Abstract
This article examines the boundary areas of the field of conflict resolution. It proposes that to advance as a practice and academic discipline, conflict resolution must define more clearly its theoretical and practice boundaries. Based on the assumption that this field requires its theory, practice, and research to complement one another, the article first outlines two boundary areas, that of theory about structural conflict and that of impartiality and neutrality in conflict resolution practice. The author proposes that developing theories about structural conflict will promote better interventions, an area where conflict resolution practice currently is underdeveloped. The debates about impartiality and neutrality in conflict resolution practice lead the author to propose two delimiters for practice—impartiality and inclusiveness—that will differentiate conflict resolution from other related fields. The article concludes with a recommendation about how integrating theory, practice, and research can advance the field as a whole.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
