Of Intractable Conflicts and Participatory GIS Applications: The Search for Consensus amidst Competing Claims and Institutional Demands

Abstract

This article reviews the discourse about geographic information system's (GIS) potential as a tool for intervening in disputes over access to natural resources. GIS is a planning tool with striking analytical capabilities and a great public appeal that can be utilized for explicitly reasoned discussions to facilitate conflict resolution. However, the technology's reputation as an interventionist tool has been undermined by competing claims about human factors that sustain conflicts. Some scholars believe elements of a conflict are manageable and that meaningful communication between disputants will erase misconceptions and generate consensus. Others reject cooperation and instead emphasize self-interest and competition as the driving forces behind conflicts. This article investigates the two claims and argues that both the competitive push to claim independent rewards and the urge to create joint values are present in a conflict resolution. A more productive discussion of GIS's role in conflict management, therefore, involves unpacking the links between competitive forces that sustain a conflict and the social norms and group expectations that govern human behavior in society. The article discusses the links between value systems, opinions, and actions and how a GIS application might influence such human attributes to induce changes that promote cooperation. The study concludes with a case study involving the use of GIS to manage a conflict over natural resources allocation in a rural community in Southern Ghana.

Key Words:

• conflict resolution
• Participatory GIS
• resource management
• values and interests
• Ghana

Notes

1. A survey of the current GIS literature reveals the following additional terms used to describe community-based GIS Applications: Public Participation GIS (PPGIS), Participatory GIS (PGIS), Community Integrated GIS (CIGIS) and recently, Participatory 3-Dimensional Modeling (P3DM).

2. The terms “competition” and “conflict” are often used interchangeably to describe conflicts, but competition and conflict are not synonymous. Competition produces conflict but not all conflicts reflect competition. According to Deutsch (1977), competition implies opposition in the goals of disputants such that the chance of one party attaining its goal reduces the probability for the other party. In conflicts dominated by competition between disputants, the incompatible actions that cause the dispute reflect incompatible goals. On the other hand, conflict occurs in the absence of incompatible goals. An example is when there is disagreement between couples about how to save for retirement (see Deutsch 1977, 10–11). Such a conflict will be driven by disagreements over what is right or wrong, but the goal (saving for retirement) remains the same.

3. The two basic types of conflicts described in this article, “interest conflicts” and “value conflicts,” have been variously described by authors whose works have been referenced in the article. These include value conflicts and fact-based conflicts (Obermeyer and Pinto 1994), conflicts induced by affectual behavior and value-rational conflicts (Weber 1968) and, facts and value conflicts (Berry 1995, 11–17).

4. The disagreement over allocation of portions of the Aboma Forest Reserve was sustained by values and interests. For those inhabitants who chose preservation over logging, the dispute was about the protection of forest resources that had a great religious significance and served also as the economic backbone of their survival. On the other hand, supporters of the logging placed their economic concerns over the religious significance of the forest.

5. Several attempts were made (prior to the PGIS application) by traditional leaders in Kofiase to settle the dispute, but all such efforts proved futile. The traditional consultative problem-solving approach, with characteristic public meetings presided over by the chief and elders in the community involved exhortations, persuasion, and even threats to compel the parties to agree to a settlement. On the other hand, local customs that promoted obedience and reverence to elders often left stakeholders with no choice but to resist such attempts. Many of the earlier attempts, therefore, failed to resolve the conflict, partly because they sought to impose the creation of joint gains without providing avenues for the parties to satisfy their self-interests.

6. Interviews with the representatives in the Kofiase case revealed a common concern about threats posed by wildfires that annually swept through the area during dry seasons that lasted from November to March. This period coincided with the dry harmattan winds season (northeast trade winds). In preliminary GIS exercises prior to the group discussions, participants went into the forest to map forest cover types and record previous fire damage. The information was used to create a fire hazard potential map of the forest reserve (see Kyem 2002). Many of the participants were surprised to find that over 85% of the remaining forest was at very high risk of being destroyed by the annual wildfires that swept through the area.

7. In view of the fact that the inhabitants of Kofiase depended mainly on nontimber resources from the local Aboma Forest Reserve for many of their livelihood needs, their representatives on the mediation committee found it difficult to agree to trade-offs and compromises that would have left them with insufficient resources for their daily needs.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Peter A. Kwaku Kyem

Associate Professor