Applying a Mediated Negotiation Framework to Integrated Coastal Zone Management

Conflict is intrinsic to coastal zone management, yet relatively few peer-reviewed studies have examined how coastal managers might apply conflict resolution processes in the coastal zone management (CZM) context. The authors believe that many of these disputes can be addressed by using a structured...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Coastal management 2001-07, Vol.29 (3), p.183-216
Main Author: Scott McCreary, John Gamman, Bennett Brooks, Lisa Whitman, Rebecca Bryson, Boyd Fuller, Austin McInerny, Robin Glazer
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Brackish
California
Coastal zone management
Coastal Zone Management Collaborative Processes Conflict Resolution Consensus Building Environmental Dispute Resolution Joint Fact-FINDING Stakeholder Analysis Single-TEXT Negotiation
Dispute settlement
Environmental policy
Estuaries
Marine
San Francisco bay region
United States
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Conflict is intrinsic to coastal zone management, yet relatively few peer-reviewed studies have examined how coastal managers might apply conflict resolution processes in the coastal zone management (CZM) context. The authors believe that many of these disputes can be addressed by using a structured mediation model that involves face-to-face negotiation with a broad range of stakeholders to build consensus-based agreements for integrated coastal zone management (ICZM). To explore this further, the article examines four questions. First, it examines how CZM literature characterizes conflict and conflict resolution. Second, it looks at how essential principles from the field of alternative dispute resolution and environmental mediation can be best employed in the ICZM context. In particular, it explores the various elements of a stepwise agreement building model, a mediated negotiation process model the authors use in practice that bases its success on a foundation of four principles: representation, participation, legitimacy, and accountability. Next, it details three essential tools used in this process, stakeholder analysis, joint factfinding, and single-text negotiation, that the authors believe to be promising for developing and adopting stable, well-informed, and implementable agreements for ICZM. Finally, the article examines how these structuring principles and process strategies have been used in two recent case studies regarding the management of the San Francisco estuary and its tributaries.
ISSN:0892-0753
1521-0421
DOI:10.1080/08920750152102035