Laserfiche WebLink
Revised: 7/26/2007 <br />fundamentally different value structure; interest conflicts describe situations when the <br />overall goals of participants are not in question, but the allocation of costs and benefits is <br />of primary concern; and cognitive conflicts inv olve situations in which inadequate <br />knowledge or understanding slows progress. <br /> <br />Interest Conflict : Direct impacts upon stakeholders cause disagreements over how <br />resources should be allocated, managed, and used. In some situations, gains to one side <br />may c ome only at the expense of corresponding losses to another (zero - sum game). <br />Some agreements may result in options which provide benefits to all (this can be a <br />positive - sum game where the collective benefits to all parties exceed the collective cost, <br />or a Pareto optimal outcome where all individuals received either net benefits or are at <br />least not harmed). <br /> <br />Value Conflict : Occurs when participants do not share common values. Opposing sides <br />disagree fundamentally about is morally right and wrong, a quality that can make value <br />conflict particularly difficult to resolve in a satisfying manner. A good example is the <br />ESA, which is based on the philosophy that the existence value of a species is inherently <br />greater than any economic or other anthropocentric value that may be constrained <br />through species protection. <br /> <br />Interest conflicts typically result when different parties are in competition for control of a <br />finite resource of benefit. Interest conflicts differ from value conflicts in that the latter <br />involves con flicting parties who share philosophically incompatible ideals about the <br />appropriate distribution of resource uses, whereas interest conflicts typically involve <br />disputes about how to “divide the pie” among potential beneficiaries with largely similar <br />goals . <br /> <br />Cognitive Conflict : Arises when people simply disagree about the “facts of the case.” <br />Nobody ever has complete and accurate information, an people will tend to believe those <br />explanations which are consistent with their own preferences and self - interest . Cognitive <br />conflict is almost always a complicating feature of natural resource and environmental <br />problems. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Solving Problematic Situations <br /> <br />Solving Operational Choice Level Problems <br /> <br /> <br />This framework does not define natural resource and environmental pr oblems in terms of <br />the resource itself. <br /> <br />Depletion Problems : There is typically an absence of adequate boundary rules to control <br />entry, and/or a lack of authority rules specifying limits on levels of consumption. As a <br />result, a payoff rule encourages depl etion. Remedies feature a change of operational <br />3 <br />