There is the need to recognise conflict management as a change strategy, to accept it as a valid part of the urban planning process, and to be cognizant of the range of techniques potentially available.
Urban planners need to temper this with the recognition that they do not, in the more commonly accepted role assigned to them, have a substantial role in the two main parts of the urban planning process in which conflict occurs, namely decision-making and implementation.
In addition, it is necessary that urban planners recognise the potential benefits of some conflicts. The fact that they may be either third parties outside of, but trying to influence other parties within a conflict, or they may be themselves part of the conflict.
Particular methods of conflict management are more or less appropriate according to the circumstances of the situation.
For urban planners, the main situational variables are:
1.) the value placed on the conflict
2.) the general change strategy seen as the most appropriate
3.) the degree of interdependence of the parties, and
4.) the type of interdependence, including the “rules” of the relationship.
Underlying these considerations is the part played by urban planning’s focus on land and land uses, for land as a resource has a number of unique characteristics which affects the nature of conflicts over it.
Two other aspects of urban planning which have implications for conflict management are its nature as a profession and its location within the structure of government.
Conflict Management Mechanisms:
1.) Ignoring conflict
2.) Agreement to continue
3.) Avoidance and evasion
4.) Conquest
5.) Suppression
6.) Conciliation
7.) Mediation
8.) Bargaining
9.) Persuasion
10.) Coercion
11.) Advocacy
12.) Arbitration
13.) Special purpose mechanisms such as the adoption of superordinate goals or regulations; fact collecting mechanisms; membership exchange; partisan mutual adjustment; and cooption
14.) Exacerbation
End result
These various conflict management techniques change a conflict situation to some end state. The idea that conflicts are eventually only either “won” or “lost” is widespread.
The only other widely recognised end state is compromise.
The end state of conflict management that could be important to urban planners include:
- Victory/ Defeat: one party achieves its goals at the expense of the other; Defeat is the cessation of the other’s pursuit of disputed goals and the recognition of the other party’s control over disputed resources and roles.
- Isolation: the abandonment of one or more party’s struggle and withdrawal from contest, so that the interaction between the two parties ceases and so with it the ensuing conflict.
- Compromise: ending the conflict by the abandonment of some of both parties goals in the interests of (a) successfully achieving others, and (b) avoiding the continued costs if attempting to coerce each side and being the target of coercion of the other.
- Cooperation: both parties retain, in their entirety, their original goals but agree to work together, even if temporarily
- Consensus
- Award
- Passive Settlement
The urban planner can either be an external agent of conflict management or be an integral part of the conflict itself, depending on the kind of conflict being considered. Because the urban planner is often placed in the role of a third party consultan in the community conflict he must be able to recongnisdse whether these third party conditions exist.Thus the appropriate method of conflict management will depend on (a) the value placed on the conflict, (b) whether the urban planner is a third party or participant, and (c) what general strategy of change is considered the most appropriate
| 3rd Party Intervention |
No 3rd Party Intervention |
| |
Agreement to continue |
| |
Avoidance |
| Suppresion |
Suppression |
| |
Conquest |
| Mediation |
|
| |
Conciliation |
| |
bargaining |
| Advocacy |
|
| |
Coercion |
| Arbitration |
|
| Persuasion |
Persuasion |
| Special Purpose |
Special Purpose |
The role of the planner in conflict can either be as observer, informant, supporter, participant, or even as adjudicator.
First, it is important to clarify the nature of conflict before any action be taken
Second, conflict over the structure of the rules is more severe and less amendable to manipulation than conflict within a structure of rules. As urban planning deals with the distribution of important social resources, it is unrealistic to assume that conflict will always occur ”within the rules”. If the resources in question are important enough, parties will disregard the rules. As planning is essentially a public activity, it must be noted that the possibility of a change of rules by the legislature is always possible.
Third, the need to recognize the limits of human abilities must be taken into account.
Fourth, Planning involves qualitative as well as quantitative goals. The range of mechanisms available to manage qualitative conflicts is smaller as compared to quantitative conflicts
Fifth, it must be accepted that conflicts can have positive functions as well as negative dysfunctions. The urban planner’s role in conflict management depends on his power ot effect change.
Conclusions:
Conflict management is a process, in the same way that urban planning is a process.
The next stage is to clarify the characteristics and structure of the conflict
When the conflict episode has been understood it must be then evaluated. If it is beneficial, or adequately controlled, no further action will be required.
If action is to be taken to manage the conflict, and the action may include ensuring its continuation or exacerbation, a decision has to be made on the desired end state.
Once the desired end state has been decided, the next step is whether to ignore the conflict or to take action on it.
If the action to manage or suppress the conflict is to be taken, then the resources available need to be evaluated.
At this stage it will be clear as to what role the urban planner is to take, whether he is a participant of the conflict or a third-party/ outsider, so that the appropriate conflict management process can be undertaken.
If the action is unsuccessful, then it may be possible to modify the characteristics of the conflict to make it more amendable to urban planning action.
Once the conflict episode has ended, continuing monitoriong of the resulting condition is necessary.
0.000000
0.000000
