Conflict resolution for water resource projects: using facilitation and mediation to write section 404 general permits

Priscoli, Jerome Delli

doi:10.1016/0195-9255(87)90004-7

Cited by 13 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many researchers have, however, identified the importance of process dynamics such as opening lines of communication, developing mutual understanding, sustaining active engagement, and learning together (Innes and Booher, 1999;Susskind, McKearnan, and Thomas-Larmer, 1999;Leach, Pelkey, and Sabatier, 2002;Dedekorkut, 2004;Daniels and Walker, 2001). Some argue that the essential ingredient of any successful process dynamic is collective recognition of mutual interdependence (Delli Priscoli, 1987;Susskind and Cruikshank, 1987;Hamilton, 1991); others recognize a transformational nature in collaborative engagement (Folger and Bush, 1996).…”

Section: Use Of Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental conflict resolution: Evaluating performance outcomes and contributing factors

Emerson

Orr²,

Keyes

et al. 2009

Conflict Resolution Qtrly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This empirical study of fifty-two environmental conflict resolution (ECR) processes is based on an evaluation framework that specifies key conditions and factors that contribute to ECR outcomes. Data were collected on a range of ECR processes and applications. This article reports on findings from a multilevel modeling analysis that focuses on three primary outcomes: reaching agreement, the quality of agreement, and improved working relationships among parties. Effective engagement of parties is identified as a major contributor to all three outcomes. Other key factors that operate directly and indirectly through effective engagement are involvement of appropriate parties, the skills and practices of ECR mediators and facilitators, and incorporation of relevant and high-quality information. Findings generally support the ECR evaluation framework.

show abstract

Section: Use Of Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental conflict resolution: Evaluating performance outcomes and contributing factors

Emerson

Orr²,

Keyes

et al. 2009

Conflict Resolution Qtrly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All parties recognize a need for negotiation (Fisher and Ury 1981;Lee 1982;Bacow and Wheeler 1984;Bingham 1986). 3. Each party has sufficient power to prevent any other party from acting unilaterally (Cormick, 1980;Susskind and McMahon, 1985;Delli Priscoli, 1987). 4.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Each party is able to commit itself and its constituents to implementation (Cormick, 1980;Susskind and Weinstein, 1980;Bingham, 1986;Carpenter and Kennedy, 1988). 5. There is a sense of urgency in the negotiations (Cormick, 1980;Susskind and McMahon, 1985;Bingham, 1986;Delli Priscoli, 1987). 6. Technical issues are clear (Susskind and Weinstein, 1980;Bingham, 1986;Susskind and Cruikshank, 1987;Clark et at., 1991).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

TECHNICAL CLARITY IN INTER‐AGENCY NEGOTIATIONS: LESSONS FROM FOUR HYDROPOWER PROJECTS¹

Burkardt¹,

Lamb²,

Taylor³

et al. 1995

J American Water Resour Assoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the effect of technical clarity on success in multi‐party negotiations in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing process. Technical clarity is the shared understanding of dimensions such as the geographic extent of the project, range of flows to be considered, important species and life stages, and variety of water uses considered. The results of four hydropower licensing consultations are reported. Key participants were interviewed to ascertain the level of technical clarity present during the consultations and the degree to which the consultations were successful. Technical clarity appears to be a prerequisite for successful outcomes. Factors that enhance technical clarity include simple project design, new rather than existing projects, precise definition of issues, a sense of urgency to reach agreement, a sense of fairness among participants, and consistency in participation. Negotiators should not neglect the critical pre‐negotiation steps of defining technical issues and determining appropriate studies, deciding how to interpret studies, and agreeing on responses to study results.

show abstract

“…People are more likely to participate in a collaborative process if they believe the outcome will advance their interests and produce better results than an alternative method (Priscoli, 1987, evaluation of two cases; Gray, 1989). However, parties will be unlikely to participate, let alone reach an agreement, if they believe they could achieve more by using another method (Bingham, 1986).…”

Section: Motivation and Timingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Instead, the approaches tend to utilize more horizontal systems of association, interaction and communication to organize, make decisions and mobilize resources (KenCaim, 1996). After analyzing two cases, Priscoli (1987) reports that actors might not have accurate perceptions of each other's power, but the fact that parties are working collaboratively and making decisions consensually helps equalize power by giving each person an equal say in the outcome. Equal power within groups and shared management and decision-making authority contributes to successful resolution processes (President's Council on Sustainable Development, 1997, review and synthesis of several collaborative processes).…”

Section: Equality Between Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a collaborative approach to mediate conflict between parties with interests in wildlife and livestock in Colorado

McAndrews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. The Habitat Partnership Program (HPP) is a collaborative initiative of the Colorado Division of Wildlife and the Colorado Cattleman's Association. The program consists of 15 committees, distributed over western Colorado, representing the interests of public resource managers, livestock growers and hunters. Through partnerships and projects, each committee strives to reduce fence damage and forage loss from big game activity. Information gathered from interviews, documents, projects and observation was used to assess the effectiveness of HPP in meeting its stated goals: resolve conflicts, improve ecosystem health, raise local knowledge about resource management and improve communication and understanding. Over seven years (1991-1998), committees completed habitat improvement projects on 77,856 hectares of public and private land, established 124 water developments and assisted with noxious weed control on 5,904 hectares. In addition, 193 kilometers of new 'wildlife friendly' fence and 60 big game crossings were built. For educational purposes, committees sponsored 31 workshops in holistic resource management and developed 37 brochures on natural resource issues. Ninety-four percent of committee members thought the program improved communication between landowners, sportspersons and government agencies. As measured by independent indicators and the degree of satisfaction of program participants, HPP can be considered an improvement over previous directive programs. However, the continuous influx of people and the loss of habitat in Colorado -over 110,000 hectares per year-may render moot the issues addressed by collaborative wildlife and natural resource management programs. u Graduate College

show abstract

Conflict resolution for water resource projects: using facilitation and mediation to write section 404 general permits

Cited by 13 publications

References 4 publications

Environmental conflict resolution: Evaluating performance outcomes and contributing factors

Environmental conflict resolution: Evaluating performance outcomes and contributing factors

TECHNICAL CLARITY IN INTER‐AGENCY NEGOTIATIONS: LESSONS FROM FOUR HYDROPOWER PROJECTS¹

Evaluation of a collaborative approach to mediate conflict between parties with interests in wildlife and livestock in Colorado

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Conflict resolution for water resource projects: using facilitation and mediation to write section 404 general permits

Cited by 13 publications

References 4 publications

Environmental conflict resolution: Evaluating performance outcomes and contributing factors

Environmental conflict resolution: Evaluating performance outcomes and contributing factors

TECHNICAL CLARITY IN INTER‐AGENCY NEGOTIATIONS: LESSONS FROM FOUR HYDROPOWER PROJECTS1

Evaluation of a collaborative approach to mediate conflict between parties with interests in wildlife and livestock in Colorado

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

TECHNICAL CLARITY IN INTER‐AGENCY NEGOTIATIONS: LESSONS FROM FOUR HYDROPOWER PROJECTS¹