首页>
外文学位
>Conflict resolution in ecological negotiations: How multilateral negotiations contribute to the resolution of environment and development conflicts.
【24h】
Conflict resolution in ecological negotiations: How multilateral negotiations contribute to the resolution of environment and development conflicts.
Purpose. Negotiation research has been biased toward the analysis of win-lose behaviors in bilateral situations. This study responds to the need for a systems framework to monitor consensus building in complex, multi-party ecological negotiations. The study demonstrates how multilateral negotiations contribute to the dynamics of conflict resolution.; Methods. A conflict resolution systems framework is used to analyze the integrative (win-win) and distributive (win-lose) features of climate change negotiations. Content analysis determines associations between forms of power and preferred levels of integration. Interviews with expert informants provide low and high power perspectives on symbolic, social and material issues. Secondary sources of documentation provide evidence of situations and preferences.; Results. The 1992 and 1997 climate change agreements included flexible (integrative and distributive) statements. The majority were integrative (79%). Preferred levels of integration were related to the forms of power under consideration. Consensus building moved from holistic levels of symbolic appreciation, to the cooperative establishment of social roles and rules, to distributive approaches to the regulation and management of material resources. Parties avoided centralizing sanctions and funding in the United Nations. High and low power parties had significant differences in preferences (t-test, t = 5.89, df = 214, p .001). The Alliance of Small Island States draft protocol (1994) proposed a high percentage of integrative solutions. The United States position paper (1996) prioritized distributive interests.; Conclusions. The 1992–2000 climate change negotiations had multiple functions, and there were indicators of conflict resolution. First, multilateral negotiations provided opportunities for low power parties to raise awareness of threatening ecological conditions and propose integrative multi-party solutions. Second, the benefits of inclusive, transparent and flexible negotiations to low power groups included capacity building, the formation of extensive partnerships and increased access to technical resources. Third, high power groups developed innovative technical solutions. Constraints to the dynamics of conflict resolution included sovereign economic interests. High power parties have protected their advantages.
展开▼
机译：目的。谈判研究偏向于分析双边情况下的输赢行为。这项研究满足了在复杂的多方生态谈判中监测建立共识的系统框架的需求。研究表明，多边谈判如何促进解决冲突的动力。 方法。解决冲突的系统框架用于分析气候变化谈判的综合（双赢）和分配（双输）特征。内容分析确定权力形式与首选集成水平之间的关联。与专家线人的访谈提供了关于象征性，社会性和物质性问题的低视角和高视角。辅助文件来源提供了情况和偏好的证据。 结果。 1992年和1997年的气候变化协议包括灵活的（整合和分配）声明。大多数是综合性的（79％）。首选的整合水平与所考虑的权力形式有关。共识的建立已从象征性欣赏的整体层面发展到社会角色和规则的合作建立，再到物质资源的调节和管理的分布式方法。缔约方避免在联合国集中制裁和供资。高功率和低功率方在偏好方面存在显着差异（ t -测试， t = 5.89， df = 214， p <.001）。小岛屿国家联盟议定书草案（1994年）提出了很高比例的综合解决方案。美国立场文件（1996年）优先考虑分配利益。 结论。 1992-2000年的气候变化谈判具有多种职能，并且有解决冲突的指标。首先，多边谈判为低党派提供了提高对威胁生态条件的认识并提出综合多党派解决方案的机会。第二，与低权力团体进行包容，透明和灵活的谈判的好处包括能力建设，建立广泛的伙伴关系和增加获得技术资源的机会。第三，大国集团开发了创新的技术解决方案。解决冲突的动力包括主权经济利益。大国势力保护了自己的优势。
展开▼
