Sign in or 
| Version | User | Scope of changes |
|---|---|---|
| May 20 2009, 10:29 AM EDT (current) | chachabooth | 7 words added |
| Feb 13 2009, 10:40 PM EST | mikicesari | 39 words added, 29 words deleted |
Changes
Key: Additions Deletions
A) Conflict resolution vs. conflict transformation
Conflict transformation differs from the concept of conflict resolution. One can compare these two concepts in the following way:
B) The three lenses of conflict transformation
In everyday settings we often experience conflict as a disruption in the natural flow of our relationships. We notice or feel that something is not right. Suddenly we find ourselves more attentive to things we had taken for granted. The relationship becomes complicated, not as easy and smooth as it once was.
Our feelings change and translate from uneasiness to anxiety to even outright pain. In such a situation we often experience a growing sense of urgency leading to deeper and deeper frustration as the conflict progresses, especially if no end is in sight.if someone not involved in the situation asks, “what is the conflict about?” we can translate our explanations into a kind of conflict topography which is a map of the peaks and valleys of our conflict. The peaks are what we see as the significant challenges in the conflict, often with an emphasis with the most recent, the one we are now climbing. (illustrate this with a drawing). Often we identify this mountain we are currently climbing as the primary issue or issues we are dealing with (the content of the conflict). The valleys represent failures, the inability to negotiate adequate solutions.
This map illustrates our tendency to view conflict by focusing on the immediate “presenting” problems. We give our energy to reducing anxiety and pain by looking for a solution to the presenting problems without seeing the bigger map of the conflict itself. We also tend to view the conflict as a series of challenges and failures –peaks and valleys-without a real sense of the underlying causes and forces in the conflict.
Conflict transformation is a way of looking as well as seeing. Looking requires lenses that draw attention and help us become aware. To see is to look beyond and deeper. CT suggests a set of lenses through which we view social conflict. Illustrate this with eye glasses-assuming I have a set of eye glasses with three different lens types within the same lens. Each has its own function. One lens brings into focus things at a great distance the would otherwise be blurred; a second brings into clarity things that are mid-range like computer screen; and the final reading or magnifying lens helps in reading a book. Since no one lens is capable of bringing everything into focus, we need multiple lens to see different aspects of a complex reality.
The three lenses as proposed by Lederach (Lederach, J. P., The little book of conflict transformation, 2003) are:
C) Conflict and change
Both conflict and change are a normal part of human life. Conflict is continuously present in human relationships and these relationships are constantly changing. Change always involves a movement from one thing to another; and therefore peacebuilders must look at both the starting point and the goal of change. Conflict transformation refers to change, and change can be understood in two fundamental ways:
1) Analysis: Changes brought about by social conflict. In order transform conflict and build something constructive, we first need to reach a thorough understanding of what changes the conflict brought about and what needs to be stopped.
2) Action: the change that peacebuilders/conflict transformers hope to create. What do we hope to build? How do we reach that goal?
D) The four dimensions of conflict and conflict transformation
Changes effected by conflict (analysis) and intended changes (action) in order to transform conflict can be located in four dimensions, looking at where the changes occur. These dimensions are strongly linked to each other and get bigger in scope from one to the next.
The personal dimension
Change in the personal dimension generally occurs in two categories: First, attitudes can change. Attitudes are ways that people think about (often unconsciously) and approach a given topic, situation or relationship. They are not obvious. Second, behaviours – the way people actually act, respond, express themselves and interact– can change.
The relational dimension
The relational dimension of change refers to people who have direct, face to face contact; that is people who meet, interact and are interdependent in everyday settings (family, school, work, neighbourhood, and local communities). It also includes relationships that are not everyday in nature but that are important in reference to a wider conflict setting (meeting of local or national leaders; representatives of groups in conflict).
Personal and relational changes take place at individual, interpersonal and community levels, with a more immediate and local scope.
The structural dimension
The structural dimension refers to systems and structures – how relationships are organised and who has access to power – from the level of family and organisations to communities and whole societies.
It includes the analysis of social conditions that give rise to conflict (structural causes of conflict) and the way that conflict effects change in the existing social structures: changes in the structure of power, in the distribution/allocation of economic resources and in social institutions (such as traditional mechanisms for conflict resolution). In the action perspective, conflict transformation openly promotes non-violent mechanisms that reduce adversarialness, minimize and ultimately eliminate violence, and foster structures that meet basic needs and maximize participation of people in decisions that affect them.
The cultural dimension
Cultural patterns and understandings about conflict, responses to conflict and peacebuilding are always present. Violent conflict causes deep-seated cultural changes, for example the norms that guide patterns of behaviour between elders and youth, or women and men. Compared to the structural dimension, the cultural dimension refers to even deeper and often less conscious patterns related to conflict and peace. Culture is fundamentally about how people make sense of things, in other words, culture is the process of how meaning is constructed and shared.
Structural and cultural changes have a broader and longer-term scope and impact and include processes that impact institutions and wider social, political and economic patterns.
Sources:
Lederach, J. P., The little book of Conflict Transformation, Intercourse (PA) 2003, pp. 3-33.
Lederach, J. P. and Maiese, M., Conflict Transformation, in: Guy Burgess/Heidi Burgess: Beyond intractability, University of Colorado, Boulder, October 2003 <http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/transformation/?nid=1223>
Lederach, J. P., Reina N., Culbertson, H., Reflective Peacebuilding. A Planning, Monitoring, and Learning Toolkit, Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies and Catholic Relief Service, 2007, pp. 17-23. PDF freely availavle at <http://crs.org/publications/showpdf.cfm?pdf_id=80>
Conflict transformation differs from the concept of conflict resolution. One can compare these two concepts in the following way:
| | Conflict Resolution Perspective | Conflict Transformation Perspective |
| The key question | How do we end something not desired (that is causing pain or difficulty)? | How do we end something destructive and build something desired? |
| View of conflict | It sees the need to de-escalate conflict processes | It sees conflict as dynamic – sees need to de-escalate and escalate conflict. Sees conflict as an opportunity for positive change. |
| The purpose | To achieve an agreement and solution to the presenting problem creating the crisis | To promote constructive change processes, including and beyond immediate solutions |
| The focus | Problems that need to be resolved | Relationships |
| Time frame | Short-term relief to pain, anxiety and difficulties | Mid to long-term and intentionally responds to crisis |
B) The three lenses of conflict transformation
In everyday settings we often experience conflict as a disruption in the natural flow of our relationships. We notice or feel that something is not right. Suddenly we find ourselves more attentive to things we had taken for granted. The relationship becomes complicated, not as easy and smooth as it once was.
Our feelings change and translate from uneasiness to anxiety to even outright pain. In such a situation we often experience a growing sense of urgency leading to deeper and deeper frustration as the conflict progresses, especially if no end is in sight.if someone not involved in the situation asks, “what is the conflict about?” we can translate our explanations into a kind of conflict topography which is a map of the peaks and valleys of our conflict. The peaks are what we see as the significant challenges in the conflict, often with an emphasis with the most recent, the one we are now climbing. (illustrate this with a drawing). Often we identify this mountain we are currently climbing as the primary issue or issues we are dealing with (the content of the conflict). The valleys represent failures, the inability to negotiate adequate solutions.
This map illustrates our tendency to view conflict by focusing on the immediate “presenting” problems. We give our energy to reducing anxiety and pain by looking for a solution to the presenting problems without seeing the bigger map of the conflict itself. We also tend to view the conflict as a series of challenges and failures –peaks and valleys-without a real sense of the underlying causes and forces in the conflict.
Conflict transformation is a way of looking as well as seeing. Looking requires lenses that draw attention and help us become aware. To see is to look beyond and deeper. CT suggests a set of lenses through which we view social conflict. Illustrate this with eye glasses-assuming I have a set of eye glasses with three different lens types within the same lens. Each has its own function. One lens brings into focus things at a great distance the would otherwise be blurred; a second brings into clarity things that are mid-range like computer screen; and the final reading or magnifying lens helps in reading a book. Since no one lens is capable of bringing everything into focus, we need multiple lens to see different aspects of a complex reality.
The three lenses as proposed by Lederach (Lederach, J. P., The little book of conflict transformation, 2003) are:
- Lens to see the immediate situation
- Lens to see underlying patterns and context
- A conceptual framework that holds these perspectives together-one that permits us to connect the presenting problems with deeper relational patterns.
C) Conflict and change
Both conflict and change are a normal part of human life. Conflict is continuously present in human relationships and these relationships are constantly changing. Change always involves a movement from one thing to another; and therefore peacebuilders must look at both the starting point and the goal of change. Conflict transformation refers to change, and change can be understood in two fundamental ways:
1) Analysis: Changes brought about by social conflict. In order transform conflict and build something constructive, we first need to reach a thorough understanding of what changes the conflict brought about and what needs to be stopped.
2) Action: the change that peacebuilders/conflict transformers hope to create. What do we hope to build? How do we reach that goal?
D) The four dimensions of conflict and conflict transformation
Changes effected by conflict (analysis) and intended changes (action) in order to transform conflict can be located in four dimensions, looking at where the changes occur. These dimensions are strongly linked to each other and get bigger in scope from one to the next.
The personal dimension
Change in the personal dimension generally occurs in two categories: First, attitudes can change. Attitudes are ways that people think about (often unconsciously) and approach a given topic, situation or relationship. They are not obvious. Second, behaviours – the way people actually act, respond, express themselves and interact– can change.
The relational dimension
The relational dimension of change refers to people who have direct, face to face contact; that is people who meet, interact and are interdependent in everyday settings (family, school, work, neighbourhood, and local communities). It also includes relationships that are not everyday in nature but that are important in reference to a wider conflict setting (meeting of local or national leaders; representatives of groups in conflict).
Personal and relational changes take place at individual, interpersonal and community levels, with a more immediate and local scope.
The structural dimension
The structural dimension refers to systems and structures – how relationships are organised and who has access to power – from the level of family and organisations to communities and whole societies.
It includes the analysis of social conditions that give rise to conflict (structural causes of conflict) and the way that conflict effects change in the existing social structures: changes in the structure of power, in the distribution/allocation of economic resources and in social institutions (such as traditional mechanisms for conflict resolution). In the action perspective, conflict transformation openly promotes non-violent mechanisms that reduce adversarialness, minimize and ultimately eliminate violence, and foster structures that meet basic needs and maximize participation of people in decisions that affect them.
The cultural dimension
Cultural patterns and understandings about conflict, responses to conflict and peacebuilding are always present. Violent conflict causes deep-seated cultural changes, for example the norms that guide patterns of behaviour between elders and youth, or women and men. Compared to the structural dimension, the cultural dimension refers to even deeper and often less conscious patterns related to conflict and peace. Culture is fundamentally about how people make sense of things, in other words, culture is the process of how meaning is constructed and shared.
Structural and cultural changes have a broader and longer-term scope and impact and include processes that impact institutions and wider social, political and economic patterns.
Sources:
Lederach, J. P., The little book of Conflict Transformation, Intercourse (PA) 2003, pp. 3-33.
Lederach, J. P. and Maiese, M., Conflict Transformation, in: Guy Burgess/Heidi Burgess: Beyond intractability, University of Colorado, Boulder, October 2003 <http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/transformation/?nid=1223>
Lederach, J. P., Reina N., Culbertson, H., Reflective Peacebuilding. A Planning, Monitoring, and Learning Toolkit, Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies and Catholic Relief Service, 2007, pp. 17-23. PDF freely availavle at <http://crs.org/publications/showpdf.cfm?pdf_id=80>
