No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Negotiation in the Public and Private SectorsA Core Model
Abstract
Conventional models of negotiation assume that each side involved in a debate is monolithic , agreeing on demands and strategies. This article offers an alternative model that takes into account conflicting goals and interests within bargaining teams and their effect on the larger negotiating process, including the role of the mediator. It is also demonstrated that she model is applicable regardless of the particular issues, parties, or sector— public or private—involved.
The “public” is a central concept in planning, delimiting a realm of praxis as well as often indicating the reconciliation of disparate interests to create a collective basis for action. Recently, communicative action, informed by Habermasian critical theory, has enlivened these ideas. The author draws on ongoing feminist debates to rethink this “public” through two conceptual devices: the social and the global. In planning, the public has always been contested, but a feminist perspective demonstrates how the discursive constitution and legitimation of the public has crucial implications for social entitlements. And if communicative action has shown how the public interest is shaped by the dialogic parameters of the public domain, then feminist contentions point to the geopolitical conditions under which participatory dialogue is possible. The author offers this feminist interrogation of the ideal of the public not with the intent of replacing it but instead with the hope that it will strengthen the everyday idea of the public.
The literature has established many claims concerning the effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in resolving environmental conflicts, with little empirical research to support them. Using data collected from 54 recent cases in which ADR was used to resolve waste management disputes in Ontario and Massachusetts, this study employs seven criteria of success to test empirically the validity of these claims. Although by some measures ADR has been quite successful in certain types of environmental conflicts, this study shows that it is hardly a panacea for resolving waste management disputes.
In Maine, the state government does not require municipalities to plan, but it provides technical assistance, incentives, and state review to encourage local comprehensive planning. Most municipalities submit plans; the majority adopt plans that are consistent with state goals. Voluntary planning may therefore constitute a viable alternative to planning mandates if states offer incentives and assistance. The research finds little evidence that higher status municipalities are more likely to plan, casting doubt on the hypothesis that planning is driven by exclusionary motives in Maine. Municipalities’ planning actions correlate more consistently with indicators of their residents’ attitudes about property rights.
Because of shifts in funding resources and calls for mandated cooperation, small community-based organizations are increasingly engaging in collaborative partnerships. This article focuses on how well collaboration works in practice for small community-based organizations. Existing research suggests that small community-based organizations, because of their informal organizational structures and adapttability, can develop highly effective partnerships. However, such organizations are largely inexperienced at implementing formal partnerships with other groups, leading to a potential for significant conflict. The article presents the case study of three small community-based organizations and illustrates the rather unexpected result that even with high degrees of interagency conflict, collaboration can result in highly effective programmatic outcomes.
This article explores the pedagogical issues associated with reconstructing Geographic Information Systems (GIS) instruction into a form more directly linked to the substantive heart of the planning discipline. It surveys the broad terrain of GIS pedagogy and reviews the fit of prevailing instructional modes with the pedagogical mission of planning. Drawing on the insights gained from this review, the article then discusses the key design challenges planning educators must confront to repackage GIS instruction into a more planning-relevant form. Outlining changes the author has made to his own classes, he demonstrates one form that this type of instructional strategy may take.
The present research investigated whether (a) preexisting affiliation (bias) between a mediator and 1 disputant and (b) interpersonal hostility between 2 disputants affected university Residence hall Assistants' (RAs') mediation strategies. Respondents (N = 45) read 1 of 4 versions of a dispute scenario; versions varied independent variables according to a 2 × 2 design (high vs. low mediator affiliation and high vs. low disputant hostility). Respondents indicated the probability of using 18 mediation techniques. Results suggested that both independent variables significantly affected strategy selection. When friends with the complainant, the RA was likely to first avoid mediating. Hostility between disputants was related to less problem solving. In all conditions. RAs mentioned techniques consistent with stage theories of mediation, moving from problem definition to problem solving to pressing the parties.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.