Collaborative Principles to Collaborative Principles to Resolve Policy IssuesResolve Policy Issues

Key Ingredients and ConsiderationsKey Ingredients and Considerations

Jonathan BrockWilliam D. Ruckelshaus Center

Daniel J. Evans School of Public AffairsUniversity of Washington

Why Collaborative Principles?Why Collaborative Principles? Allows influence on a situation you can’t control Formal route won’t achieve exploration, resolution Combination of perspectives can generate solutions

that you wouldn’t think of on your own Parties take greater responsibility for the outcome More likely to obtain a sustainable outcome Develops relationships helpful in implementation and

for future conflicts ADR process can be shaped to fit the specific issues,

parties and context

When to Mediate or NegotiateWhen to Mediate or Negotiate When issue is too important to stand consequences

of decision you actually have the power to make! When a decision or position could put the

situation out of your constructive influence When you don’t have power to impose a solution When you have power, but consequence too risky When one or more key parties seem entrenched When your alternatives are worse than negotiation

*Lessons of Key NW Conflicts*Lessons of Key NW Conflicts Beginning/structuring

– Importance of initial sponsorship, gov’t connection– Trust in process, conveners– Careful front-end and ongoing effective staff work– Presence of principals for decision; engagement of staff

Important features– Agreed upon use of data for decisions, later actions– Open to local knowledge; flexible for special conditions– Lesser financed groups can participate

Provisions for implementation– Continuity from negotiation to implementation – Accepted channels for implementation; new structures for priority setting,

coordination, focus, sponsorship Key success, progress often follows major tension

*Locally Based Decision Forums*Locally Based Decision Forums

Place-based groups with representation appropriate to resolving likely issues– NW Straits– Nisqually River Council

Issues & solutions from local joint committee Connected to local, state, sometimes federal authorities via

sponsorship needed for issues Often causes compliance, problem solving, data collection

not possible through traditional regulatory and administrative procedure

Often government provides staff support role!

*Collaborative Principles Apply to *Collaborative Principles Apply to Regulatory & Advocacy Work Regulatory & Advocacy Work

Gives enforcement & policy staff expanded tools for addressing compliance issues– Resolving disputes among or within groups– Developing policies that recognize power– Voluntary compliance often more sustainable

Can resolve issues on the groundCan produce more realistic, accepted policy

What are the key ingredients?What are the key ingredients?

Finding the source of the conflictWho are the parties?What are their interests?What’s their power to influence outcome?What’s their BATNA?Knowing that the most important factors are

often away from the table

Assessing the sourceAssessing the sourceWhat has to be resolved to end the conflict?

– What, if resolved or removed, would end conflict and obviate need for conflict process?

– Often, critical questions are not evident– Formal conflict may be over an EIS or quota, but

the real source of the conflict may be fear of losing some important right or access; or losing an irreplaceable or meaningful resource

– Finding the real source of the conflict is essential so that the right issues get attention, and needed parties are present and engaged.

Who are the parties?Who are the parties? Source of conflict determines who to engage Three kinds of parties

– Direct--must be at the table– Indirect--consulted, may have to approve, comment – Interested--need to be informed

Anyone necessary for implementation or who can undo an agreement must be involved at a level that will allow them to accept the outcome

Otherwise, they may work against resolution, or important input may be lacking

What are the interests of each party?What are the interests of each party?Interests are different than positions

– Position is an end point; hard to negotiate over– Positions lack context; interfere w/solutions– Interests are concerns or needs that must be addressed to

resolve conflict. Once identified, can be explored, in open, creative ways.

– Interest-based negotiation is among the most successful for policy and environmental disputes, and also in labor and commercial.

Positions may be incompatible; non-competing interests can form agreement.

What is the power of each party to What is the power of each party to influence the outcome?influence the outcome?

Thus, to know how to arrange a negotiation, assess the relative power of key parties – to each other– to this conflict (power is conflict-specific)

Examples of power– Legal standing– Access to media, direct action– Personal stature, knowledge, respect– Personal contacts among parties, outside

Real power is exercised away from table

What is the power of each party to What is the power of each party to influence the outcome?influence the outcome?

Mediation forum must equalize the power of the parties within the forum

Can pool power for joint gainsConsensus rule equalizes power; Not votesIf not satisfied w/participation parties may

use power away from tableGround rules to cover use of external power

What is their BATNA?What is their BATNA?

“Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement”Not, “what’s my final position”, but “what

could I actually achieve on my own?”As long as the process offers more than the

BATNA, parties will normally stay engaged

Features of Successful Features of Successful Collaborative ProcessesCollaborative Processes

Cormick’s Principles Strengths / Risks

Purpose-driven A reason to be there, clear goal

Inclusive Constituents with “significant interest” involved

Voluntary Constituents willing to come to the table

Self-Design No preconceived ideas / solutions

Flexibility Able to adapt process to meet needs

Equal opportunity All involved parties have equivalent access

Respect for Diverse Interests

Lots of listening

Accountability Representatives are accountable

Time Limits Deadlines, assessment points

Implementation Must have reasonable guarantees, recourse re: implementation

Building an AgreementBuilding an Agreement Choosing an acceptable convener Convening the parties

– Determining representation– Ensuring true representation

Developing ground rules– To equalize the power– To create certainty– Set deadlines– Preserve rights– Creates the first agreement among the parties

Building an Agreement 2Building an Agreement 2Create safe forumStart with areas of agreementConstructively explore interestsRole of the convener

– Jointly selected– Works ahead of meetings– Gets to know the parties– Gets to know the issues– Build trust with and among parties– Set plan and agendas; get agreement on agenda– Prepare parties for each meeting

Building an Agreement 3Building an Agreement 3

Exploring issues jointly, e.g.– Joint data collection– Joint exploration– Jointly specify assumptions of any studies– Use joint committees

Use only agreed upon expertsNeutral staff crucial to large, ongoing issue

Some Dynamics Some Dynamics Deadlines matter, create movement Best offers often in worst language, so

– Listen for the whole presentation– Respond to the offer, not the insult

Help representatives be effective Progress begets trust, begets progress Settlement aided by making problem bigger Settlement requires giving, not hoarding, info

– others must know what you want (interests)– you must know what they want (interests)– But be cautious how you reveal your interests

Agreement won’t resolve underlying differences

Getting ClosureGetting Closure

Hardest conflicts often within groups, not among May require different public than private positions Strike when hot: No buyers remorse, sellers regret Capture agreement in writing Don’t let anyone “get theirs first.” Even the

agreement must recognize the mistrust

Drawbacks, Cautions, Oppy’sDrawbacks, Cautions, Oppy’s Not always cheaper Not always faster Can be especially difficult for some groups to

keep people and resources tied up May cause criticism from own constituency Often estranges members from their groups Ongoing forums like NW Straits, NRC overcome

many, not all of the drawbacks Systems or ongoing forums are insufficiently

utilized

A Few More Observations A Few More Observations Collaborative approach not always best Note importance of power in creating opp’y Recognize limits of legal compulsion; power of voluntary

action– Opp’y for enforcement via voluntary, peer action– More can be done when people are not forced, and when the

response respects their circumstances Needs to go from informal to structured Scale and breadth must reflect scale of issues, influence

and authority Note informal spin-offs that help future problems Trust is a result, not an ingredient

Why choose collaborative Why choose collaborative principles for problem-principles for problem-

solving? solving? When faced with a choice between two

evils

Try the one you haven’t tried…