Deliberative multi-actor dialogues as opportunities for transformative social learning and conflict resolution in international environmental negotiations

Maria Schultz,Niclas Hällström,Thomas Hahn,Claudia Ituarte-Lima

doi:10.1007/s10784-018-9410-4

Abstract

The format for formal international negotiations on environment and development sometimes prevents negotiators from truly listening to each other and adapt pre-existing positions to realize constructive conflict resolution. In this paper we present and analyse “Multi-Actor Dialogue Seminars” (MADS) as an approach to contribute to transformative social learning and conflict resolution, and the contribution to tangible and intangible outcomes in formal negotiations. Unlike negotiations, the objective of MADS is not to agree on a text, but to identify areas of agreement and disagreement, build trust and understanding and identify policy options that are tailored to different cultural-political and value systems. As a case study we use the breakdown of the negotiations at the formal Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Conference in 2010 regarding “innovative financial mechanisms,” and subsequent two international Quito Dialogues using the MADS approach. Through a composite of methods this article reveals the effects of the Quito Dialogues on formal CBD negotiations. The Quito Dialogues contributed to bringing actors out of their deadlock and thereby paving the way for constructive results in the formal CBD negotiations, evident by references in CBD Decisions adopted by 196 CBD Parties. We discuss key design and implementation factors which were decisive for these effects including the importance of a bridging organization, trust building, exploration of both convergences and divergences, involvement of participants with diverse and conflicting views early in the planning, promotion of active listening and addressing diverse knowledge systems and power asymmetries.

Highlights

Global environmental change calls for a new paradigm in international policy making to “explore options for transformations towards sustainability” (Steffen et al 2015)
We find that the distinction between tangible and intangible outcomes is useful to assess the outcomes of the Quito Dialogues
Our results suggest that transformative social learning has taken place in the Quito Dialogues, according to the three criteria suggested by Reed et al (2010): 1. Demonstrate that a change in understanding has taken place in the individuals involved The nature of the understanding concerning biodiversity financing evolved, from polarized positions between some negotiators, to a shared understanding that particular biodiversity financing mechanisms” (BFM) may look different depending on the country-specific conditions and cultural-political orientations

Summary

Introduction

Global environmental change calls for a new paradigm in international policy making to “explore options for transformations towards sustainability” (Steffen et al 2015). The process of negotiation, where the search for mutual exchange is shaped by persuasion and political power, can be almost contrary to the communication patterns of dialogue and transformational learning (Littlejohn and Domenici 2001). A visualization of this is the Chinese finger trap: When you push your fingers into each end of these straw tubes and try to remove them, the tube diameter shrinks and grabs the fingers firmly. The more you struggle, the more your fingers are trapped. The only way to create enough room to get your fingers back out is to do something counterintuitive: push them deeper into the tube, which only relaxes its grip (Hayes 2007)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion