IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Conflict, Co-Operation, And Culture: A Study In Multiparty Negotiations

  • Benson, Marjorie L.
Registered author(s):

    This paper presents a report and analysis of simulated negotiations in a multiparty institutional context, specifically a Canadian Aboriginal-Crown context. The purpose is to offer a conceptual model of skills and processes of successful negotiations under such circumstances. The Aboriginal-Crown subject of the simulation has particular relevance in light of Canada’s Supreme Court declaration in Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3. S.C.R. 1010 at para. 186 (quoting itself from Sparrow v. The Queen, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1075) that Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 “provides a solid basis upon which subsequent negotiations can take place.” The vehicle of the analysis is participant reflections, which offer a 360-degree view of the simulation, selected, classified, and combined into a conceptual model by the instructor. Multiparty institutional conflicts are large-scale social and organizational conflicts involving multiple groups that have historical, social, cultural, and economic significance, potential legal claims and remedies, and ongoing relationships. Formal negotiations in a multiparty institutional context consider possible changes to some aspect of current institutional arrangements, which are the legal and policy rules governing group relationships. Multiparty institutional negotiations are high stakes because the goal is institutional reform that will affect large numbers of people over the long term. Neither the outcome of negotiating nor of any particular reform is predictable. Leaders find such uncertainty a heavy challenge, and often participate only when facing even greater risks through violence, institutional breakdown, or external threats.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/31781
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by University of Saskatchewan, Centre for the Study of Co-operatives in its series Occasional Papers with number 31781.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 2002
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ags:uscoop:31781
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://coop-studies.usask.ca/

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:uscoop:31781. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.