Negotiation Support Tools Research Articles

Plural Valuation of Land and Insights for Achieving Sustainable Outcomes in Large-Scale Land Acquisition Projects

Large-scale land acquisition projects by foreign investors, also known as “land grabbing,” raise difficult questions about the processes of valuing land in Sub-Saharan Africa that the current literature does not sufficiently explore. Land acquisitions can help developing countries like Tanzania achieve their economic and development goals. Nonetheless, it can also threaten local livelihoods and well-being due to displacement, lack of access to natural capital, and conflicts between land users. Empirical evidence is limited on how local contexts affect the recognition and incorporation of multiple values that people hold about land into decisions on land acquisition projects in Tanzania. Plural valuation (PV) is needed to design more comprehensive and deliberative policy instruments that enhance nature’s contributions to people. This empirical study uses sociocultural valuation approaches to assess the diverse values of land in the Bagamoyo district of Tanzania, impacts of EcoEnergy land acquisition project on local livelihoods, and contextual factors that enable or hinder incorporating PV into decisions. The findings suggest that synergies and conflicting values of land exist, and PV can serve as a negotiation support tool to reconcile the differences and land conflicts. The success of PV relies on the (1) extent of partnership and participation, (2) design of asset valuation process, (3) stakeholder goals, and (4) sociopolitical context. Currently, the risks of land acquisition projects outweigh the benefits to people in rural Tanzania. However, to realize the sustainable and equitable flow of the contributions of land to Tanzanians, the government should consider improving the valuation processes by (i) fostering recognition of neglected voices and marginalized people, (ii) rectifying power imbalances and injustices that result from current land valuation processes, (iii) reinforcing customary land rights and compensation policies, and (iv) adhering to the principle of free, prior, and informed consent.

Basketball contract: applying the SIPRES method in the process of evaluating the negotiation template

Abstract In a negotiation process, knowing the preferences of the decision-maker and building a negotiation offer scoring system are very challenging tasks. There are many different methods that can be used to develop such a negotiation support tool, including, but not limited to, techniques based on the multiattribute utility theory (MAUT) or the outranking relation, for instance SAW, AHP or PROMETHEE II. In this paper we present the procedure of evaluating the negotiation template using an unconventional and inventive method called SIPRES, which combines the key elements of the revised Simos’ procedure and the ZAPROS method to elicit the negotiator’s preferences over some reference solutions. This transparent and easy to implement technique – thanks to the ZAPROS-like approach applied within it – allows the decision-makers to define their preferences in a simple manner, providing an effective method for analysing the trade-offs between the alternatives using selected reference alternatives only. Simultaneously, the revised Simos’ procedure, applied in the method, allows for determining the cardinal scores of the alternatives. Thus, sophisticated negotiation analyses can be carried out. As an illustrative example the problem of basketball contract negotiations is discussed.

Heuristics and biases as sources of negotiators’ errors in the pre-negotiation phase. Review of literature and empirical research

Purpose – Heuristics and biases are simplifying strategies that people (in the analysed issue – negotiators) use in the decision-making process, even when they can take advantage of supporting tools (e.g. Negotiation Support System), which will allow them to make the optimal choice [Wachowicz, 2006]. Many empirical studies have found that decision makers use heuristics and are biased [Bateman, Zeithaml, 1989; Jackson, Dutton, 1988; Kahneman et al. 1982; Zajac, Bazerman, 1991]. Therefore, the question should be asked: are negotiators, like managers (whose decisions were examined), instead of consciously and intentionally using tools supporting decision-making during negotiations, subject to heuristics and cognitive errors? As a consequence of this general question one may ask the specific research questions: (1) What heuristics do the negotiators undergo? (2) How do heuristics influence the decision-making process? (3) How can the impact of heuristics and biases be minimized by taking advantage of negotiation support tools? Research methods – The article is a review of psychological, sociological and management sciences theories, concepts and empirical researches on heuristics and biases. The review was made according to the following categories: (a) theories that recognize the inevitability of heuristics in the decision-making process, (b) theories that attempt to identify opportunities to minimize or even reduce the impact of heuristics on decisions, and (c) those that offer alternative solutions. Results – The summary highlights those heuristics which might occur in the decision-making process in the pre-negotiation phase. Originality/value – There is no research exploring the role of specific heuristics and biases in particular stages of negotiations.

Decision support tools for collaborative marine spatial planning: identifying potential sites for tidal energy devices around the Mull of Kintyre, Scotland

The expansion of offshore renewable energy production, such as wind, wave and tidal energy, is likely to lead to conflict between different users of the sea. Two types of spatial decision support tools were developed to support stakeholder workshops. A value mapping tool combines regional attributes with local knowledge. A negotiation support tool uses these value maps to support stakeholders in finding acceptable locations for tidal energy devices. Interactive value mapping proved useful to address deficiencies in data and to create credibility for these maps. The negotiation tool helped stakeholders in balancing objectives of the various stakeholders.

International Business Negotiations: Innovation, Negotiation Team, Preparation

Negotiating communication has created new challenges, as business becomes global, and the distance between the two parties do not allow to negotiate fully – to take full advantage of the bargaining power remotely. The use of innovation can be beneficial not only to support the negotiation process but also in the preparation phase of the negotiations. In order to properly prepare for negotiations is need to form an effective negotiating team whose analytical work and skills could help to achieve the highest outcome of the negotiations. This is particularly important in the preparation and in the course of intercultural negotiations, which require an understanding of other cultures, other languages, possession of legal knowledge, knowledge of the negotiation context, etc. In preparation for the negotiation phase is needed to know the best way possible about the other side of the negotiation. Knowing the technical communication capabilities of other negotiation side it is possible to prepare effective negotiation support tools. Negotiation's success often depends on the effectiveness of the preparation - the better it will be known the other side of the negotiation and negotiation context, the better results will be achieved. In this article is made the analysis of global scientific literature in international business negotiations innovations. As well there is examined the preparation of business negotiations and considered the formation of negotiating teams. In the conclusions the author provides suggestions for further negotiations research.

Map-based multicriteria analysis to support interactive land use allocation

This article focuses on the use of map-based multicriteria analysis to develop a negotiation support tool for land use allocation. Spatial multicriteria analysis is used to make explicit trade-offs between objectives and to provide guidance and feedback on the land use changes negotiated by the participants. Digital maps are the means of communication among workshop participants, and an interactive mapping device (the ‘Touch table’) is used as the interface. Participants are informed about the relevant trade-offs on the map and use this information to change the land use maps. The approach is tested during a negotiation session as part of the land use planning process of the Bodegraven polder, a peat meadow area in the Netherlands.

Agent-Based Facilitation of Water Allocation: Case Study in the Drome River Valley

The purpose of the 1992 French Water Act is to encourage negotiation and dialogue among local stakeholders within a framework which is very similar to a patrimonial approach. Potential use of models in such post-normal approaches is analyzed. Two kinds of models are compared: one is agent-based, the other follows a more classical approach. They are compared according to their contributions as negotiation support tools. This comparison is based on a specific collective decision process dealing with water allocation at the sub-basin scale, in which authors are involved. Both are used to support collective decision processes through simulation of resource use dynamics. Agent-Based Models entail the broadening of spatial information of actors in the process, revealing inter-connected topics not taken into consideration earlier. This makes it possible to remain relevant, despite the sometimes rapidly evolving stakes. The central point of this paper is the implementation, within a practical application, of theories advocating the use of ABM as a collective decision support system. This application promotes a better understanding of the kind of support ABM provides and the way it does so. This is brought about more by re-framing the discussion and modifying the representation of the system on the part of the stakeholders than by providing specific agreements.

An Australian Perspective on Research and Development Required for the Construction of Applied Legal Decision Support Systems

At the Donald Berman Laboratory for Information Technology and Law, La TrobeUniversity Australia, we have been building legal decision support systems for a dozenyears. Whilst most of our energy has been devoted to conducting research in ArtificialIntelligence and Law, over the past few years we have increasingly focused uponbuilding legal decision support systems that have a commercial focus.In this paper we discuss the evolution of our systems. We begin with a discussion ofrule-based systems and discuss the transition to hybrid rule-based/case-based systems.We next discuss how we have used machine learning in building legal decision supportsystems. Our focus on using machine learning led us to investigate the domains ofexplanation and argumentation. We conclude by discussing our current work onbuilding negotiation support systems and tools for constructing web-based legaldecision support systems.

Supporting Integrative Negotiation via Computer Mediated Communication Technologies

This paper presents an empirical study of dyadic negotiation supported by computer-mediated communication media. Dyads of MBA students from mainland China and the United States negotiated in a distributed, semisynchronous environment. The task was based on a scenario developed and used extensively by Lituchy (1992) involving distribution of real estate. The technologies were electronic mail and Internet/World Wide Web-based threaded discussion, configured to appear and function very similarly to electronic mail. Outcome measures included joint profitability of the negotiation (reflecting its integrativeness) and perceptions of suitability of the technologies for the task (task-technology fit). Hypotheses drew from literatures on integrative negotiation, negotiation and group support systems, technology adoption, and cross-cultural psychology. As predicted by previous research, Chinese dyads (from a collectivist culture) reached higher average joint profitability (more integrative solutions) than did American dyads (from an individualist culture). These results concur with those obtained with similar cultural groups in previous studies. Both groups of dyads here achieved somewhat lower joint profitability than similar groups who negotiated face-to-face without computer support in previous studies. Neither amount of information technology experience nor assigned technology had any effect on profitability or on any perceptions of task-technology fit. Subjects from both cultures reported that the technologies were acceptable for the task. Chinese subjects preferred the computer-based technologies to face-to-face negotiation, preferred the computer-based technologies to the telephone for dispersed negotiation, and felt that these media were more secure and private than telephony. Americans showed reversed preferences. The authors stated that the technologies used are already being adopted in mainland China in their primary roles as communication support media. Results are consonant with the technologies' expected adaptation as negotiation support tools, appropriate for both cultural groups.

Negotiation support using the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution

The Graph Model for Conflict Resolution is a flexible methodology for systematically studying strategic conflicts in the real world, and is therefore a natural tool for negotiation support. The basic definitions underlying the graph model are reviewed, and the techniques for analysis and interpretation are discussed. The modeling and analysis of a case study, an international trade negotiation concerning the export of Canadian softwood lumber to the United States, are used to demonstrate the practical application of the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution as a negotiation support tool. The modeling and analysis is carried out using the GMCR software system. The ability of the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution to provide insights and advice to negotiators is emphasized.

Are game theoretic concepts suitable negotiation support tools? From Nash equilibrium refinements toward a cognitive concept of rationality

If game theory is to be used as a negotiation support tool, it should be able to provide unambiguous recommendations for a target to aim at and for actions to reach this target. This need cannot be satisfied with the Nash equilibrium concept, based on the standard instrumental concept of rationality. These equilibria, as is well known, are generally multiple in a game. The concept of substantive or instrumental rationality has proved to be so pregnant, however, that researchers, instead of re-evaluating its use in game theory, have simply tried to design concepts related to the Nash equilibrium, but with the property of being unique in a game — i.e., they have devised ways ofselecting among Nash equilibria. These concepts have been labeledrefined Nash equilibria.

Multicriteria analysis of the burden sharing in the European Community

We discuss the equity problem of the Member States' burden sharing in financing the European Community in a multicriteria framework. We use the Prométhée method to calculate a ‘fair’ burden sharing percentage scale, based on a set of representative criteria. Several scenarios are simulated. We show how the GAIA graphical instrument, based on the Prométhée method, is a useful negotiation support tool in the equity debate.