Conflict Resolution Perspective Research Articles

How Development of a Healthcare Standard of Preparedness Can Save Community Medicine: A Conflict Analysis and Resolution Perspective

U.S. hospitals and health systems are facing a trifecta of crises in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic – financial peril, reduction in provision of healthcare, and a rise in litigation

Multi-criteria Large-Scale Group Decision-Making in Linguistic Contexts: A Perspective of Conflict Analysis and Resolution

Multi-criteria Large-Scale Group Decision-Making in Linguistic Contexts: A Perspective of Conflict Analysis and Resolution

THE IMPACT OF INTERNATIONAL JUDICIAL INSTITUTIONS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF LEGAL SYSTEMS IN WEST AFRICA (CASE STUDY OF BURKINA FASO)

Purpose: this article examines the impact of international judicial institutions on the development of the legal systems of West Africa, namely Burkina Faso. Research methods: synthesis, analysis, formal-legal, comparative-legal. Results: the impact of international judicial institutions on the development of West African legal systems, particularly in Burkina Faso, was assessed from the perspective of international conflict resolution and its impact on the rule and development of democracy in Africa, and the main grounds for conflict resolution were identified: Discussion: this article reveals the influence of international judicial institutions on the development of the legal systems of West African countries, often due to the political and social realities of the countries. These countries have generally succeeded in developing a colonial system of justice. The legal systems of West African countries derive from different traditions inherited from colonization. They have also been influenced by numerous customs and religious norms which influence the structure of the judicial system in each country. The region is now collectively developing under the aegis of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).

US WITHDRAWAL & TALIBAN REGIME IN AFGHANISTAN: IMPLICATIONS FOR REGIONAL STABILITY

After the United States leaves, Afghanistan, a nation decimated by a four-decade prolonged conflict, will experience much more anarchy and a humanitarian calamity. The United States' abrupt withdrawal has left a political vacuum that has spread to all of the regional states, and the state system has also disintegrated. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of the US withdrawal and the Taliban's resurgence in Afghanistan. This study specifically sought to comprehend the prospects for peace in Afghanistan in relation to regional peace, current regional blocs, and those blocs' policies. The United States' plan to combat terrorism and restore peace to war-torn nations has serious flaws, as evidenced by the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and the Taliban's subsequent takeover. To comprehend the breakdown of the state apparatus, the U.S. withdrawal, the Taliban regime, and its implications for regional stability, secondary data has been used. This research paper used the theoretical perspective of conflict resolution and management to highlight the shortcomings in American management of the Taliban and Afghanistan issues, as well as their effects Key words: United State Withdrawal, Political Vacuum, Taliban, Conflict Resolution and Management Theory, Discourse Analysis.

Scenarios for BRICS Evolution in Light of the India–China Conflict

AbstractWhat is the future of the BRICS (Brazil–Russia–India–China–South Africa) group? BRICS has transformed in record time from a global non‐entity into an informal institution that pursues global policy leadership, features extensive policy coordination among five powerful countries, and creates its own organizations. While BRICS momentum seemed unstoppable, a militarized dispute between India and China in 2020 raised questions about the group’s future. This contribution concludes the Special Section by arguing that the BRICS group is not broken. Instead, it faces a range of strategic, geopolitical and operational challenges: how it addresses them will define its future trajectory and its impact on global governance. This essay analyses the situation from a conflict resolution perspective while bringing together insights from the five BRICS countries. It conceptualizes new directions for the BRICS group. Two possible internal conflict management scenarios are outlined: circumventing conflict and making institutional adjustments. Yet the real test of the group’s resilience is its ability to exert collective leadership and improve global governance. BRICS’ response to COVID‐19 and to the challenge of sustainable development offers insights into the group’s ability to advance community goals.

The Memorandum of Understanding between Mberengwa Rural District Council and Mberengwa Community in Zimbabwe: A Conflict Resolution Perspective

The Memorandum of Understanding between Mberengwa Rural District Council and Mberengwa Community in Zimbabwe: A Conflict Resolution Perspective

Racism and social conflict post-1994 in South Africa : a conflict resolution perspective

Racism and social conflict post-1994 in South Africa : a conflict resolution perspective

The Dichotomy between Family Law and Family Crises on Marriage Breakdown

The following analysis focuses on three crises of marriage breakdown: the emotional crisis; the economic crisis; and the parenting crisis. The response of lawyers and of legal processes to these three crises that so frequently interact with each other is examined with a view to providing a broader perspective of family conflict resolution.

Multilevel Access to Justice in a World of Vanishing Trials: A Conflict Resolution Perspective

Multilevel Access to Justice in a World of Vanishing Trials: A Conflict Resolution Perspective

Multilevel Access to Justice in a World of Vanishing Trials a Conflict Resolution Perspective

English Abstract: This paper proposes a novel approach to access to justice by introducing a complex multilevel model that addresses the stages of conflicts in an age of vanishing trials. It provides a nuanced understanding of various modes of access to justice that correspond with different needs of disempowered populations before they enter the legal system and as they make their long journey within it. Parties trying to resolve their disputes through the civil justice system end up nowadays drifting through an incoherent, inconsistent and opaque process generally resulting in some form of reluctant compromise. ADR processes such as mediation do not necessarily help in providing a genuine alternative throughout the legal process, in which reliable data regarding expected case disposition and outcome (on the basis of similar cases) are not made available to the parties. No systematic screening mechanism directs parties to holistic conflict resolution alternatives. The involvement of judges in promoting consensual disposition of legal cases is rare and limited in scope. Accordingly, many people who initiate lawsuits as default find themselves within an adversarial and incoherent negotiation process in the shadow of the courts. This problem is particularly true for unrepresented litigants, a growing population that seeks access to justice in contemporary court systems. It is also true for conflicts that never reach the court or any legal processing due to the barriers of cost and legal information. To address the question of access to justice in an age of vanishing trials, in light of the failure of ADR to become the prevailing paradigm for resolving conflicts and the decline of litigation, this paper develops an interdisciplinary multilevel model that draws on legal theory together with methodology from law and society scholarship. This model addresses ways for improving access to justice during each stage of the civil conflict, focusing specifically on the stage of pretrial hearings, as it is currently the main public sphere in which parties seek justice. Our findings regarding the role of judges in pretrials, based on court observations and interviews, suggest that that judges develop their own methods and perspectives to promote access to justice in an age of vanishing trials and in this paper we outline some of them. We propose to expand the horizons of access to justice by adopting our modular multilevel model embedded within a coherent Dispute System Design approach and inspired by public health perspectives on law.

A Patchwork of Doors: Accelerated Proceedings in Continental Criminal Justice Systems

English Abstract: Our paper surveys the development of hybrid models in two continental jurisdictions, Italy and France following the 1987 Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to accelerate criminal proceedings through the introduction of guilty pleas, out-ofcourt settlements and simplified proceedings. We describe the development of various frameworks for criminal justice as a multi-door arena, of which the plea bargaining is but one of several possibilities. In our review, we emphasize the consensual element, the place of the search of truth and the role of the stakeholders. In particular, we examine the power of the judges that underpins these accelerated frameworks for criminal trials. France and Italy have taken a different path of incorporating adversarial and inquisitorial elements to increase efficiency. The French system made gradual modifications and has changed from within. Aside from the more recent integration of two different proceedings without trial inspired by plea bargaining (The Composition Penale et la Comparution sur Reconnaissance Prealable de Culpabilite (CRPC)), it has developed doors of abbreviated trial where the investigation stage is omitted (e.g., la Comparution Immediate et la Citation Directe). This has resulted in a different version of the vanishing trial – the vanishing investigation. The Italian system, on the other hand, has announced a drastic transformation to an adversarial framework of trial, alongside adopting proceedings without trial that include elements inspired by plea bargaining (il Patteggiamento and Giudizio Abbreviato) and proceedings in which the investigation is waived (Il Giudizio Immediato and il Giudizio Direttissimo). This shift in Italy has not resulted in a vanishing trial phenomenon and, currently, the full adversarial-type trial remains the main door. This may be partly explained by the strict legislation of the statute of limitations concerning the time expected for a trial to finish. In this paper, we describe the sequence of transformations of these systems into a patchwork of doors of criminal justice. We emphasize the significance of these contemporary forms of justice in terms of the role of the judges and the possibility of transcending the goal of efficiency in quest of a conflict resolution perspective.

Adopting a Conflict Resolution Perspective towards Terrorism – Possibilities and Limitations

Living in the world in peace and with dignity is the utmost desire of each and every human being. Everyone wishes to live in a society where only peace and humanity reign. But in the present world, at every moment world peace is getting endangered by ‘terrorism’ - the most horrifying phenomenon of the contemporary world

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Development trend of sharing economy in big data era based on duplication dynamic evolution game theory

Since the 1990s, with the perfection and infiltration of Internet infrastructure and the vigorous development of a new generation of information technology industry, the contemporary sharing economy supported by big data has emerged. On the surface, sharing economy has indeed formed a brand new economic model that is different from the past. However, when we analyze the contradictory vision of supply and demand determined by the inclusion of the sharing economy in the basic social system, we can see that the essence of the contemporary sharing economy is from two dimensions influence rather than change the development mode of this contradictory paradigm: one is the anarchy state of social production is improved through communication of big data based on the Internet; the other is the reduced demand for workers having ability to pay is alleviated through collaborative consumption. Therefore, the sharing economy as a commercial operation mode still can not escape the contradiction between production and consumption. From the perspective of social conflict resolution, the real sharing comes from the improvement of fairness and justice and from the reformation of the sharing system. Such reformation is from the reuse of private resource to the collaborative sharing of public resource, that is, the commonweal development of sharing economy. Through the duplication dynamic evolution game theory model of sharing economy, it can be found that the degree of public benefit of sharing economy depends on the degree of benefit of imitation object and the number of imitators. How countries can promote the development direction of sharing economy towards public sphere and public welfare through conscious policy guidance will be an important indicator for testing the government’s ability to respond to emerging policy issues.

The analysis of Basque conflict and ETA in the 1990s: The kidnapping of Miguel Angel Blanco

Since the fall of the Franco’s regime in Spain, the Spanish governments have been dealing with the low-intensity conflict in their country, namely the Euskadi Ta Askatusuna (ETA) attacks. This article analyzes the Basque conflict within the framework of the conflict analysis and resolution perspective. First, it highlights the conflict issues among the Basque conflict parties. Second, it clarifies the conflict issues by focusing on kidnapping and assassination done by the ETA during 1990s. The special case of Miguel Angel Blanco who was a local Basque councilman is a case study. In order to shed light on the Blanco case, it is necessary to focus the conflict resolution dynamics of the Basque conflict. Third, the paper aims to examine the Blanco case in terms of conflict issue identification, conflict issue clarification, and conflict cultural analysis perspectives. The issue identification perspective focuses on identity, face, and instrumental issues of the Basque conflict. The issue clarification perspective concentrates on two conflicting parties’ perceptions and positions in the conflict. The cultural analysis perspective mainly attempts to analyze the cross-cultural differences between ETA and the Spanish government. Based on the analysis of Miguel Angel Blanco, this study concludes that it is necessary to reframe, re-identify and re-clarify the Basque conflict within the framework of conflict and peace studies.

Constructive Plea Bargaining: Towards Judicial Conflict Resolution

In today’s plea-bargaining reality, the role of judges in processing criminal legal conflicts has changed dramatically. Judges today preside over decreasing number of trials, and instead they are involved in various activities to promote – and approve, plea bargains. Such activities are not fully regulated and documented, but they can be studied, improved and refined by using methods and concepts from the field of conflict resolution. The major claim of this paper is that judges’ current role in approving plea-bargains (which is often criticized) offers a new terrain of decision-making. This new terrain opens a constructive landscape of judicial discretion, in which judges may integrate perceptions of reconstructive law with perceptions of reconstructive conflict, bring together elements of retributive justice and legalistic reasoning, with possibilities of inserting elements of restorative justice and problem solving into the legal domain. In this paper we present the foundation for a conflict resolution perspective for understanding judges’ activities in processing criminal conflicts along the different stages of the criminal process, and primarily in their work towards plea-bargaining. The paper presents a “conflict perspective” of criminal legal disputes, which borrows from John Burton’s theory of conflict resolution, and outlines organizing principles of a jurisprudence of conflict resolution in order to understand and enhance judges’ management of criminal cases. An innovative practice of judicial-lead “criminal mediation” is examined in this context.

コメント:当事者からみる医療事故と保健医療社会学 : 紛争解決学の視点から(シンポジウム「当事者からみる医療事故と保健医療社会学」, 第35回大会(2009年度)熊本大学)

コメント:当事者からみる医療事故と保健医療社会学 : 紛争解決学の視点から(シンポジウム「当事者からみる医療事故と保健医療社会学」, 第35回大会(2009年度)熊本大学)

Constructive Plea Bargaining; Towards Judicial Conflict Resolution

In today’s plea-bargaining reality, the role of judges in processing criminal legal conflicts has changed dramatically. Judges today preside over decreasing number of trials, and instead they are involved in various activities to promote – and approve, plea bargains. Such activities are not fully regulated and documented, but they can be studied, improved and refined by using methods and concepts from the field of conflict resolution. The major claim of this paper is that judges’ current role in approving plea-bargains (which is often criticized) offers a new terrain of decision-making. This new terrain opens a constructive landscape of judicial discretion, in which judges may integrate perceptions of reconstructive law with perceptions of reconstructive conflict, bring together elements of retributive justice and legalistic reasoning, with possibilities of inserting elements of restorative justice and problem solving into the legal domain. In this paper we present the foundation for a conflict resolution perspective for understanding judges’ activities in processing criminal conflicts along the different stages of the criminal process, and primarily in their work towards plea-bargaining. The paper presents a “conflict perspective” of criminal legal disputes, which borrows from John Burton’s theory of conflict resolution, and outlines organizing principles of a jurisprudence of conflict resolution in order to understand and enhance judges’ management of criminal cases. An innovative practice of judicial-lead “criminal mediation” is examined in this context.

Como eles decidem em sistemas de direito? Uma abordagem sobre construcionismo sistêmico

From a communications perspective something in common can be observed in human decisions, a simple clause, consisting of a subject and a verb: I decide. The investigation of such a sentence leads to two questions: who is the subject who decides? And how does this subject decide? These questions are necessary to work with a bigger one: how can a decision be modeled in a system of law? The research uses Marcio Pugliesi’s systemic constructionism to work with this problem. Systemic constructionism models the subject as a semantic-pragmatic atmosphere, formed by doxa, episteme and social representations. This atmosphere is capable of establishing communication with different atmospheres using non-empty intersections. The atmosphere contains an irremovable level of semantic pollution – unquestioned meanings, ideologies and traditions peculiar of individuals and groups. As for the decision-making process, systemic constructionism deals with a pragmatic and strategic perspective of conflict resolution in law, founded on game theory, in order to optimize acts of decision in conflict situations. The subject, seen as a semantic-pragmatic atmosphere, acts and corrects his action with the purpose of achieving certain results at the lowest cost in the system. In law practice, certain procedures limit the action of the subject, but to systemic constructionism a decision is never true or false, or even correct, only useful or useless within a situational context. The minimax criterion offers a guide to measure the utility of decisions, based on the exclusion of uselessness, and offers a path to the minimum of the maximum – often not the answer aimed at, but one that the institution can deliver. Through the application of this model, systemic constructionism offers new ways to understand how a decision is made in a system of law.Keywords: subject, decision, system of law, systemic constructionism.

Power and International Relations

Power and International Relations

Iran and theUnitedStates: A Conflict Resolution Perspective

The interim nuclear agreement between Iran and the United States (under Iran‐P5 + 1 umbrella) in November 2013 revived attention to the problem of the Iran‐U.S. conflict and its resolution. The key issues to understand are: first, the reasons for the start of nuclear dispute resolution between Iran and the United States despite failure of all the past reconciliation initiatives; and second, the agreement's implications for overall conflict resolution between the two countries. Relying on the “ripeness theory” and its development in response to criticisms, the central argument of the article is that the start of direct negotiations and efforts of Iran and the United States to reach agreement over the nuclear dispute is due to ripeness of the overall Iran‐U.S. conflict as a result of a nuclear “asymmetric hurting stalemate.” Explaining the factors that disrupt normalization of relations under conditions of ripeness, the article presents four scenarios for the future of Iran‐U.S. relations.