| Does Australian mediation training present a range of
conflict theories in order to critically evaluate the scale and context of issues needing
resolution? All conflict theories promote intermediary processes, identifying
impediments to agreement, and assisting participants search for solutions. Differences
often relate to scale - theories vary for scoping inter-personal, local, regional,
national, international and global conflicts. Appreciating different theories offers
greater flexibility for taking into account the scale of the problems and the scale at
which it is possible to seek resolution.
ADR as it is directed and supported through national programs may be inadequate for
addressing problems unresolvable through existing laws and legislation. Theory is critical
to determine whether majority/minority issues are being adequately scoped as disputes,
resolvable through compromise, or as conflicts that entail deeper concerns about
legitimacy and recognition and require cross-cultural engagement between western and
non-western traditions. If outcomes cannot be accommodated within predominant national
structures, broader theoretical frameworks may be needed so that mediators can explicitly
stipulate what kind of process could address intra-state disparities between the interests
of dominant/subordinate peoples; otherwise predominant national interests simply dictate a
prescribed, and potentially unjust process. |
Judith
Morrison is a PhD student with the Institute for Sustainability & Technology Policy, Murdoch
University, Perth. Her interest is in theories dealing with the resolution of
disputes and conflicts, and how they can be applied in Australia to support the
facilitation of cross-cultural decision-making processes. Her practical work in
conflict resolution and my research, drawn from a wide range of global sources of
knowledge, suggest that conflicts that ensue from changes in the use of land and resources
are influenced not only by ‘material’ issues but also by
‘psychological’ issues, that is, how effectively groups can negotiate about the
values which underpin statutory, legal and contractual settlements.
Her assertion is that
there is insufficient attention given in Australia to approaches being put in place in
other regions of the world to actualise the capacity of indigenous people to effectively
participate in decision-making about land and lifestyle choices, given that many issues in
Australia have parallels elsewhere. The developing academic research concerned with
resolving cross-cultural conflicts indicates that theory informed by practice is a source
of replicable knowledge that could help to improve competency in the facilitation of
Australian cross-cultural decision-making processes. In Australia, as elsewhere,
conflict resolution has to deal with dominance systems and disadvantage, rights to
recognition, capacity for self-determination, and capacity to meaningfully participate in
multi-party decision-making about co-existance and sustainable uses of land and resources.
If it is conceded that in Australia issues needing to be reconciled about
domination, disadvantage and non-recognition represent conflicts rather than disputes,
theory should be drawn from the field of Conflict Resolution as much as from Alternative
Dispute Resolution in order to critically evaluate decision-making processes as being
adequate for the prescribed purposes.
Her thesis examines how well participants who are to engage in cross-cultural
decision-making are assisted and supported to develop appropriate processes. Last
year she participated in, and reported on, a four-month consultative process whereby
representatives from all native title claimant groups throughout South Australia were
asked to consider negotiating with the SA Government, the SA Chamber of Mines and
Energy, and the SA Farmers Federation to devise a statewide Indigenous Land Use Agreement
as a basis for integrated working relationships. Claimants have expressed their
willingness to proceed with the negotiations which will have to deal with a wide range of
potentially conflicting interests in land and natural resources. Relevant theory
will be necessary to critically examine and fully understand the scale and the context of
issues needing resolution. One of the recommendations in my report was that a survey
be conducted amongst stakeholder groups to determine what resources they might draw from
in order to adequately structure and participate in this significant cross-cultural
process. |
