6 Benefits and Drawbacks to Negotiation

• Title: Colorado’s Interbasin Compact Negotiations: Development of an Institutional Framework - Benifits and Drawbacks to Negotiation
• Date: 12/17/2004
• Author: Russell George, Franks McNulty, Peter Nichols, Eric Hecox
• IBCC - Doc Type: Program Planning, Budget & Contracts

Revised: 7/26/2007
Benefits and Drawbacks to Negotiated Compacts

Benefits of Negotiations
?

Traditional government action and litigation is slow, costly, and often ineffective.
?

Has the potential to avoid government regulation and litigation (Manring 1998).
?

Enhances local invo lvement and participation (Griffin 1999; Kundson 1999).

Creates opportunities for stakeholder involvement early in the process.
o

Increases stakeholder influence on government decisions.
o
?

Generates more technically sound projects/policies (Curtice and Lockwoo d 2000).
?

Devises better solutions by including the human, economic, and biological dimensions of
resource management (Wondolleck and Yaffee 2000).
?

Can overcome divisive conflict among stakeholders.

Organizational achievements (establishing agreements, hold ing meetings, etc.)
o
build relationships (Kenney 2000).

Is a way to overcome prolonged mistrust and suspicion (Kinsley 1997).
o

Negotiated processes build relationships between stakeholders that pay dividends
o
beyond the specific issue at hand.
?

Compacts offer stability (Tyler 2003).

Compacts represent a form of sustainability in relations between parties. A
o
permanent solution would establish peace between neighbors while encouraging
entrepreneurial activity without the risk of litigation with the beneficial ef fects of
certainty, reliability, and predictability over time.

Avoids a free - for - all race to develop.
o
?

Once compacts are in place, basins can control their own water and would not have to
accept servitude from neighboring basins (Tyler 2003).

The Down - Side of Negotiations
?

Existing approaches, while not perfect, may not be fundamentally flawed.
?

Without the framework of regulation/litigation, negotiated approaches are not possible.
?

Collaborative programs have struggled to solve on - the - ground problems despite the
expectation that they will lead to better solutions (Kenney 2000).

Solutions that have come out of collaborative programs are solutions to problems
o
with obvious answers.

Once obvious solutions have been implemented, collaborative processes can have
o
gre at difficulty confronting tougher issues.
?

Cognitive conflict: Stakeholders with different core values have fundamentally different
perceptions of resource problems and appropriate responses (Lubell 2000).
?

Collaborative negotiations can result in endless g ridlock (Echeverria 2000).
?

In negotiations, preserving consensus can become more important that realizing resource
management goals.
?

When constructive conflict is devalued, solutions can result in “lowest common
denominator agreements.”
?

Compacts can hinder flexibility and can hinder marketing by limiting long - term transfers.
?

An institution that fosters participation is unwieldy; one that does not is undemocratic.

1