and sustain collaboration.
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 6
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 7
ANNEX 1. EXCERPTS FROM AN ESCAP REPORT ON CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Introduction
Wetland management and conflicts
Conflict management can be called the greatest challenge of Integrated Wetland Management. Almost any
significant development of the wetland zone, be it for tourism, biodiversity, fisheries or residences, is likely
to infringe on the rights or expectations of others and, hence, to lead to user conflicts.
In practice, it can be observed that projects and papers most often tend to describe the conflicts among
users – and call for an integrated approach – but do not address the conflicts directly. Wetland managers
usually are not trained – and do not posses the tools – to manage conflicts. Often also, environmental
issues (for example, pollution) and resource user conflicts (for example, fishing conflicts) are not clearly
distinguished from each other, perhaps because of the frequent cause-effect relation existing between the
two. In this report is argued that conflict management, starting with the careful identification and analysis
of potential conflicts at the early stages of project preparation, should become an explicit component of
integrated wetland management. Therefore, conflict management techniques should become part of the
toolkit of wetland managers.
Wetland Conflicts
This report examines the potential of methods and techniques that explicitly address “conflicts”, jointly
referred to here as conflict management, to contribute to wetland management. Wetland conflicts are
defined as situations or circumstances where strong and persistent divergence of positions (needs, values,
etc.) among wetland users and other stakeholders represent an obstacle to efficiently managing a defined
wetland area. Conflict management is a well-developed field of social sciences but has not been applied
much to the management of natural resources in general and to the management of wetland zones in
particular.
It is recognised here that all societies develop institutions to deal with conflicts. When change in society is
rapid, however, institutions are likely to lag behind. This situation is currently found in many wetland zones.
In the long-term, the formal institutions may increase their capability to deal with wetland conflicts, but in
the short-term explicit conflict management approaches will have to be built into wetland management
projects and programmes.
Conflicts in Asia and the Pacific
Attitudes towards conflict influence the behavioural choices that people make when confronted with
disputes. A key part of using conflict management techniques in Asia and the Pacific therefore involves
understanding attitudes towards conflict throughout the region.
Of fundamental importance is the concept of authority in terms of the structure of power. In some of the
countries in the region a powerful political elite or ruling family was until recently or still is in control of the
decision making. This party could enforce a solution –commonly described as the Best Alternative To a
Negotiated Agreement (BATNA)- and thus had no incentives to participate in a conflict management
process. This recent history still influences the attitudes of stakeholders in the region.
Regional cultural aspects do affect the discussion of conflict management as well. Examples of aspects,
which may be perceived very differently throughout the region, are:
 Emotional contents of sovereignty over jurisdictional waters
 Attitude of dependence on government intervention
 High respect of hierarchy or seniority
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 8








Strong traditional decision making structures
Community shared resources as part of the cultural background
Strong customary land and marine tenure system
Avoidance of face to face confrontation
Tradition of political violence
Political cost of decision making in front of the electorate
Tendency to intermingle business and personal issues
Urge to use discussion to maintain social networks
2. Conceptual Framework
Conflict Management & Participation
The high priority accorded to “ownership of projects” and “stakeholder participation in all programme
phases” is a typical success factor for all integrated resource and environmental management fields.
Stakeholders, as defined in the IDB Resource Book on Participation, are “people who may –directly or
indirectly, positively or negatively – affect or be affected by the outcome of projects or programs. This means
that stakeholders are likely to outnumber project users”. Conflict management is closely linked to
participation of stakeholders. The most significant influence on the prevention and resolution of conflicts in
wetland management is likely to result from early participation. Thus, effort should be made not to limit
participation to consultation procedures after experts have already designed the project alternatives or
management interventions.
This study explicitly focuses on the prevention, occurrence and management of conflicts. In this context
stakeholder participation is recognised as an important response to a conflict situation. However, it is not
the only possible action. Furthermore, depending on the characteristics of the conflict, other approaches
may be identified as more suitable.
Conflict management & Wetland Management
Wetland managers come from diverse fields, but mostly have a natural science or engineering background.
Conflict management, on the other hand, started as a subject of social and behavioural sciences with the
focus on alternatives to legal procedures. Traditionally, limited overlap exists between both groups.
The following benefits of conflict management, both as part of project preparation and as a component in
project execution, are identified:
1. Ownership of the project
2. Contribution to resolving pre-existing conflicts among stakeholders
3. Prevention of delays during execution as well as sub-optimal project performance
4. Reduction of costs of conflicts later in time
Conflict management techniques
Six main groups of conflict management techniques are distinguished, ranging from methods that leave
the responsibility for the identification and negotiation of solutions to the conflict with the parties
themselves, to methods that put this responsibility in the hands of third parties:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Consensus building or conflict prevention
Relationship building
Procedural assistance
Substantive assistance
Advisory non-binding assistance
6. Binding Assistance
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 9
Conflict Assessment
A crucial first step in any conflict management approach is conflict assessment. Four main factors have
been distinguished, that need to be analysed in determining the scope, nature and stage of a wetland
management conflict:
1
2
3
Characterisation of conflict and stakeholders.
Stage in the project cycle.
Stage in the conflict process.
4 The legal and institutional context.
The overall conclusions of the study are:
Cultural diversity
Asian and Pacific countries do not constitute a homogeneous group. Cultural and societal differences are
very important in the region and it is unlikely that a single approach will equally suit all countries. The
inclination shown by various agencies and international organisations to organise their work on the basis of
great blocks of countries may find its justification in Africa or Latin-America but obviously is inappropriate
to the Asian and Pacific region. Here, subdivisions should be considered to reflect the cultural diversity of
the region. Moreover, ethnic variations including groups that are culturally extremely different can occur in
wetland zone or small island areas. Sociologists or anthropologists recognise various types of informal
groups of people: ethnic groups, kin groups or territorial groups, for example. The existence of these
should be taken into account.
Political diversity
Also in terms of political systems, Asian and Pacific countries do show a wider diversity than other regions
in the world. Hence, the concepts of stakeholder, participation or conflict management will have a different
content and context, and therefore the approach to consensus building will have to be adapted to fit in the
local system. Subdivisions should be considered to reflect the political diversity of the region.
Bureaucracy
Many countries have a fairly complex system of authority and a plethora of competent agencies usually
inherited from past colonial history. Overlapping attributions do create conflicts of competence, intricate
procedures and confusion in the final decision. Cultural aspects may lead officials to use knowledge as a
means to gain power so that the circulation of information is minimal. The simplification of structures and
procedures is a must to ensure transparency. The access to information is a condition to effective
participation. Therefore, involving the grassroots level in collecting and processing information in its own
language is one of the key to successful participation.
Language diversity
Major ethnic variations including groups that are linguistically different can occur that will impair
communication between communities in the wetland zone or small island areas. On a regional level, the
language diversity and lack of a common language do not facilitate the dissemination of information
between countries and even within countries.
Wetland zone boundaries
In most countries, the definition of the administrative boundaries of the wetland zone is still inappropriate.
Boundaries based on an arbitrary distance measured from a tide level line do often result in splitting up
morphological or ecological units such as lagoons or wetlands. This is causing either an overlap in
competence or voids in regulations.
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 10
Top-down planning structures
Being the least empowered, politically, economically, socially and academically, local communities often are
unable to express their needs and to be heard from the decision-makers. The result of this alienation from
the planning process is a certain discontent with ill-adapted measures for which the level of acceptance will
be low. The hiatus between decision makers and planners who dispose of all relevant tools at the higher
level, and local communities who are unequipped at the lower level, makes that the target group of the
planning is considered the least capable of being a partner in the planning. Most often a top-down
approach is adopted, instead of a bottom-up process, while the beneficiary groups best know what they
need and how to fulfil this. Drastic measures such as resettlements are often taken without sufficient
explanation work. Voluntary conservation measures are only likely to succeed in frame of a structure of
empowerment and co-management. However, the sole bottom-up approach should also not be regarded
as the ultimate solution.
Tradition and social pressure
Traditional communities sometimes have very ancient ways of life, which are not likely to change if
communities do not have the opportunity to ensure their survival through tapping alternative sources
of livelihood. Environmentally damageable practices such as coral mining or illegal fishing will thus only
be abandoned if they become socially unacceptable to the community themselves. Voluntary
conservation measures are therefore more likely to gain acceptance in community-based programmes
providing a co-management structure of empowerment and law enforcement. However, poverty
alleviation measures must be taken at the same time to offer alternative sources of livelihood.
Involvement of outsiders
In the conflicts involving an international donor agency there is a risk for an expert-dominated approach.
Donors do not always consult stakeholders effectively. Either the timing of the consultation or the
composition of the consulted groups can be less than optimal. It is observed that donors or international
agencies do have their preferred counterpart organisations at country level and that they thus are not quite
able to integrate as they have a tendency to adopt a traditional way of funding sector activities.
Participation as a means, not an objective
There is a trend in some countries to include participation more as an objective in itself, than as a means to
an end. The composition of the groups of stakeholders and the methodology chosen may then not take
into account all stakeholders involved. Issues and problems may be overlooked because too much
importance is given to the tool. A responsible use of participatory techniques should be encouraged.
Importance of timing and preparation of participation
Participatory approaches can be made more efficient, when started early in the design phase. This is clearly
perceived in various countries. However, donor pressure to complete proposals and plans may cause late
or insufficient participation. In addition, all stakeholders should be involved and appropriate information
should be provided about the issues at stake. Furthermore, the design of the process should be clear to all
stakeholders.
Choice of a method and mediator
The choice of a suitable conflict management technique and mediator is extremely important, as is the
need to adapt to local conditions, culture and society. Several sections in this report are dedicated to this
topic.
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 11
Expert bias
Davos et al. (1997) conclude that wetland management projects in general are expert-driven and outcomeoriented. A recent review of World Bank Practice (World Bank, 1997) concluded that multilateral
organisations also tend to have a bias towards solutions to problems or conflicts based on expert opinion.
The standard solution to a problem is to have an expert staff member, or a consultant recruited for the
purpose, study the issue and propose a solution. Issues are often defined as “technical” problems, related
to water quality, poverty or public health, for example, and solutions are defined in terms of “fundable” –
often though not always physical – interventions. Given that one of the main products in support of
“lending” of the development banks has always been “technical assistance”, this is very understandable.
Consultants and agencies can and do consult with stakeholders, but the terms of reference of their
assignments usually put high expectations on rapid identification of well-defined solutions. In the review
referred to above, it was concluded that in most cases World Bank staff and external (international) experts
define the terms of reference (ToR) for the consultative process. The nature of the consultations following
the ToR and results then “tends to be to convince affected people and other stakeholders of the validity and
wisdom of the choices already made.” (World Bank, 1997, p. 36)
5. Suggestions for further action
Capacity Building
Wetland managers as well as agencies are insufficiently aware of the importance of conflicts in wetland
management and of the methods and techniques available to manage them. In addition, local communities
are often not at a point where they can negotiate with powerful stakeholders. Therefore, capacity building
for conflict management needs to reach agencies, wetland managers in the countries as well as the various
stakeholders. It is important that conflict management techniques are chosen to be relevant to the region.
Similarly, capacity-building programmes should consider the benefits of professional facilitators from the
region.
Local Facilitators
To ensure acceptance of conflict management techniques it is important that facilitators and mediators be
regarded as competent in the region. For this reason they should as much as possible originate from the
region. Capacity building programmes should take into account the need for professional
facilitator/mediator training for the region.
Local Government & Conflict Management
Local governments are often the weak link between the strong national agencies and the stakeholders in
projects. In wetland management projects the local governments are likely to be responsible for key
components of project execution. It is at this level, however, that capabilities in effective conflict
management are relatively weak. Wetland managers could take this into account in its capacity building
programmes as well as in the support to pilot projects dealing with conflict management in wetland
management.
Participatory Development
Some recommendations:
 Encourage grassroots documentation, by and for people at grassroots level providing the time,
incentives, and examples that will facilitate the exchange of experience at grassroots level

Shift from the dominant language, so as to enable the research and recording of experience and
documentation by local people
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 12

Develop non-traditional forms of documentation, that will be more compatible than written text and
books with the local modes of expression

Encourage translation from local languages, providing resources and capacity building so that local
communities and instances can communicate

Increase the priority of information management, starting from the beginning of the project
conception

Setting an example of sharing, both of successes and failures to prevent knowledge concentration as a
means to gain power

Recognise ownership, of contributions at all levels in respect of the ethics of data and information
collection
The Project Cycle
Conflict management is to play a role, depending on the stage in the project cycle:
 Policy and Strategy Definition. All stakeholders should increasingly access meetings, conferences,
seminars and workshops related to strategy definition directly.
 Country Programming and Project Identification. Major conflicts or conflict areas may be
identified as the objective for specific supported interventions.
 Identification and Orientation. This is an important stage from the perspective of conflict
prevention. Dormant conflicts of interest are likely to erupt. Parties may try to control or highjack
the procedure. At this stage a conflict analysis or assessment is useful to provide appropriate
conflict management inputs at the next stage. The conflict analysis should identify all stakeholders,
past and potential conflicts among them, relationships among stakeholders and the balance of
power, in relation to the identified project. The design of the conflict management process during
project preparation and analysis should be based on this conflict analysis.
 Preparation, Analysis. Community consultation is part of the project preparation process.
Consultation that aims at conflict prevention or reduction needs to involve all stakeholders early in
the project design phase and clearly show how the different inputs will affect the project. The type
of conflict management approach that is most effective depends partly on the existing
relationships among stakeholders, but the focus is on consensus building and relationship building.
A second conflict management related task during project preparation is to design conflict
resolution procedures that will govern project implementation.
 Negotiation and Approval. If the previous stages have been concluded successfully, negotiation
focuses on the conflicts of interests among the stakeholders and procedural assistance to
overcome power imbalances among stakeholders.
 Project Implementation or Execution. Contracts and agreements do, in principle, cover project
implementation. Stakeholder participation takes place as described in the project document.
Conflicts are likely to be clearly defined and among a smaller number of parties. The emphasis of
conflict management is on mediation and arbitration, rather than on consensus building. Project
documents should have conflict management procedures built into the project execution stage, as
cost-effective mechanisms to prevent escalation of conflicts at this stage.
 Monitoring and Evaluation. If conflicts could not be dealt with internally, monitoring or
evaluation missions can be the ultimate option to manage conflicts.
HEPPAP – Course 1. Organisations, Collaboration and Conflict Management
Page 13