GROWING FIELD OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION NEEDS A CHANCE TO TEST
ITS FULL POTENTIAL TO IMPROVE COMMUNITY LIFE AND GOVERNANCE 

	CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va., Nov. 15 -- Is it possible to have an
American society where citizens and groups resolve their conflicts
with each other through mutual respect, fairness and tolerance? 
	A new book by a University of Virginia mediator and scholar
says the possibility hasn't been irretrievably lost but warns that
one of the few promising routes to such a society could itself be at
risk. 
	From the schoolyard to neighborhoods and communities to the
international arena, dispute mediation aimed at resolving bitter
conflicts and reconciling opponents has been growing and in many
cases succeeding. But the burgeoning field of public conflict
resolution, which by working to build a true sense of community
offers one of the few hopeful signs for ending some of the culture
wars of contemporary society, needs broader opportunities to test
its fullest potential, suggests E. Franklin Dukes in "Resolving
Public Conflict: Transforming Community and Governance," published
this month by St. Martin's Press. The book presents the first
full-scale history and assessment of public conflict resolution in
the United States, which has led the way in the field. 
	Public conflict resolution, which uses mediation and third
party facilitators to bring seemingly distant, opposing sides in
public disputes to new understandings and agreements, holds one of
the hopes to resolve what has been called a "crisis of governance"
in contemporary society, says Dukes, who teaches mediation in the
Urban and Environmental Planning program in the U.Va. School of
Architecture and is associate director of U.Va.'s Institute for
Environmental Negotiation. The institute provides mediation services
around the state and country on difficult environmental and other
public disputes.
	More than just a way to settle individual disputes, Dukes
believes, public conflict resolution could also be a vehicle for
transforming communities and private and public institutions of
contemporary society into seeing how they could consistently take
more open, civil and fair minded approaches in all that they do. 
	Conflict is important and necessary to society, and won't
disappear, Dukes stresses. But each time it crops up, he says, it
can be used toward "a revaluation of who we are as human beings in
relation with one another." This "transformative" view of conflict
resolution -- causing citizens to see how they are connected to each
other -- holds a key to how democratic communities and institutions
can be sustained, Dukes believes. 
	But although public conflict resolution is being
increasingly used by government agencies and businesses involved in
thorny issues with citizens' groups, the field risks becoming
dominated by what Dukes calls an "ideology of management" that
limits its full potential. This management mentality, whether in
business or government, largely supports conflict resolution simply
as a means to end individual conflicts rather than also to promote a
larger societal move in the direction of social justice, fairness
and tolerance, says Dukes. Such a limited vision also keeps alive
the idea that there always has to be a fundamental split in a
community between such groups as liberals and conservatives. 
	"People talk about reaching 'common ground,' but I argue
that it is also possible to search for 'higher ground,'" says Dukes,
who volunteers on the side with non-profit mediation organizations
including the student-run U.Va. Mediation Services.
	To the managers of business and government, the most
important goals may be efficiency and productivity, Dukes notes.
Management often sets the limits for what will be mediated and stays
narrowly focused. 
	Dukes sees a much more significant role for conflict
resolution than just efficiency. Such work as mediating where a
landfill should be built, facilitating a neighborhood dialogue about
crime, or holding a town discussion on school issues actually "has
considerable potential for challenging the sense of decline,
hopelessness and distrust permeating civic culture," he says.
	The phenomenally growing field of conflict resolution today
includes more than just professional mediators. There are a growing
number of organizations involved, many who wouldn't even consider
themselves part of a field or movement, Dukes says. They include
elected officials, teachers, lawyers and citizens from every walk of
life. 
	Dukes argues for a larger role for all these in practicing
"transformative" conflict resolution. A transformative approach
focuses not on the "crisis of governance" but on a critical
assessment of society that recognizes three broad categories of
fundamental problems of modern life, he says. 	These are
disintegration of community and of the relationships and meaning
found in community life; alienation from the institutions of
governance; and inability to solve public problems and resolve
public conflict.
	The transformative approach he advocates envisions a direct
challenge to these problems and calls for a substantially broader
and more ambitious role for public conflict resolution. The field
should be allied with a wider movement to nurture and sustain a
truly democratic public life, he says.
	"This movement is neither of the left nor of the right,"
Dukes says. "It rejects the aspect of postmodern critical thought
and practice which is infused with a sense of victimization and
which offers no realistic program of change. It finds within the
traditions of liberal democracy an enduring core of values and
practices whose affirmation offers a powerful force for productive
change." 
	Dukes advocates three chief goals for a transformative
practice of conflict resolution: inspiring and nurturing a vital
community life and an engaged community; invigorating the practices
of governance and making government responsive; and enhancing
society's ability to solve problems and resolve conflicts. These
goals are the "higher ground" that he says mediation could reach for.
	"Few expect that public conflict resolution can
significantly alter the destiny of society," he concedes, noting
that some practitioners agree the field is "a mile wide and in inch
deep" as it goes from one conflict to another.
	But, he asks, can anyone believe that a healthy society can
be maintained "without a capacity for engaging different viewpoints,
confronting difficult issues and resolving difficult problems?
Public conflict resolution offers a unique challenge, and
opportunity, to help build this capacity."
###
November 14, 1996
	E. Franklin Dukes may be reached at U.Va.'s Institute for
Environmental Negotiation at (804) 924-1970. Review copies of
"Resolving Public Conflict" may be ordered from St. Martin's Press
at (212) 982-982-3900.  Television reporters should call our TV News
Office at (804) 924 7550.