Pairwise comparison of concessions in negotiation processes

Abstract

Starting off with a pairwise-comparison method to evaluate the possible deals between two parties in conflict, we generalize the approach and we consider the case of three parties in conflict. The basic step is the subjective evaluation of a deal where each party offers exactly one concession. The trade-off of benefits and costs is judged in verbal terms which are subsequently converted into numerical values on a discrete geometric scale. Although the number of plausible geometric scales is large, the information to be used by a mediator is scale-independent. The approach is illustrated by the results of an exploratory project aiming at a balanced CO2 emission reduction in Poland, Brazil, and the netherlands. The success of the method depends largely on the information-processing support. Given the limitations of human imagination and human judgement, the method is not likely to be effective in a conflict among four or more parties, although it can easily be generalized.