Global Facilitation Network for Security Sector Reform (GFN-SSR)

Can particular mediation strategies be linked with successful outcomes? This chapter of the SAGE Handbook of Conflict Resolution discusses definitions of mediation, its performance, influential factors and evaluations of outcomes. Certain styles of mediation tend to be more effective in certain situations; intense conflict, for example, is likely to require directive forms of mediation. Mediation may well offer the most coherent and effective response to current conflicts, but greater understanding of the process and consistent guidelines are needed.

Of the many definitions available, the most helpful is mediation as conflict management, related to but distinct from the parties’ own negotiations. Those in conflict seek the assistance or accept help from an outsider to change perceptions or behaviour, without resorting to physical force or invoking the authority of law. International mediation is a complex and dynamic interaction between mediators who have resources and interest in the conflict or its outcome, the protagonists or their representatives.

Mediators follow one of three fundamental strategies, ranging from low to high-level intervention. These are communication-facilitation strategies, procedural strategies (determining factors such as structuring meetings, and information distribution) and directive strategies (providing bargaining incentives or issuing ultimatums). Communication-facilitation appears to be the most frequently used strategy, but directive strategies seem more successful. This may be because the high stakes of high-intensity conflict encourage a mediator take as active an approach as possible and also motivate agreement, whereas in low-intensity conflict parties are less likely to countenance external involvement and may regard a mediator’s use of incentives as too directive. Further findings include the following:

• Mediators are political actors who expend resources because they expect to gain something from a conflict resolution. Mediation may be a policy instrument through which actors pursue interests with little opposition.
• The act of mediating makes the mediator part of a conflictual relationship. Effective mediators will reflect and harmonise with the interests, costs and rewards of the interaction between the conflicting parties.
• Ideally, mediation should be evaluated in terms of the participants’ goals. Some consequences of successful mediation, such as the fairness of mediation, satisfaction with its performance and an improved relationship between the parties cannot be easily demonstrated.

Not all conflicts can be mediated, but the increasing number of ethnic and internal conflicts provide many opportunities for significant expansion in using mediation for conflict resolution. The challenge is to recognise mediation’s diversity, its strengths, and its limitations. The choice of mediation strategies depends on context and cannot be prescribed in advance, but factors affecting choice of strategy and its potential for success include: conflict intensity; type of issues; parties’ political, economic and social structures; parties’ previous relationship; mediator identity and rank; and the initiation, timing and environment of the mediation. For example:

• Mediation in low-intensity conflicts is likely to take the form of negotiation, and in high-intensity conflicts more active forms of mediation may be needed to prevent escalation.
• Internal conflicts often involve emotive issues such as identity, autonomy and ethnicity which are hard to mediate. The most effective mediation approach in such cases may be communication to build trust. In dealing with more concrete issues such as security and resources, a mediator can press for concessions.
• Parties with similar political or social systems may be more open to active mediation strategies. Parties with few similarities may require strategies to increase trust, teach negotiation skills and clarify issues.
• Individual mediators and NGOs are limited to communication strategies, whereas others might use official position and/or resources to exercise leverage.

Author: Jacob Bercovitch
Source: Bercovitch, J., 2009, ‘Mediation and Conflict Resolution’, in The SAGE Handbook of Conflict Resolution, eds., J. Bercovitch, V. Kremenyuk, and I. W. Zartman, SAGE, London, pp. 340-354
Size: 16 pages