Module 4 Conflict Management GG 1 With Inputs From FCC GG 20140108

Published by
Module
Module Subject:
Conflict Management
Imprint
As a federally owned enterprise, we support the German Government in achieving its objectives in
the field of international cooperation for sustainable development.
Items from named contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Published by
Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH
Registered offices
Bonn and Eschborn, Germany
T +49 228 44 60-0 (Bonn)
T +49 61 96 79-0 (Eschborn)
Environment and Rural Development Program

Decentralization Program
2/F PDCP Bank Center Rufino cor. Leviste StreetsSalcedo Village, Makati City Philippines
T +63 2 892 9051
I: www.enrdph.org
Responsible
Dr. Walter Salzer
Environment and Rural Development Program
Program Director and Principal Advisor
E: walter.salzer@giz.de
Dr. Andreas Lange

Chief Adviser Local Governance
E: andreas.lange@giz.de
Dr. Walter Salzer
Source and Copyrights
2013 Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH
Contributing Authors
Cecilia Astilla, Agnes Balota, Andrea Barcelona, Anselmo Cabrera, Filma Calalo, Corinne Canlas, Arce Chua, Lilian Dela
Vega, Erlinda Dolatre, Gino Garcia, Dr. Andreas Lange, Edlin Lumanog, Loreto Marinas, Elmer Mercado, Marifel T. Moyano,
Sarah Muniz, Dolores Nuevas, Ed Quitoriano, Jay-ar Ragub, Jerson Sala, Ma. Calpiza Sardua
Thomas Hnert
Copyright on Photos
The photos in this publication are owned by GIZ unless otherwise indicated on the photo.
Maps
The geographical maps are for information purposes only and do not constitute recognition under international law of bound-
aries and territories. GIZ does not guarantee in any way the current status, accuracy or completeness of the maps. All liability
for any loss or damage arising directly or indirectly from their use is excluded.
Printed and distributed by

Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH
Place and date of publication

Manila, Philippines
May 2013
Module Subject:
Conflict Management
Module Contents
PAGE
Module 4 Conflict Management
4.5
Module Overview
Learning Objectives
Time Allotted
Module Content
Suggested Methodology
Resources Needed
Sub-Module 4.1 Understanding Conflict 4.9
Sub-Module Overview
Learning Objectives
Time Allotted
Sub-Module Content
Expected Results
4.1.1 Understanding Conflict 4.11
Session Overview
Learning Objectives
Topic Guide
Duration
Process
Sub-Module 4.2 Conflict Analysis 4.32
Sub-Module Overview
Learning Objectives
Time Allotted
Sub-Module Coverage
Process
Resources
4.1
4.2.1 Conflict Profiling 4.34
Session Overview
Learning Objectives
Time Allotted
Process
4.2.2 Conflict Mapping 4.41
Session Overview
Learning Objectives
Time Allotted
Process
4.2.3 Contingency Modeling 4.45
Session Overview
Learning Objectives
Time Allotted
Process
4.2.4 Relevance of Conflict Analysis to Ancestral 4.51

Domains and IP Communities
4.2.5 Integration to SIMPLE 4.53
References and Suggested Readings
4.2
PAGE
Sub-Module 4.3 Constructive Conflict Handling and Mitigation
4.56
Sub-Module Overview
Learning Objectives
Time Allotted
Session Guide
Resources
Sub-Module 4.4 Conflict Management: Practicum 4.83
Sub-Module Overview
Learning Objectives
Time Allotted
Sub-Module Content
Practicum Guide
Application in Ancestral Domains and IP Communities
Resources Needed
Sub-Module Overview
Guide to Practical Exercises

4.1: Understanding Conflict
4.2.1: Conflict Profiling
4.2.2: Conflict Mapping
4.2.3: Contingency Modeling
4.3 (1): Risk Mapping and Analysis
4.3 (2): Mediated Negotiations (Simulation)
4.3 (3): Formulating a Local Conflict Referral Procedure
Handouts
Learning Points
4.1.1: Understanding Conflict
4.2.4: Relevance of Conflict Analysis to Ancestral Domains and IP
Communities
4.2.5: Integration to SIMPLE
4.3: Constructive Conflict Handling and Mitigation
List of Figures
4.1.1: Galtungs Triangle of Conflict, Violence and Peace
4.3
4.2.1: Overlapping Causes of Conflict
4.2.2: Key Elements of the Conflict Profile
4.2.3: Timeline Analysis
4.2.4: Sample Conflict Map and Historical Map
4.2.5: Conflict Escalation De-escalation Model
4.2.6: GIZ-EnRD Contingency Model for Micro Conflicts
4.3.1: Lederach Pyramid
4.3.2: Risk Analysis Matrix
4.3.3: Hierarchy of Risk
4.3.4: Sample Risk Analysis (Matrix)
List of Tables
4.1.1: Sample DNH Assessment of Negative Impacts
4.1.2: Sample DNH Assessment of Positive Impacts
4.3.1: Table Guide for Assigning Numbers to Level of Consequence
and Vulnerability
4.3.2: Referral Process
4.3.3: Sample Risk Factor Analysis, Coastal Resources Management
Program of LGUs in Negros Occidental
4.4
MODULE GUIDE Module 4
Conflict Management
MODULE OVERVIEW
The management and constructive handling of conflicts is part of an empowering discourse

on conflict resolution that lends valuable contribution to development cooperation, in
general, and sustainable management of resources, in particular. It is grounded on the
reality that it is unrealistic to remove conflicts. Although often difficult, it is more realistic
to deal with conflicts in a constructive manner by which opposing parties engage each other
cooperatively and non-violently. In a country that is still grappling with poverty and unequal
access to resources, there is a need to give attention to rights holders who are marginalized
by conventional power structures and processes and sensitize duty bearers in the state and
civil society sectors. Where there is imbalance, there is a need to restore equilibrium by
which conflict parties can pursue their interests without the use of force.
The countrys land and other natural resources are finite and the challenge to conservation
and sustainable management is confronted by increasing and competing demand from a
growing population. Past practices that are unsustainable and illegal and the resulting
degradation of resources - have already showed their impacts on the intensity of natural
disasters.
Land use planning is a mandated process and the outputs are crucial for establishing the
national, regional and provincial framework plans and formulation of local zoning
ordinances. But it is a process that involves decision-making processes in public and private
lands. The process and the output are both susceptible to competing goals and interests,
not to mention that the allocation, ownership and use of the land, water and forest resources
being planned for are already a subject of differences and divergence between the state
and society and within society itself.
This module provides the lenses and tools for local governments, civil society, private sector
and other development stakeholders to broaden the considerations in planning in conflict-
affected environments and for the plans to support the building of local capacity for the
constructive management of conflicts.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
.
This module has been designed to contribute to the objective of enhancing the SIMPLE
approach to planning and overall goal of sustainable resource management. It aims to serve
as a guide for sensitizing development agents to conflict and achieve adequate confidence
4.5
in working-in-conflict situations. The module also serves as a tool for training of trainers
(TOT). Specifically, participants of this module are expected to:
1. Recognize conflict as a natural phenomenon and is an integral part of natural

resource management;
2. Gain adequate understanding of conflict theories and concepts;
3. Acquire knowledge and skills in conflict analysis and the ways and means of
conflict transformation, risk management and conflict referral;
4. At the minimum, integrate conflict sensitivity in ways of working and, at the
optimum, develop capacity for transferring similar knowledge and skills to other
stakeholders.
TIME ALLOTED
10-15 days, when used for TOT

3 days when used for conflict sensitization
MODULE CONTENT
This module consists of four sub-modules. It is structured on a gradated scale starting with
the basic concepts, theories and models for understanding conflict formation. Building on
the first, the second sub-module introduces knowledge and skills for examining conflicts
with emphasis on understanding micro and community level conflicts. Taking off from the
second, the third sub-module introduces theories, approaches and tools for third party
intervention with emphasis on constructive handling that leads to positive conflict
transformation.
The fourth sub-module is designed for enhancement of the knowledge and skills of actual
and potential trainers. It reintroduces the three sub-modules with the intention of using
the concepts, models and theories as lenses in examining micro conflicts and testing the
tools for conflict analysis and options for third party intervention.
1. Sub-module 4.1: Understanding Conflict. This serves as an introduction to the

topic on conflict and harnesses existing literature on conflict concepts and theories.
The session will guide participants into examining the theoretical discourses and
evolutions and the contexts from where had evolved. It will focus on selected
concepts and theories but will include a bibliography of suggested readings.
2. Sub-module 4.2: Conflict Analysis. This sub-module is a progression of Sub-Module
4.1 and focuses on applying the concepts and theories into the understanding of
observed conflicts. Participants will be guided on the use of conflict profiling and
mapping tools as instruments for understanding conflict issues and the location of
conflict parties along their independent goals, interests and positions on the issues
at hand.
3. Sub-module 4.3: Conflict Handling and Mitigation. Progressing from Sub-module

4.2, this session introduces the participants to third party interventions and selected
4.6
methods and approaches in conflict handling and mitigation. Since conflict dynamics
suggest possibilities of dormancy, escalation and de-escalation, participants will be
guided into the construction of conflict escalation models and the ways of managing
the accompanying risks.
This sub-module also introduces the participants to a particular approach to conflict

intervention. Specifically, it guides the participants into the methodology of conflict
referral as a way of conflict handling and reduction. The applicability of the conflict
referral requires existence of must-have conditions that vary according to certain
conflict actors, issues and contexts. Participants will be introduced to certain
scenarios based on recorded conflicts in the ENRD area of operations.
4. Sub-module 4.4: Practicum (for TOT). This sub-module is designed as a refresher

course for existing trainers and practical course for potential trainers. It re-enacts
sub-modules 4.1 to 4.3 into a live exercise that includes review of conflict literature,
conflict identification, profiling and mapping, development of conflict escalation
models and localized referral system and development of a training module for
immediate testing on micro conflicts in a small area.
SUGGESTED
METHODOLOGY
Facilitators and Resource Persons use creative ways of facilitating trainings and sharing
knowledge and experience. For conflict sensitization and training, the following methods
are suggested:
Lectures with audio-visual presentation, open exchanges and sharing of views and
experiences.
Sub-group exercises for immediate testing of tools.
Plenary presentation of sub-group exercise results and peer-group critiquing.
For sub-module 4.5, fieldwork guided by a coach or mentor is a requisite. Locally,
based on the experience of ENRD, the guidance can be provided by a local university.
Evaluation is done for every sub-module. For lesson learning and immediate
assessment of the workshop or training results, it is important to allow time for
participants to evaluate their experience with the learning objectives as reference.
The achievement of the learning objectives could be measured by using a scale of 1-
5 (1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest). It is also important for facilitators to
know how he/she performed. Similarly, a scale of 1-5 could be used in assessing the
performance of the facilitator in terms of three variables: content or grasp of the
topic/s, style of delivery and psychological preparedness.
When used as a conflict-sensitization tool, this module can be applied over a 3-day workshop
with a maximum size of 30 participants. When used as a training tool for the Training of
Trainers (TOT), the module can be applied over a period of fifteen (15) days that can be
spread over a period of two (2) months. The training sessions can be handled on an
installment basis depending on the availability of the participants and the resource
requirements.
4.7
For the TOT, it is important to generate a profile of the participants and prior commitment
for their uninterrupted participation. It will be difficult to achieve the learning objectives
of the TOT without sequential progression.
The session guides applied to the sub-modules should be handled flexibly. The facilitator
and process observer should be able to gauge shifts in the mood of the participants. The
time schedule could be adjusted according to need and the demands of the situation. In the
course of the workshop, the facilitator and participants could jointly agree on the exact
time of lunch and snack breaks and warming-up and stretching exercises.
Other than organized conflict sensitization workshops and trainings, this module could also
be used as a self-study guide. Each sub-module can be detached as standalone material
for self-study.
RESOURCES NEEDED
There are necessary costs involved in the conduct of sensitization and training workshops.
The budgets must be planned and prepared for. In addition to the budgets, the following
resources are needed:
Training facilitator, documenter and assistant facilitators who may double up as

process observers
Venue with ample space for sub-group exercises
Supplies such as pentel pens, manila paper, metacards, masking tapes and push pins
Equipment such as a flip chart, scissors, beamer, pin boards, portable screen and a
sound system (if the venue is noisy and the number of participants is big)
For Sub-Module 4.2 it is important to prepare pre-cut cards in various shapes
according to specifications.
For Sub-Module 4.4 (Practicum), additional resources (such as additional budgets,
vehicles and others) would be needed.
4.8
MODULE GUIDE Sub-Module 4.1
Understanding Conflict
SUB-MODULE OVERVIEW
The current literature on peace and conflict traces its roots to the 1950s and 1960s when
pioneering scholars saw the importance of studying conflict as a general phenomenon.
Before then, wars and the ravages of war were examined from the perspective of
international politics. On the side, there were marginal philosophical voices on the morality
of killing in times of war. Even as late as the 1960s, during the Vietnam War, the slogans of
anti-war protesters (such as make love not war or peace not war) suggested a
fragmented view of conflict and peace. The conclusion of the Cold War era and the
emergence of what were perceived as new types of war and chaotic conflicts in the 1990s
created an impetus for rethinking and cross-fertilization of ideas.
Conflict is a cross-disciplinary field of study. It cuts across the political, social and economic
sciences. Expectedly, there is no unified conflict theory as such. What is available are
theoretical propositions that must be viewed from various angles and continuously re-
examined as they are applied in practice.
This sub-module introduces the participants to the rationale of understanding conflict, walks
them through selected concepts, theories and models and how they may be applied to
resource management and planning and in other ways of working.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
The core objectives of this session are:
1. To introduce the participants into basic concepts and theories of conflict formation.
2. To acquire knowledge that could enhance conflict sensitivity in planning and other
ways of working.
3. To better understand observed and recorded conflicts.
TIME ALLOTED
4-5 days
4.9
SUB-MODULE CONTENT
1. Conflict concepts and theories

2. Conflict sensitivity
EXPECTED RESULTS
1. Gained knowledge and understanding on the concepts, theories, and categories of

conflict.
2. Enhanced capacity on conflict sensitivity
4.10
SESSION GUIDE:
Sub-Module 4.1 Session 4.1.1
SESSION OVERVIEW
The current literature on peace and conflict traces its roots to the 1950s and 1960s when
pioneering scholars saw the importance of studying conflict as a general phenomenon.
Before then, wars and the ravages of war were examined from the perspective of
international politics. On the side, there were marginal philosophical voices on the morality
of killing in times of war. Even as late as the 1960s, during the Vietnam War, the slogans of
anti-war protesters (such as make love not war or peace not war) suggested a
fragmented view of conflict and peace. The conclusion of the Cold War era and the
emergence of what were perceived as new types of war and chaotic conflicts in the 1990s
created an impetus for rethinking and cross-fertilization of ideas.
Conflict is a cross-disciplinary field of study. It cuts across the political, social and economic
sciences. Expectedly, there is no unified conflict theory as such. What is available are
theoretical propositions that must be viewed from various angles and continuously re-
examined as they are applied in practice.
This sub-module introduces the participants to the rationale of understanding conflict, walks
them through selected concepts, theories and models and how they may be applied to
resource management and planning and in other ways of working.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
The core objectives of this session are:
1. To introduce the participants into basic concepts and theories of conflict formation.
2. To acquire knowledge that could enhance conflict sensitivity in planning and other
ways of working.
3. To better understand observed and recorded conflicts.
TOPIC GUIDE
1. Definition of Terms
2. Why Study Conflict?
3. Theories on Conflict Formation and Persistence
4. Conflict Sensitivity and Do No Harm
4.11
5. Application in Ancestral Domains and IP Communities
6. Relevance to and Application in Planning
7. Practical Exercises
DURATION
10 hours
PROCESS
1. Introductory Exercises (Duration: 1 hour)

a. Welcome remarks from the organizer/host/sponsor
b. Introductions
c. Expectations check
d. Knowledge and capacity check
e. Topic familiarity and experience check
2. Introduction to the session (Duration: 30 minutes)
a. Overview
b. Learning objectives
c. Key topics and session guide
d. Methodology
e. House rules
3. Lecture-visual presentation-open discussions
a. Leveling off on definition of terms (Duration: 20 minutes)

b. Why study conflict? (Duration: 30 minutes).
c. Introduction to concepts and theories on conflict formation and persistence.
(Duration: 2 hours).
d. Conflict sensitivity and Do No Harm. (Duration: 2 hours, including exercise)
e. Approaches to conflict resolution
f. Ethnicity and cultural dimension of conflict. (Duration: 1 hour)
g. Relevance to SIMPLE. (Duration: 30 minutes)
4. Practical Exercise 1: Sub-group and individual sharing of experiences on

observed conflicts and application of theoretical lenses from the Session.
(Duration: 1 hour)
5. Practical Exercise 2: Do No Harm Assessment. (Duration: 1 hour)
6. Evaluation and closing. (Duration: 30 minutes).
4.12
LEARNING POINTS
Module 4 Sub-Module 4.1
Conflict the pursuit of incompatible goals by

Definition of different groups, whether pursued by peaceful means
Terms or by force.
(Adopted from Armed conflict a category of conflict where both
Ramsbotham et. al., sides resort to the use of force.
2005:27-31) Violent Conflict similar to armed conflict but
includes one-sided direct physical violence.
Conflict Settlement reaching of an agreement to
settle a political conflict
Conflict management a generic term that includes a
whole gamut of positive conflict handling.
Conflict Resolution a comprehensive term, which
implies that deep rooted sources of conflict are
addressed and transformed. The aim of conflict
resolution is not the elimination of conflict but to
transform actual and potential violent conflicts into
peaceful (non-violent) processes.
Conflict Transformation a deeper level of conflict
resolution, which implies deep transformation of
institutions and discourses that reproduce violence as
well as the transformation of the conflict parties and
their relationships. In short, it is about structural and
cultural transformation.
Negotiations a process by which conflict parties seek
to resolve their conflict.
Mediation a third party intervention wherein the
process is voluntary and the conflict parties retain
control over the outcome of the negotiations.
Conciliation or Facilitation refers to intermediary
efforts to encourage parties to move towards
negotiations.
Peacebuilding addressing structural issues and long
term relationships of conflict parties
Peacekeeping an initiative to lower the destructive
behavior of conflict parties
Peacemaking an initiative that aims to change the
attitudes of the main protagonists
Why Study Conflict is normal in human relationships and

conflict is a motor of change. John Paul Lederach
Conflict
4.13
Conflict is not madness and illogical. It has a reason
for being.
The humanitarian effects of violent conflicts are
compelling. Although the proportion of inter-state
wars has declined steadily during the past 100 years,
there has been an increase in internal wars and other
forms of violent conflict including terrorism
(Ramsbothan et. al. eds. 2005: 61-62, 67-68). It is
estimated that, since 1945, civil wars around the
world have killed approximately 20 million people
and displaced another 67 million (Collier &
Sambanis, 2005: xiii). The IISS (1997) puts the
number at 28 million deaths from 150 major armed
conflicts since 1945.
Beyond the death toll, there is another impetus for
understanding conflict and conflict resolution. These
include: (a) Increasing civilian deaths. It estimated
that the proportion of civilian casualties increased
from 5 percent in World War I, 50 percent in World
War II to 80-90 percent by the end of the century of
whom the majority are children and women (Lake,
ed., 1990:4; Grant, 1992:26; Collier et.al., 2003, all
cited in Ramsbotham et. al., eds. 2005:72); (b)
Increase in infant and adult mortality as a result of
disease, famine, displacement and collapse of health
services (Ramsbotham et. al., eds. 2005: 72); and,
(c) Diversion of resources to military purposes
(Collier et. al., 2003)
In Mindanao, the cost of the armed conflict from
1970 to 2001 is estimated at $2-3 billion in terms of
direct output losses Schiavo-Campo & Judd, 2005).
This excludes the still un-measured human and social
costs, indirect economic costs and weakening of
governance institutions. In addition to an estimated
120,000 deaths and displacement of 2 million
people, Lara and Champain (2009) cite unsustainable
economic growth and exclusion from the benefits of
national economic growth as hostile conditions that
nurture conflict resurgence in Muslim Mindanao
The road less traveled is the challenge of understanding and

Why Study managing local and specific horizontal conflicts that confront
Local and Micro communities and local authorities and confound civil society
organizations, academe and other stakeholders. Often, the
Conflicts? tendency is to recognize that a conflict exists only when it
has escalated to a level of direct and physical violence or
when it is linked to rebellion and insurgency. It is important
to recognize that:
Conflict is a natural occurrence and it forms part of
our daily life.
Everyone is party to a conflict whether as a direct or
indirect participant, a neutral or non-neutral
4.14
intervener, a connector, a divider, a spoiler or an
involuntary victim or participant.
We need to sensitize ourselves to conflict even if only
to avoid doing harm or contributing to its exacerbation
or escalation.
Micro level conflicts are at the base of vertical
conflicts and could either contribute to peace building
or conflict duration.
There is no unified theory of conflict. Unlike focused hard

Conflict sciences such as biology, zoology or geology, existing conflict
Theories and theories, concepts and models are derived from various
disciplines such as anthropology (that locates the conflict
Concepts source from the conflict parties themselves), behavioral
sociology and psychology (that looks at relationships),
economics (that focuses on the economic incentives and
impacts of conflict and violence) and political economy (that
looks at the global, national and local distribution and
balance of power).
Johan Galtungs (1969, 1996) Conflict Triangle is an

Galtungs influential pioneering model which suggests that conflict
Triangle of could be viewed from three angles: Contradiction (C), which
refers to the underlying conflict situation or structure of the
Conflict conflict; Attitude (A) which includes emotive (feelings),
cognitive (belief) and conative (will) elements; and, Behavior
(B) which includes acts such as coercion, cooperation,
violence, hostility and other manifest gestures. Conflict
formation is a dynamic process where the structure, attitudes
and behavior are constantly changing and could lead to
escalation. Taking on the challenge of transforming
structures, attitudes and behavior is expected to lead to
positive conflict transformation.
Galtung (1990) uses the same triangle to illustrate violence

from the angles, structural violence, direct violence and
cultural violence, and peace from the corresponding angles of
peacebuilding, peacekeeping and peacemaking (see Fig.
4.1.1). The thesis suggests that to end violence is to remove
injustice (structural violence), change attitudes (cultural
violence) and change conflict behavior (direct violence).
4.15
Fig. 4.1.1. Galtungs Triangle of Conflict, Violence and
Peace
Drawing from datasets compiled since the 1970s, Edward Azar

Azars (1991: 93) identified new types of conflict that are distinct
Protracted from traditional inter-state disputes over territory and
economic resources. He focuses on social conflicts in
Social Conflict underdeveloped parts of the world conflicts where there is
(PSC) no clear demarcation between internal and external sources
and actors and where changing goals, actors and objectives
provide multiple influences that blur the beginning and end
points of the conflict (Azar, 1990: 6).
The PSC theory suggests that the conflict sources are derived
mainly from within the state and the preconditions of their
transformation to higher intensity are based on the following
variables:
Communal content or the presence of identity groups

(racial, religious, ethnic, cultural, etc.), the societal
needs of the individual for security, identity,
recognition, etc., and the relationship between these
groups and the state (Azar, 1986:31; 1990:7);
Grievance resulting from deprivation of human needs
for political access, expression, security and
development, and the failure of the state to find
redress (Azar, 1990:9);
Monopoly of political power by dominant groups or a
coalition of hegemonic groups resulting to exclusion
and deprivation of needs (Azar, 1990: 10-11); and,
4.16
The states dependency within the international
economic system and the network of political and
military linkages (Azar, 1990: 11).
Greed and grievance are two contending, but often

Greed and interlinked, theses on conflict formation and persistence.
Grievance Greed is heavily anchored on the economic determinant of
conflict while grievance is anchored on exclusion, scarcity or
Thesis denial of essential needs for wellbeing.
The greed thesis is a provocative proposition that emerged

in the 1990s as an offshoot of the increasing economic-driven
features of internal conflicts such as those related to conflict
diamonds in Sierra Leone and Liberia. In its narrowest form,
the greed proponents argue that conflict is driven by
pecuniary motives and those combatants are able to finance
themselves from the exploitation of lootable resources.
Ballentine and Sherman (2003:5) caution against the mainly
quantitative and statistical references of the greed account
that suggest probability rather than factual description of
actual conflicts.
The grievance thesis is a long-standing proposition. It is about

actual or perceived scarcity or deprivation owing to factors
such as economic mismanagement, distribution of power,
political rights, ethnic diversity and marginalization, type of
government and others. These are the same factors that, in
Colliers statistical analysis did not find any bearing on the
incidence or onset of conflict (Ballentine and Sherman,
2003:3).
Beyond greed and grievance is an attempt to overcome the

Beyond Greed delimiting proposition of greed or grievance. While it is useful
and Grievance to examine economic motives (or the greed factor) and the
scarcity-deprivation factor (the grievance factor) in conflicts,
Thesis it is difficult to determine association. What may appear as
a causal factor could be merely functioning as an influential
or facilitating factor to an underlying fundamental cause. The
causal and influential dimensions of conflict vary across
geographic locations, typology of conflict, time and the
characteristics and dynamics of the conflict parties. Through
qualitative case studies, the political economy approach
seeks to examine the causal impact of economic factors on
specific conflicts relative to or in combination with other
significant factors such as political, ideological, ethnic and
security factors (Ballentine & Sherman, 2003:6).
In 1999, Mary Andersons work Do No Harm: How Aid can

Conflict support peace or war - served as a wake up call for
Sensitivity and development aid programs. The core argument is that, in the
midst of conflict, aid can never be neutral; that it will always
Do No Harm have direct or indirect, positive or negative and intended or
unintended impacts on the environment. To do no harm is to
4.17
be conflict sensitive. Conflict sensitivity and Do No Harm are
two inter-related approaches that have been developed by
international actors and, later, influenced the ways of
working of national and local NGOs. In 2008, an international
consortium brought together 35 humanitarian, development,
peace building and multi-mandated NGOs operating in Kenya,
Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka and the UK (Conflict Sensitivity
Consortium, 2012)
Conflict sensitivity is about understanding the relationship

between a project or a program and its context, specifically
the conflict environment and Do No harm is about
understanding and recognizing the presence of connectors
and dividers in conflict and how an intervention may be
designed as to support local capacities for peace
(www.conflictsensitivity.org).
Conflict sensitivity is defined by the following criteria: (a)

understanding the context; (b) understanding the interaction
between the context and the intervention; and, (c)
determining courses of action to minimize the negative
impacts and maximize positive impacts on the conflict
(Conflict Sensitivity Consortium, 2012).
The application of conflict sensitivity and Do No Harm

Minimum approaches has been continuously enriched by practical
Criteria for experience. It cuts across the stages of project cycle
management from preparations, to planning and
Conflict implementation and monitoring and evaluation. Tools are
Sensitivity widely available on the web. Depending on the context and
the project/program, the following simple steps could serve
as guide:
1. Conflict analysis. This includes profiling and specific

examination of conflict causes and effects, history,
actors, connectors and dividers and mapping of actors
and their relationships. The connectors and dividers
may be identified from among the direct parties and
indirect parties or from the wider range of intervening
actors. Some connectors and dividers may not even
live within the community where the conflict is
observed. Since conflicts are dynamic, it is important
to also examine the timing of the intervention:
What is the actual status of the conflict (in terms
of level of escalation or de-escalation)?
What are the parameters for determining or
predicting escalation and at which levels?
What are the implications (including security risks
to the project and project staff) if conflicts
escalate?
4.18
2. Analyze the link between the project/program and
the conflict. In this analysis, the following checklist
could be reviewed:
Possible exclusions (or perceptions of exclusion)
that could exacerbate grievances.
Possible diversion of aid that could reinforce
grievances, on the one hand, and strengthen the
resources and capacities of dividers, on the other.
Who do you work with (staff and partners) and how
does the community perceive them?
The explicit and implicit messages (such as
symbols, statements, selection criteria, type of
activities, etc.) of the project/program and how
they may be perceived by the community at large
and the conflict parties.
What are the possible effects (negative or positive)
of the project on the conflict?
3. Peacebuilding needs analysis. As a general starting

point, it is important to look at the national peace
building needs. In the case of the Philippines, the
source of information is the Office of the Presidential
Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP) or other
relevant sources such as the Philippine Development
Plan (PDP). At the local and micro level, the following
questions could be examined:
Has the local government developed a local peace
agenda?
What needs to be done to support local capacities
for peace?
What needs to be done to prevent escalation of
existing conflicts?
What interventions are feasible to create an
environment for non-violent conflict
transformation?
4. Consider areas for redesigning the

projects/programs strategies, methods and
approaches and possible inclusion of peacebuilding
outcomes for future impact assessment. The
considerations may include:
Findings from a risk assessment that demand
urgent action. This could take the form of an
opportunity or an imminent threat. One possible
option is to identify conflict cases that need to
undergo referral.
Changes in the political configuration of the local
partnership mechanisms. in the Philippines, local
4.19
government structures are often influenced by the
3-year recurrence of local elections.
Findings from the Do No Harm analysis that require
attention to either the risks emerging from the
behavior of dividers or the opportunities presented
by the availability and potentials of connectors.
Conflict sensitivity and Do No Harm tools require further

Application in enhancements when applied in ancestral domains and IP
Ancestral communities. Most IP communities in the Philippines hold on
to the oral tradition even in the application of customary law
Domains and on resource management and land rights.
IP Communities To do no harm and to be conflict sensitive in doing work in IP
communities is first and foremost to be culturally sensitive.
This means recognizing and respecting indigenous political
structures (IPS) and mechanisms, fulfillment of safeguards
such as observance of the guidelines on free and prior
informed consent (FPIC) and culture-based generation of data
and information. Conventional methods of research such as
interviews and focus group discussions may be perceived as
extractive and involuntary even if prior permission has been
granted. The best approach is to just facilitate own-account
narrations or the use of the life history approach. The GIZ-
COSERAM experience in ADSDPP Piloting in Sibagat (Agusan
del Sur) and Bislig (Surigao del Sur) and resolution of the
boundary conflict between the Higaonon and Banwaon tribes
in Esperanza and San Luis (Agusan del Sur) suggest the
effectiveness of individual and community narratives rather
than extractive interviews and workshops.
The Do No Harm criteria for plans, programs and projects of

local government territories and ancestral domains tread a
two-way street. Conflict sensitivity is expected of local
governments when dealing with IP communities. Similarly, IP
communities and indigenous political structures (IPS) are also
expected to be conflict sensitive to local governments. In
actual planning, the practical challenge of interfacing for
example, the oral references to land boundaries and the
official maps emerges as a probably conflict that needs to
be managed constructively and sensitively.
Learning from the conflict theories and concepts discussed

Relevance and earlier, we may locate planning in the realm of structure.
Application to Once plans are formulated, approved and, in land use plans
that are translated into local laws or ordinances, they set the
Planning rules governing human behavior. They could become a source
of conflict especially if there are perceived deficiencies in
participation, unfairness in allocation of resources or
resistance to radical change in land use. The planning process
itself may be executed in a conflict-ridden environment
where the unintended effect is the actual or potential
aggravation of conflict.
4.20
The first major requirement in planning is an examination of
the prevailing situation as baseline reference for setting the
future scenario. At the minimum, planners should be conflict
sensitive and conscious of doing no harm. But this requires
the availability of theoretical lenses and tools. The natural
resources management (NRM) sector is prone to conflicts over
ownership, access and control especially under an
environment where major laws, such as the Indigenous
Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) and the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program Extension with Reforms (CARPER), are not
yet fully implemented and other existing laws relevant to
forestry, water and minerals still need to keep pace with
demands for modernization and harmonization.
It is too expensive to back up local planning with academic

researches on micro conflicts. It would be practical and more
efficient to equip planning facilitators, technical support
teams and planning participants with the essentials for
understanding conflict, conflict sensitivity and Do No Harm.
At the minimum, local plans such as the comprehensive land

use plan (CLUP), forest land use plan (FLUP), ancestral
domain sustainable development and protection plan
(ADSDPP) and comprehensive development plan (CDP) should
undergo the Do No Harm assessment.
In enhancing SIMPLE and other approaches to planning, the
following practical steps could be undertaken:
In the preparatory steps - the inclusion of this module

in the training-preparation of the planning team and
key participants. When a trainers pool has been
established, this module forms part of the tool kits of
the team.
In the situation analysis - two sub-steps are important:
one, using the theories, concepts and models as lenses
in recognizing and understanding conflicts in the
planning environment; and, two, a quick Do No Harm
assessment of the planning mechanisms and
processes.
In plan formulation a final Do No Harm assessment
focusing on the potential positive and negative
impacts of the plan or as a result of plan
implementation and a Participatory Conflict Impact
Analysis (PCIA) to determine possible negative and
positive impacts of the plan.
4.21
GUIDE TO
PRACTICAL
EXERCISES:
Sub-Module 4.1
SESSION OVERVIEW
There are two practical exercises for Sub-Module 4.1. The first is designed to elicit ideas from
personal experiences and observations and linking this experience to the newly-acquired
knowledge from various theories and concepts. The second is designed to use the conflict
sensitivity and Do No Harm lens in examining existing programs and projects.
1. Sharing of Ideas and Experience on Conflict. It takes time to internalize newly

introduced theories, concepts and models. After the lecture-discussion, the
participants may still be grappling with the challenge of linking new knowledge to
their own experience. This exercise is a simple exchange of views and experiences. It
could be conducted in plenary or in sub-groups. For best results, it is better to hold
this by sub-groups prior to plenary sharing and exchanges. (Duration: 1 hour)
2. Do No Harm Assessment. The facilitator divides the participants into sub-groups.
Each sub-group selects one project or program they are familiar with or where data
is available. Using a set of guide questions, they assess the actual and potential
negative and positive impact of the project on the conflict (with reference to the
results of Exercise 1). (Duration: 1 hour)
LEARNING
OBJECTIVES
At the end of the session, the participants should be able to:
1. To apply conflict concepts and theories as lenses in understanding their own

experience and observations.
2. To examine the program and/or projects, their actual and potential positive and
negative impacts and how their conflict sensitivity may be enhanced.
TIME ALLOTED
2 hours
4.22
PROCESS: Exercise 1
1. Divide the participants into sub-groups. The number of sub-groups depends on the total
number of participants. Each may comprise 5 to 7 participants.
2. The facilitator instructs each sub-group to self-organize and designate a team leader-
facilitator (for the discussion), documenter and a rapporteur.
3. Each group selects one conflict case based on personal observation or experience and
applies the applicable conflict theory and concept in examining the conflict case.
4. The groups rapporteur presents the results of the discussion in plenary.
5. The facilitator wraps up the exercise with a recap of the conflict theories and concepts
and how they were used as lenses in examining observed conflicts.
PROCESS: Exercise 2
1. The facilitator divides the participants into sub-groups. He/she can use the same
grouping used in Exercise 1.
2. Each group selects one program or project that is implemented locally and where one or
more participants is familiar with. Similar to Exercise 1, each group assigns a team
leader-facilitator, documenter and a rapporteur.
3. The facilitator instructs each group to examine the program or project, firstly to
determine the actual or potential negative impacts and, secondly, to determine the
actual or potential positive impacts. The impact areas and guide questions are outlined
in the sample Do No Harm Assessment tables below.
4. The rapporteur of each group presents the results of the workshop in plenary.
5. The facilitator wraps up the exercise with a recap of the key findings from the sub-
group exercises.
Table 4.1.1. Sample DNH Assessment of Negative Impacts
Guide questions CBFM Group GOVERNANCE LAND Group

Negative impact
Group
areas
I. Acceptance of 1. What interests Promotion ARC Reward political Stop illegal activities,
or support for does the (organizational) allies conservation of forests and
conflict- government hope Devt. By waterproduction areas,
aggravating to pursue through
determination of sustainable development of
structures the project?
("structural Maturity Levels upland areas, close the
violence") open access condition
2. Who are the POS, NGOs, LGUs Punong Barangay

partners and or Political Leaders DENR/PENRO/CENRO,
mediator EcoGov, LGU, NGOs, NGA
organisations? (Provincial Agriculture
What are their
Office, DAR, DepEd, PNP,
interests, their
internal DILG), POs, church
organisation and organisations, FA, Women's
their relationship group, youth group
to the target
group?
4.23
3. Are the criteria YES No Budget was allocated by
for selection and LGU AIP, was presented to
the financial MDC and communities, and
inputs of the
apprpoved by SB
project
transparent to all
participants,
especially the
target groups?
4. Does the project Yes, all parties but Personal interest

represent the more emphasis on of the land owner. The LGUs interest however
values and maturity levels Political is economical and would
interests of a interest of the aim to benefit economically
certain party to Mayor.
(protection of
the conflict? If so,
which values of waterproduction areas, but
which party? also utilisation of resources
in territorial jurisdiction)
5. Does the project Yes No. Due to political No reservations

accept the patronage
parameters set by
authorities without
reservations (e.g.
use of national
symbols, languages
used, restrictions
placed on holding
seminars, etc.)? If
so, which
parameters?
6. Is the working No Yes. By politicians Cebuano was used and can

language of the be understood by all
project spoken involved (however IPs
well by only one participated only through
(ethnic or social) leader, at the moment this
group? group is not formally
recognised as IP)
7. Do the criteria Yes Yes. Political TWG members were only

used to select staff Agenda and men
(e.g. level of Political Allies.
education,
linguistic skills,
mobility) indirectly
favour a certain
group? If so, which
criteria? Do
members of
project staff have
private contacts to
only certain social,
political, etc.
groups? If so,
4.24
which groups are
favoured?
II. Worsening 8. Who does ARC Politician FLUP is done for the benefit
inter-group primarily benefit of the entire community
tensions from project (LGU is facilitator of the
outputs (flows of plan: FA, Women
resources; Associations etc interest
advice/consultanc groups utilised FLUP to
y/extension, voice out their
training)? concerns/interests)
9. How do Gaps determined n/a

beneficiaries use and basis
project outputs? interventions
e.g. use of
managerial LGU use it to access
competencies to funding/TA from DENR and
organise radical other NGAs or donors,
political groups, Integrated to CLUP
use of marketing
knowledge within
the framework of
the war economy.
10. Do the NO, uniform No Economic development

procedures of the procedure fund that is now used for
project FLUP was earlier used for
(unintentionally) rehabilitation of road
strengthen rivalry network, but because IRA
between groups increased the following
for control over year after FLUP approval
and access to this budget was not really
development affected IEC on closing
funds? If so, how? open access areas made it
more clear to forestland
occupants that these areas
are state land, could
reduce conflict (?)
11. What role is Facilitative n/a

played by
executing
FLUP implemented,
organisations,
stakeholders are content
partners and
about the achieved results
mediators at
present in the
overall conflict?
12. How were the Pre identified Given

target-groups
identified? What
Stakeholder analysis
role do they play
in the conflict
context?
13. How is the inadequate n/a Indirect environmental

communication
benefits (water) also
with the
4.25
surrounding concern those outside
population that is forestland
(willingly,
unwillingly) not
part or the target
group?
14. Are the target Yes Partly No. political

groups really the allies, supporters,
main beneficiaries and cronies
Yes
of the project? If
not, which are
they?
15. Does the Yes, monitoring of No

project take a activities relating
clear stance on to HR violations Plan is supporting HR,
human rights equitable access to
violations? If so, land/resources
with which
activities?
III. Weakening 16. What approach Participatory n/a

local (peace) does the project approach, claim Tranparency,
initiatives pursue in the field making accountability,
of Capacity participatory
Building?
17. Has a detailed Yes No

analysis been Yes, during situational
conducted of the analysis and production of
local institutional thematic maps
landscape?
18. Are Yes No Proper allocation of

applications for forestland for different land
support examined uses (protection,
in detail? production etc)
19. Has a situation ALDA feed backing n/a

and conflict
analysis been
conducted jointly
with partners and Issues mapping was
target groups, and conducted
promotion
priorities
identified on this
basis?
IV. Promoting 20. Does the Yes No No

the economy of project promote
violence economic
activities, which
also play a part in
the economy of
violence? If so,
which activities?
4.26
21. Have parties to Yes n/a No
the conflict
repeatedly
appropriated
project resources
(e.g. vehicles,
computers,
communication
equipment) with
the use of
violence? If so,
which resources
are affected and
which parties are
involved??
22. Is the project No n/a No

forced to pay
unofficial duties,
levies, road tolls
etc. to armed
groups (thus
helping to finance
these groups)? If
so, to whom?
23. Does the No n/a No

project use
security
companies, whose
relations to the
parties to the
conflict are
unclear?
Table 4.1.2. Sample DNH Assessment of Positive Impacts
Guide questions CBFM Group GOVERNANCE LAND Group

Positive impact
Group
areas
I. Establishment of 24. Does the project YES feedbacking No Yes, aim to issue tenure
own (peace) help partners and for individual claimants
initiatives target groups to and farmer groups
develop and
systematically pursue
their own objectives? If
so, how?
25. Has the project YES capability n/a Aim to make it self
from the outset building sustaining in long term
encouraged supported assistance (user fees, investors,
initiatives to be environmental fees: now
independent and around 20,000 PHP!
sustainable? If so, how? already in the trust
Which initiatives? account), but support from
LGU and donors is needed
4.27
to implement the plan at
least 10-20 years
26. Do disadvantaged Yes, improved Yes. Thruough

groups too benefit from awareness capacity During FLUP formulation
project consultancy and through building training was organised for
Capacity Building? How information on the TWG (this is not
do they benefit? Does their weakness disadvantaged group!), IEC
this help them assert and strengths and has benefited
their interests more Gaps in disadvantaged small
effectively within the Development holder farmers/informal
existing economic and settlers
social structures?
II. Establishment 27. Do the state and Yes, engagement No Yes

and/or reform of non-governmental and facilitative
political partners supported by activities
accounted and
institutions to the project make a
monitored
tackle contribution to the
shortcomings peaceful and fair
negotiation and
resolution of conflicts
of interest? What are
these contributions?
Does the project take
this aspect into enough
account?
28. Do conflict If so, how? Yes, No

potentials exist which through regular
are currently dealt with feedbacking Yes, claims and land use
or without any great conflict, could be soveld
degree of with the FLUP
institutionalisation? implementation, conflict
Could the project make resolution is part of the
a contribution to implementation
improving this
situation?
29. Does the project Yes, participatory No

promote a transparent and feedbacking Yes, multisectoral steering
and fair legal system, committee to make
open to all groups decission (not representing
within society? If so, one interest group)
how?
30. What is the status Adequate regular Minimal Progress reports of FLUP
of transparency and feedbacking implementation produced
target group by MENRO shared to
participation in project steering commitee,
implementation? minutes of meetings of
steering committee
III. Individuals 31. Does the project Yes, n/a No, yes Yes, composition of
reject violence pursue an inclusive steering committee is
approach, involving all decided by the functions
major stakeholders? of interest groups (Mayor,
Does it attempt to CENRO, SB environment,
4.28
avoid locally PO leaders, barangay
widespread captains, ...)
discrimination? If so,
how?
32. Do the project staff n/a No

show respect for
"Sometimes we
differences? Are
quarrel..but boss is
prejudices discussed
always right"
openly? If so, in which
way?
33. Does the project Yes, gaps n/a

strengthen the conflict identification
resolution
competencies of No capacity building for
important multipliers the steering committee on
within institutions and conflict resolution was
communities? Which organised so far
competencies are
strengthened and who
are the multipliers?
34. Does the project Yes, ARC Devt n/a Yes, the plan includes
itself embody values Concept-THD conflict resolution as one
such as respect, justice of the targets of FLUP
and non-violence? impelementation and
provides framework for
more equal and just access
to resources
REFERENCES AND
SUGGESTED READINGS
Sub-Module 4.1
Anderson, M. B. 1999. Do No Harm: How Aid can support peace - or war. Boulder: Lynne Rienner
Publishers
Ballentine, K. and J. Sherman, eds.,.2003. The Political Economy of Armed Conflict: Beyond
Greed and Grievance. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers
Berdal, M. and D. Malone, eds., 2000. Greed and Grievance: Economic Agendas in Civil Wars.
London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Bray, J., L. Lunde and S. M. Murshed. 2003. Nepal: Economic Drivers of the Maoist Insurgency, in
Ballentine, K. and J. Sherman, eds.,.2003. The Political Economy of Armed Conflict:
Beyond Greed and Grievance. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, pp. 107-132.
Bush, K. 1998. A Measure of Peace: Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment (PCIA) of Development
Projects in Conflict Zones. Ottawa: IDRC
Cater, C. 2003. The Political Economy of Conflict and UN Intervention: Rethinking the Critical
Cases of Africa, in Ballentine, K. and J. Sherman, eds.,.2003. The Political Economy of
4.29
Armed Conflict: Beyond Greed and Grievance. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, pp. 19-
45.
Collier, P. 2000. Doing Well out of War: An Economic Perspective, in Berdal, M. and D. Malone,
eds., 2000. Greed and Grievance: Economic Agendas in Civil Wars. London: Lynne Rienner
Publishers, pp. 91-111.
Collier, P. and N. Sambanis. 2005. Understanding Civil War. Washington D.C: The World Bank.
Collier, P., A. Hoeffler, and N. Sambanis. 2005. The Collier-Hoefller Model of Civil War Onset and
the Case Study Project Research Design, in Collier, P. and N. Sambanis. 2005.
Understanding Civil War. Washington D.C: The World Bank, pp. 1-33.
Collier, P., Elliot, V., Havard, H., Hoeffler, A., Reynal-Querol, M., and Sambanis, N. 2003.
Breaking the Conflict Trap: Civil War and Development Policy. Oxford: World
Bank/Oxford University Press.
Conflict Sensitivity Consortium. 2012. How to guide to conflict sensitivity.

http://www.conflictsensitivity.org/sites/default/files/1/6602_HowToGuide_CSF_WEB_3
.pdf
Darby, J. and R. MacGinty, eds.,. 2003. Contemporary Peacemaking: Conflict, Violence and
Peace Process. New York: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN
De Soysa, I. 2000. The Resource Curse: Are Civil Wars Driven by Rapacity or Paucity?, in Berdal,
M. and D. Malone, eds., 2000. Greed and Grievance: Economic Agendas in Civil Wars.
London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, pp. 113-135.
Duffield, M. Globalization, Transborder Trade, and War Economics, in Berdal, M. and D. Malone,
eds., 2000. Greed and Grievance: Economic Agendas in Civil Wars. London: Lynne Rienner
Publishers, pp. 69-89.
Galtung, J. 1969. Conflict as a way of life, in H. Freeman, Progress in Mental Health,

London: J. & A. Churchill.
Galtung, J. 1996. Peace by Peaceful Means , London: Sage.
Gamba, V. and R. Cornwell. 2000. Arms, Elites, and Resources in the Angolan Civil War, in Berdal,
M. and D. Malone, eds., 2000. Greed and Grievance: Economic Agendas in Civil Wars.
London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, pp. 157-172.
Grant, J. 1992. The State of the Worlds Children. New York: UNICEF.
Guaqueta, A. 2003. The Colombian Conflict: Political and Economic Dimensions, in. Ballentine,
K. and J. Sherman, eds.,.2003. The Political Economy of Armed Conflict: Beyond Greed
and Grievance. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, pp. 73-106.
Holsti, K. 1996. The State, War, and the State of War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.30
International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS). 1997. Chart of armed conflict. In IISS, Military
Balance. London: IISS
Keen, D. 2000. Incentives and Disincentives for Violence, in Berdal, M. and D. Malone, eds., 2000.
Greed and Grievance: Economic Agendas in Civil Wars. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers,
pp. 19-41.
Keen, David. (2000). Incentives and Disincentives for Violence, in Berdal, M. and D. Malone
(2000). Greed and Grievance: Economic Agendas in Civil Wars. London: Lynne Rienner
Publishers Inc.
Lake, A., ed., 1990. After the Wars: Reconstruction in Afghanistan, Indochina, Central America,
South Africa and the Horn of Africa. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Lara, F. and P. Champain. 2009. Inclusive Peace in Muslim Mindanao: Revisiting the Dynamics of
Conflict and Exclusion. London: International Alert
Lund, M. 2005. Greed and Grievance Diverted: How Macedonia Avoided Civil War, 1990-2001, in
Collier, P. and N. Sambanis. 2005. Understanding Civil War. Washington D.C: The World
Bank, pp. 231-257.
Ramsbotham, O., T. Woodhouse and H. Miall, eds. 2005. Contemporary Conflict Resolution.
Cambridge, UK: Polity Press
Reno, W. 2000. Shadow States and the Political Economy of Civil Wars, in Berdal, M. and D.
Malone, eds., 2000. Greed and Grievance: Economic Agendas in Civil Wars. London: Lynne
Rienner Publishers, pp. 43-68.
Ross, M. 2005. Resources and Rebellion in Aceh, Indonesia, Collier, P. and N. Sambanis. 2005.
Understanding Civil War. Washington D.C: The World Bank, pp. 35-58.
Schiavo-Campo, S. & M. Judd. 2005. The Mindanao Conflict in the Philippines: Roots, Costs, and
Potential Peace Dividends. Social Development Papers, Conflict Prevention and
Reconstruction, Paper No. 24/February 2005. Washington D.C.: The World Bank.
Voyame, M. 2011. Linking Security Risk Management and Conflict Sensitivity: Afghanistan and
beyond. http://www2.gtz.de/dokumente/bib-2011/giz2011-0346en-security-
afghanistan.pdf
Wehrmann, B. 2008. Land Conflicts: A practical guide to dealing with land disputes. Eschborn:
GTZ.
4.31
MODULE GUIDE:
Sub-Module 4.2
Conflict Analysis
SUB-MODULE
OVERVIEW
Conflict analysis is a process of critically looking at a particular conflict to understand the causes,
context, actors, and other aspects of the conflict. This includes profiling and specific
examination of conflict causes and effects, history, actors, connectors and dividers and mapping
of actors and their relationships. The connectors and dividers may be identified from among the
direct parties and indirect parties or from the wider range of intervening actors. Some
connectors and dividers may not even live within the community where the conflict is observed.
Since conflicts are dynamic, it is important to also examine the timing of the intervention, as
such looking at the status of conflict, identifying the parameters for determining conflict levels,
and determining the implications in cases of conflict escalation. Hence, this will clearly provide
basis for determining interventions that will have increased possibilities of a positive outcome.
LEARNING
OBJECTIVES
At the end of this sub-module, the participants should be able to:

1. Acquire knowledge, skills and techniques in conflict analysis.
2. Test acquired knowledge, skills and techniques on actual conflict cases.
3. Utilize the results as reference for enhancing conflict sensitivity in planning and other
development initiatives and for designing options for peace building and conflict
transformation.
TIME ALLOTED
1-2 Days
SUB-MODULE
COVERAGE
Sub-Module 4.2.1 Conflict Profiling

Sub-Module 4.2.2 Conflict Mapping
Sub-Module 4.2.3 Conflict Contingency Modeling
Relevance of Conflict Analysis to Ancestral Domains and IP Communities
Integration of Tools to SIMPLE
4.32
PROCESS
1. Recap and reflections on lessons learned from the preceding module. (Duration: 30 minutes)
2. Expectations check for the session. (Duration: 30 minutes)
3. Reminder on house rules. (to post on the wall)
4. Lecture, visual presentations and open discussions:
a) Profiling and Context Analysis (Duration: 1 hour)
b) Mapping (Duration: 1 hour)
c) Escalation Modeling (Duration: 1 hour)
d) Culture Sensitivity in Conflict Analysis (Duration: 1 hour)
e) Relevance of Conflict Analysis to Ancestral Domains and IP Communities (Duration:1
hour)
f) Integration of Tool in SIMPLE (Duration:1 hour)
5. Practical Exercise 1: Conflict Profiling (Duration: 1 hour)
6. Practical Exercise 2: Timeline Analysis (Duration: 30 minutes)
7. Practical Exercise 2: Conflict Mapping (Duration: 1 hour)
8. Practical Exercise 3: Conflict Escalation Modeling (Duration: 1 hour)
9. Evaluation (Duration: 30 minutes)
RESOURCES
To facilitate this session, the following resources are needed:
1. Facilitator, documenter, process observer

2. Facilitators lecture guide and powerpoint presentation
3. Supplies: pentel pens, tack pins, manila paper, rectangular metacards, pre-cut rounded
metacards in five sizes (2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 diameters), pre-cut semi-circular metards
from two halves of a 6-diameter rounded card and pre-cut card strips with arrows 0.5
x 6.
4. Equipment: laptop or desktop, beamer, scissors, pin boards, flip charts, sound system
and laser pointer.
5. Venue with ample room for sub-group exercises.
4.33
SESSION GUIDE:
Conflict Profiling
SESSION OVERVIEW
For deeper understanding of an observed or perceived conflict, the phenomenon should be
profiled and its context should be analyzed as well. This activity looks at key variables such as
historical context, conflict actors, conflict issue, conflict lines, conflict causes and sources,
relationships, dynamics, scale and conflict level.
LEARNING
OBJECTIVES
At the end of the session, the participants should be able to create a conflict profile based on
existing conflict over a natural resource, using the elements of a conflict profile.
TIME ALLOTED
1 hour
PROCESS
1. Introduction to the topic to emphasize the relevance of profiling conflicts covering
discussions on determining the history and context; actors; core issues; conflict lines;,
effects, causes and sources; dynamics of relationships; scale; and level of conflict.
2. Introduce the practical exercise and allocate one (1) hour and 30 minutes for the group-
exercises.
4.34
LEARNING POINTS:
Conflict Profiling
The conflict profile is composed of the following key variables.
Focus on understanding better the history of conflict, in cases

Historical where socio-economic, political, cultural and ecological
context conditions are available.
Organizations, individual entities, institutions, and social

Conflict Actors groups are identified and categorized according to their roles
and location in the conflict. They are categorized into three;
primary actors, secondary actors, and intervening actors.
This is what conflict is all about. It is imperative to be reminded

Conflict Issue of zooming in the core issue in a given situation.
These two elements must be differentiated. Conflict causes can

Conflict be attributed to data, rules, behavior and attitude of conflict
Causes and parties. To substantiate, Moore developed a practical approach
in understanding the conflict causality through five possible
Sources sources such as values, values, interests, relationships, and
structures. Along these sources possible causes are lack of
information, varying interpretation on the information, unequal
access to power, etc.
Describe the connection between actors over a conflict issue,

Conflict Line whether violent or non-violent and alliance or influential.
Include both direct and indirect effects of such conflict. For

Effects instance direct effects among conflict parties are ruptured
communication lines, broken trust, and abandonment of
homes, while indirect effects may vary from decreasing flow of
investments or destruction to natural resources, depending on
the level of conflict.
Can be measured according to geographic, economic, social,

Scale political and ecological reaches and impacts such as number of
deaths or value of economic losses. Some conflicts are dormant
or concentrated in a small area, while some escalates vertically
and horizontally.
A way of presenting the vertical scale and magnitude of a

Level conflict. This is different from scale, in which a level describes
the scalar and vertical politico-geographic scale (local,
4.35
national, international, and global) and intensity of the
conflict. In general, horizontal conflicts, such as inter-
individual or inter-group conflicts, are characterized as societal
level conflicts
Describe the weight of access to power or resources between

Relationships conflict actors. This can be categorized into two general
categories namely; symmetrical (equal/similar access) and
asymmetrical (unequal/imbalance access).
Change in the character and configuration of conflict. However,

Dynamics it should be noted that conflict change in non-linear, which
means that conflict does not vanish with the disappearance of
root causes, rather conflict is merely transformed. This is
influenced by at least three factors a) behavioral style of the
conflict parties; b) conflict events; and c) action and reaction.
Use as reference to identify intervention options and

Typology monitoring of such intervention for the recorded conflicts.
Often, there is no singular cause of conflict. Moore (1996) offers

Issues on a practical approach to understanding the causality of conflicts.
Causality He identifies five possible sources, namely: (1) values, (2)
data, (3) interests, (4) relationships and (5) structure. Along
these possible sources are the possible causes such as: data
conflicts caused by lack of information, misinformation, varying
interpretation of data of differing views on the significance of
data.
Most conflicts are influenced by multiple and overlapping

causes. Lack of information (data conflict), for example, may
overlap with unequal access to information from government
agencies (structural conflict) or, differing views on the
significance of data may overlap with variances in worldviews
over a resource (value conflict). The latter is often observed
in forest zones where the world views of indigenous
communities, private investors and local governments clash
over best use of resources.
Often the causality of one conflict is wrapped around the

complexity of the context. For example, what one may see as
an ethnic or identity-based conflict manifested in ancestral
domain claims of indigenous peoples (IPs) versus non-IP claims,
the same could be seen as an economic driven conflict that
drives landless farmers to the uplands to secure their
livelihoods or of private investors availing of legal instruments
and incentives for mining and forestry. Both would be wrapped
around the structural promises of IPRA (NCIP mandate) and
agrarian reform (DAR mandate) or community forestry,
industrial forestry and mining (DENR mandate) and coal mining
(DOE mandate).
4.36
Fig. 4.2.1. Overlapping Causes of Conflict
4.37
GUIDE TO
PRACTICAL
EXERCISE:
Profiling Conflicts
EXERCISE OVERVIEW
There are two exercises under this sub-topic; 1) conflict profiling and 2) timeline analysis.
1. Conflict Profiling. Identification of key variables as discussed during the session.

The participants should be reminded of following questions
What is the conflict all about; what are the core issues?
What are the sources and conflict causes?
Who are the actors involved; their roles and locations within a conflict?
What are relationships and conflict lines between actors in relation to the
conflict?
2. Timeline Analysis. Tool in developing a diagram that details the history of conflict.
The timeline is divided into two zones; the left zone reserved for negative events,
the right zone reserved for positive events.
TIME ALLOTED
1 hour for conflict profiling and 30 minutes for timeline analysis
PROCESS FOR
EXERCISE 1
1. Divide the participants into sub-groups.

2. Each group selects a conflict case. Better if the selected cases are the same cases
shared during the conduct of Sub-Module 4.1. Each group makes sure that a resource
person (or someone knowledgeable about the conflict) is available.
3. The resource person narrates the conflict. Group members ask questions and take
notes of important data using the variables.
4. Collected data during the narration is organized into a matrix or a diagram similar to
figure below.
5. Review the profile and identify data gaps for further research.
6. Present the results in plenary.
4.38
Fig. 4.2.2 Key Elements of the Conflict Profile
PROCESS FOR
EXERCISE 2
1. The same sub-group creates a timeline diagram, either horizontally or vertically which
is divided into two zones; the left zone reserved for negative events, the right zone
reserved for positive events. The starting period of the timeline depends on available
information from the resource person/s.
2. Cluster the years into 5 or 10-year periods, depending on the starting date.
3. In each cluster of years, record negative events (violence, displacement, killings,
droughts, floods, etc) and positive events (good harvest, good relationships, economic
boom, etc). If there are events that have dual meanings (positive and negative), put
these in the middle of the timeline.
4. Analyze the diagram by answering the following key questions:
Using the conflict contingency model, what is the current status of the conflict
(or what is the level of escalation)?
During which periods had the conflict escalated?
During which periods was the situation characterized by cooperation, open
communications and positive relationships?
What are the main traumatic events?
What are the main inspiring or hopeful events?
Through the years, has there been any transformation (positive or negative) of
the conflict?
What are the intervention options at the moment?
4.39
Fig. 4.2.3 Timeline Analysis
4.40
SESSION
GUIDE:
Conflict Mapping
SESSION OVERVIEW
A useful tool for conflict analysis that describes a particular conflict in a particular setting and
visualizes the core issue/s, the conflict parties, the role and location of conflict parties, the
quality of the relationships of the conflict parties and the direction of power and influence. It
tells a story that could be understood by anyone who looks at the map.
LEARNING
OBJECTIVES

1. Understand the basic elements of a conflict map;
2. Familiarize themselves with conflict mapping symbols;
3. Create a conflict map from an existing resource conflict issue.
TIME ALLOTED
1 hour
PROCESS
1. Introduction to the topic and discuss the elements of a conflict map.

2. Introduce the practical exercise and allocate one (1) hour for the group-workshop.
4.41
LEARNING POINTS
Conflict Mapping
The mapping process itself, when done by the conflict parties themselves, becomes a venue
for rebuilding of inter-personal and inter-group communications. In the GIZ-ENRD
experience, community level conflict mapping served as a venue for clarifying issues and
relationships that were, otherwise, blurred by lack of information and communication. In
most cases, the substantive issues are further clarified when local authorities and
government agencies are on hand to provide the missing information.
The following are the symbols used for conflict mapping:
Circles represent the parties to the

conflict (e.g. semi-circle: external
actor). Different sizes of symbols
indicate differences in power and
influence.
A line between two parties to the

conflict represents good relations.
A double line represents an alliance

or community of interests.
A dotted line represents weak or

fragile relations.
An arrow between two parties to the

conflict represents a dominant or
strongly influential relationship.
Arrows can also be used to indicate
the direction of activities.
Zigzag or wavy lines represent

differences in views. Used with a
lighting symbol they indicate a
conflict.
A line interrupted by two cross-lines

represents an interrupted relation.
More than two cross-lines can be used
to indicate that a relationship is
under severe strain.
A double zigzag indicates a violent

relationship.
4.42
GUIDE TO
PRACTICAL
EXERCISE:
Sub-Module 4.2 Sub-Module 4.2.2
Conflict Mapping
EXERCISE OVERVIEW
Conflict mapping usually takes an hour to complete depending on availability of information

and mapping materials, hence best way is to make use of information derived from the
preceding exercise on conflict profiling. Using metacards and designated colors for each
conflict actor, key steps are:
1. Identify the core issue or the subject of the conflict between parties.
2. Identify the direct parties and determine the relative balance of power. The size of
the card represents the amount of power and resources available to group relative
to the other group in conflict such as access to or position of formal and informal
power, financial resources, technological resources, weapons, support from security
forces or rebel forces, etc.
3. Identify the indirect/secondary parties, second layer of concentric circle. Place the
indirect parties to the side of the direct/primary parties they are allied to or to whom
they give support.
4. Identify the intervening parties. These parties are sometimes government agencies,
development agencies, NGOs, church-based organizations, mediation organizations
and others, who are in a position to influence the clarification of the issue/s and
behavior of the conflict parties. Select a card color to represent the intervening
parties. Placed as third layer of concentric circle and written in semi-circular cards.
5. Determine the quality of the relationship and position of power by connecting the
parties with the use of symbols, as discussed in the session. Note that all parties have
to have some relationships and should be connected with lines (except those whose
relationship is unknown or where there is no data available).
6. Sum up the quality of the relationship through counting of positive relationships,
alliances, ruptured friendships, ruptured alliances, negative relationships, violent
relationships, etc. Then, determine the proportion of each type or relationship
relative to the overall number of relationships.
7. Analyze. If there are two or more groups, ask each group to present and analyze the
work of the other group using the following questions;
What is the mood of the conflict parties at the moment? Is there high tension, is
there violence or is there a positive mood for peaceful negotiations?
Who are the possible connectors or the parties who could directly or indirectly
connect the parties with negative relationships?
Who are the violent parties or parties who could spoil peace building
initiatives?
Looking at the issue/s and the relationships of parties, what can be done
about the conflict? What are the entry points and what are the possible modes
of intervention?
4.43
TIME ALLOTED
1 hour for conflict profiling and 30 minutes for timeline analysis
PROCESS FOR
EXERCISE
1. Each group to select a team leader to facilitate the discussion and a presenter or
rapporteur.
2. Follow the key steps as discussed by the facilitator.
3. Present the map in plenary.
Fig. 4.2.4 Sample Conflict Map and Historical Map
4.44
SESSION GUIDE:
Contingency Modeling
SESSION OVERVIEW
A model being used to identify critical variables in determining proneness to escalation or

possibilities of de-escalation. The conflict contingency model is a predictive scenario that serves
as guide for determining entry points for facilitating processes towards restoring communication,
building or rebuilding relationships, reducing issues into mutually acceptable and workable
chunks and referral to laws and policies and state administrative structures or reducing
asymmetry in information.
LEARNING
OBJECTIVES

1. Understand the escalation and de-escalation of conflict.
2. Familiarize themselves in escalation and de-escalation model.
3. Create criteria for determining level of escalation.
TIME ALLOTED
1 hour
PROCESS
1. Introduction to the topic and discussion on different models on contingency modeling.

2. Introduce the practical exercise and allocate one (1) hour for the group-workshop.
4.45
LEARNING POINTS
For countries with ethnic minorities, Gurr (1996) and Gurr and Harf (1996) suggest the
following criteria for conflict emergence, such as collective incentives, capacity for joint
action, and external opportunities. While some scholars use econometric models for
prediction, using 22 case studies from more than 30 civil wars from 1960 to 1999, Collier et.
al. (2005) proposes a quantitative model known as the Collier-Hoeffler or CH Model for
civil war onset. Results suggest the following criteria for conflict emergence.
Availability of finance. This uses proxies such as availability of primary

commodity exports and opportunities for extortion and source of financing such
as remittances from the diaspora.
Cost of rebellion. This uses a proxy such as low foregone earnings as facilitator
of conflict.
Military advantage. This uses a proxy such as population dispersion.
Some other scholars use quantitative indicators such as human rights violations, state
failure, displacement, hunger, flow of firearms and others. The problem with purely
quantitative indicators is the blurring of case and context specific information (Ramsbotham
et. al., 2005:113).
There are triggering factors, underlying causes and structural conditions that shape conflict
events (Ramsbothan et. al., 2005; Nye, 1993). Some scholars propose escalation-de-
escalation models of macro (inter-state and intra-state) conflicts that are used by actors
who intend to match the model with appropriate conflict resolution interventions. An
existing 9-stage contingency model looks like a normal curve was also used in the hourglass
model of Ramsbotham and Woodhouses (1999). This describes the contingency inside the
hourglass and the complementary processes on both sides parallel to the contingency scale.
In this model, elite peacemaking that forms part of conflict settlement is distinguished from
the deeper levels of structural and cultural peacebuilding (Ramsbotham et.al., 2005:13).
4.46
Fig. 4.2.5 Conflict Escalation-De-escalation Model
The conflict contingency model above suggests that type of intervention should match the
stage of the conflict. At the early stages, facilitation and low-power mediation might be
appropriate but in times of high escalation (of violence) high-power mediation and even
coercion might be necessary (Lederach, 1997).
Most models are focused on macro conflicts and are framed from the perspective of
international actors. It forms part of the global political economy discourse and serve as
guide for designing conflict resolution strategies. However, conflicts do not follow a normal
curve and many latent conflicts stay dormant or static for years, others escalate at a rapid
pace when precipitated by triggering events. At high points, power-based mediation or
even coercion is required (Lederach, 1997).
In 2012, GIZ-ENRD developed a contingency (known as Conflict Referral System) model

specifically focused on micro conflicts as basis for developing an alternative third party
intervention approach, which it describes as conflict referral. This is in response to ground
level reality of micro conflicts that require urgent attention from local authorities, civil
society and staff of development programs and projects. It is a hybrid adaptation of the
Lederach Pyramid, Fishers (2011) contingency model of third party intervention and the
hierarchical conflict referral systems used in the management of workplace conflicts. At the
core of the system are three relevant concepts: one, the concept of conflict contingency;
two, the concept of structure and hierarchy; and, three, the conflict frames and targets of
transformation.
The GIZ-EnRD contingency model also has four levels of conflict escalation the same as
Fishers contingency model but uses the language of dormancy, tensions, violence and
escalated violence. This model aims to enhance accuracy of monitoring and inform
appropriate security responses and procedures, each level is accompanied by descriptors
and color codes for early warning.
4.47
Fig. 4.2.6 GIZ-ENRD Contingency Model for Micro Conflicts
As illustrated in the figure, the baseline reference of all conflicts is 0 (Color Code Green),
which refers to latent or dormant conflicts. This also refers to what is inherent among social
beings the variances and competition in goals and interests over scarce resources
accentuated by issues of identity. Level 0 conflicts escalate to Level 1 (Open Tension, Color
Code Blue) when the following factors emerge: (a) organized assertion of interests and
positions by one party or the other; (b) lip service implementation of laws and policies; (c)
weakened communication between parties in conflict; and, (d) weak negotiation capacity
despite existence of communication lines.
Level 1 conflict escalates to Level 2 (Overt Violence, Color Code Orange) when the following
factors emerge: (a) one party gains monopoly access to power and resources; (b) local elites
infuse power and resources to one party or the other; (c) high but exclusionary economic
growth; (d) perceptions of failure in governance; and, (e) overt violence. The conflict
further escalates to high levels of violence (Color Code Red) when the following factors are
present: (a) external power and resources are infused to escalate the violence; (b) ruptured
communication and relationship between parties; (c) external elites instrumentalizing the
conflict; (d) political and economic deprivation of aggrieved parties; and, (e) loss of life
and/or property due to violent confrontations.
4.48
GUIDE TO
PRACTICAL
EXERCISE
EXERCISE OVERVIEW
The exercise aims to familiarize the participants on how to determine the level of escalation of
such conflict. A matrix is given as guide for the discussion of sub-groups, in which each level has
its corresponding indicators to use as reference.
TIME ALLOTED
1 hour
PROCESS
Fill out the matrix with corresponding additional indicators based on the conflict being
analyzed.
Criteria for Determining Level of Escalation
Level of Escalation Indicators New or Additional Indicators

Suggested by the Group based on the
conflict being examined
0: Latent 1. Competing goals and interests
2. Conflict parties able to
communicate
1: Tensions 1. Organized assertion of
interests and positions by one
party or the other
2. Lip service implementation of
laws and policies
3. Weakened communication
between parties in conflict
4. Weak negotiation capacity
despite existence of
communication lines
2: Violence 1. One party gains monopoly of
access to power and
resources
2. Local elites infuse power and
resources to one party or the
other
4.49
3. High but exclusionary
economic growth
4. Perception of failure in
governance
5. Overt violence
3: Escalated 1. External power and resources
Violence infused to escalate violence
2. Ruptured communications and
relationships between parties
3. External elites
instrumentalizing conflict
4. Political and economic
deprivation of aggrieved
parties
5. Loss of life and property due
to violent confrontations
4.50
LEARNING POINTS
Relevance of Conflict Analysis to

Ancestral Domains and IP Communities
Conflicts observed in ancestral domain areas and conflicts between IPs and non-IPs might
be easily misconstrued as an ethnic-based or identity based conflict. Rothman and Friedman
(2011) provide a useful perspective by framing conflicts into three: (a) the resource conflict
frame; (b) identity frame; and, (c) interest frame, which also resonate in Galtungs triangle
of conflict sources, namely: structure, attitude and behavior.
Resource Conflict Frame. Struggle over claims to scarce power and resources;
Identity Frame. Pertains to individual or group needs, desires, concerns, and fear;
and.
Interest Frame. Pertains to bargaining and competitive resource framing
In the Philippine experience, ethnic minorities had been historically excluded from
conventional politics and access and control of natural resources. The Indigenous Peoples
Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997 sought to correct the injustice but there is still a big distance
between the intentions of the law and social reality. The satisfactory solution of ethnic-
based claims for autonomy is argued to be important in achieving political stability and
social peace (Ghai, 2003: 186).
It is argued that ethnic differences do not necessarily cause conflicts (De Varennes,
2003:153). What may look like an ethnic-based conflict could actually be a manifestation
of grievances against political exclusion, economic marginalization and social
discrimination. Philippine indigenous peoples (IPs) have suffered from historical trauma
since the colonialist imposition of Christianity during the Spanish period, through American
colonial attempts at assimilation and expropriation of natural resources in the name of the
colonial state.
The implementation of IPRA has given new hopes to IPs in the Philippines but this hope is
mired in conflicts over ownership rights, physical boundaries and land use directions. The
estimated 7 million hectares of ancestral domains are carved from the estimated 15 million
hectares of lands in the public domain where the national government had, and continues
to issue land tenure instruments to other stakeholders. The IPRA enables IP communities to
self-govern their ancestral domains, inclusive of the recognition of customary law and
ancestral land claims since time immemorial. It is a bold promise that confronts a reality
of competing visions and claims. It is an autonomy that does not actually allow the full
functions of a state but rather an autonomy that is framed within the overall sovereignty of
the Philippine state.
In the 1990s there had been attempts from civil society groups and federations of IP
organizations in Mindanao to push for nationhood or statehood within the ambit of the
proposition for federalism. It was also an attempt to catch up with the Moro demand for
separate nationhood and statehood. This belief is echoed in recent attempts of some shady
groups pushing unrealistic ancestral domain claims and supporting supposed IP leaders
whose legitimacy remains under question.
The call for federalism has waned down but it would be unrealistic to dismiss the
significance of the sentiments. What may no longer appear in public statements could still
4.51
be present in implicit languages. The non-fulfillment of real autonomy could trigger
tendencies of what Reilly (2003:174) describes as exclusive visions based on ethnicity.
Exclusivity, to the point of xenophobia, has happened in other ethnically divided societies.
In the 1990s, the former Yugoslavia witnessed exclusive visions such as Kosovo for the
Kosovars, Serbia for the Serbians or Croatia for the Croats.
Autonomy arrangements are idealized as strategies for power sharing without sacrificing
national integrity and sovereignty. But, as always, the devil is in the details. And the details
are not only about the ability of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) to
lead the implementation of IPRA but also how other government agencies empathize with
the NCIP and the laws implementation while fulfilling their own mandates.
There are contemporary considerations that need to be accounted for in handling conflicts
in ancestral domains. At the first instance, IP communities are not objects to be examined.
The observed conflicts have much to do with IP perceptions and sentiments that need to be
heard rather than collected or extracted. Any conflict analysis on ancestral domains has to
be a process that involves IP communities.
External actors such as foreign development agencies, CSOs, LGUs and NGAs, need not fall
into the romanticist trap that everything in ancestral domains and IP communities is
primordial. Like other cultures, IP culture is dynamic and adaptive. The estimated 110 IP
ethnic groups are at varying levels of social development and cultural integrity. Indigenous
knowledge systems and practices, including rituals, have evolved and adapted to new
conditions. In many IP communities in Mindanao, customary law co-exists with modern law
and belief systems have been diluted with Christian and other beliefs. In the many regions
of Mindanao, IP rituals are already mixed with Christian rituals. No ancestral domain (with
title or still in the process of delineation) is purely homogenous in terms of population,
culture and land tenure instruments. There are prevailing conflicts (either with government
agencies, non-IP populations and private investors and even among IP tribes themselves)
that need to be handled constructively. Otherwise, what Lederach describes as a motor of
change could escalate into violence.
4.52
LEARNING POINTS
INTEGRATION TO SIMPLE
Some concepts and tools under this sub-module could be used in the interfacing and inter-
phasing of CLUP, FLUP, and ADSDPP.
Preparatory steps Key stakeholders and planning agents mutually inform each
other on the initiation of the planning process and state of
preparations. Note that NGAs and LGUs must recognize
indigenous political structures as main reference for
coordination and invocation of IP participation as part of
conflict and culture sensitivity.
Generating data for the Data on ancestral domains and IP communities should be
situation analysis heard rather than collected or extracted through
conventional interviews and focus group discussions. This
includes identification and profiling of conflicts.
Analyzing the situation The conflict analysis should be included in the situational
analysis and IPs should be involved in analyzing the
situation, including analysis of conflicts. A conflict analysis
should appear as a conflict situation rather than a resolved
conflict. For instance, in case of boundary conflicts, the
historical references and physical markers may continue to
clash when transposed into the official maps. Hence, LGU
and IP planners need to negotiate specifically on
harmonizing the community maps based on oral narratives
and the official maps used by government agencies.
Visioning The underlying assumption is that there are competing

visions between IPs on ancestral domains and LGUs on their
territories and populations. Providing a platform would be
useful for the competing visions to be interfaced as to find
their reference within an overarching national vision.
Formulating strategies Often preceded by a SWOT analysis, however this could be

enhanced by a full risk assessment and development of a
conflict contingency model. The risk assessment could be
further enhanced by the utilization of the conflict
contingency model as basis for making projections on
potential risks and opportunities. CLUP, FLUP and CDP
strategies should be interfaced with ADSDPP strategies if
only to examine areas of convergence, cooperation and
competition.
4.53
Management and The plan could include proactive measures for the
implementation of the constructive management of conflicts based on the results
plan of the prior exercises. On the assumption that the plan has
passed through the conflict sensitivity and Do No Harm
check, strategies and activities could include options such
as building local capacities for peace (such as training on
facilitation, negotiation and mediation) or utilization of the
conflict referral system for conflicts that require third party
intervention.
REFERENCES AND
SUGGESTED READINGS
Christopher Moore, The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict, 2nd ed., (San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996).
Collier, P., A. Hoeffler., and A. Sambanis. 2005.. The Collier-Hoeffler Model of Civil War Onset and
the Case Study Project Research Design, in Collier, P. and Sambanis, N., eds. (2005).
Understanding Civil War. Washington D.C.: The World Bank.
Daniela Korppen, the circularity of conflict dynamics: a critical review. Berghof Center for
Constructive Conflict Management, Berghof Handbook Dialogue No. 5, August 2006 , In
http://www.berghof-
handbook.net/documents/publications/dialogue5_koerppen_comm.pdf
Daniela Korppen, the circularity of conflict dynamics: a critical review. Berghof Center for
Constructive Conflict Management, Berghof Handbook Dialogue No. 5, August 2006 , In
http://www.berghof-
handbook.net/documents/publications/dialogue5_koerppen_comm.pdf
De Varennes, F. 2003. Peace Accords and Ethnic Conflicts: a Comparative Analysis of Content and
Approaches, in J. Darby and R. MacGinty, eds., Contemporary Peacemaking: Conflict,
Violence and Peace Processes. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 151-160.
Fisher, R. and Keashly, L. (1991). The potential complementarity of mediation and consultation
within a contingency model of third party intervention. Journal of Peace Research, 28(1),
29-42.
Fisher, R.J. (2011). Methods of Third Party Intervention. Berghof Research Centre for Constructive
Conflict Management. http://www.berghof-handbook.net/articles/section-iii-third-party-
tools-and-capacity-building
Galtung, J. 1969. Conflict as a way of life, in H. Freeman, Progress in Mental Health, London: J.
& A.Churchill.
4.54
Galtung, J. 1996. Peace by Peaceful Means , London: Sage.
Galtung, J. and Carl G. Jacobsen 2000. Searching for Peace.
Ghai, Y. 2003. Territorial Options. In in J. Darby and R. MacGinty, eds., Contemporary

Peacemaking: Conflict, Violence and Peace Processes. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 184-
193
Glasl, F. 1982. The Process of Conflict Escalation and Roles of Third-parties, in G.B.Bomers and
R.B.Gurr, T. 1996. Minorities, nationalists and ethnopolitical conflict. In Crocker, C. and
Hampson, F, eds., 1996. Managing Global Chaos: Sources of an Responses to International
Conflict. Washington D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press.
Gurr, T. and Harff B. 1996. Early Warning of Communal Conflicts and Genocide: Linking Empirical
Research to International Responses: Tokyo: United Nations University.
Moore, C. 1996. The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict, 2nd ed.,San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers
Nye, J. 1993. Understanding International Conflicts: An Introduction to Theory and History. New
York: Harper Collins.
Office of the Attorney General and Ministry of Justice, Sierra Leone. 2002. Briefing Paper on
Documentation and Conflict Mapping for the Special Court: Proposal for the establishment
of a Documentation and Conflict Mapping Program, Planning Mission Briefing Series, 7-18,
January 2002.
Peterson (eds.), Conflict Management and Industrial Relations , Boston, The Hague, London:
Ramsbotham, O. and Woodhouse, T. 1999. Options for the development of codes of conduct for
conflict resolution. Paper presented at Codes of Conduct Conference, Soesterberg,
Netherlands, April 1999.
Reilly, B. 2003. Democratic Validation, in J. Darby and R. MacGinty, eds., Contemporary

Peacemaking: Conflict, Violence and Peace Processes. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 174-
183
Rothman, J. and V. J. Friedman. (2001). Identity, Conflict and Organizational Learning, in

Berthoin, A. , M. Dierkes, J. Child and I. Nonaka (eds.) (2001). Handbook of Organizational
Learning and Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Singer. D. 1996. Armed conflict in the former colonial regions: from classification to explanation.
In van Goor et al., eds. 1996. Between Development and Destruction: An Enquiry into the
Causes of Conflict in Post-Colonial States. New York: St. Martins Press.
Wilke, Helmut 1999. Interventionstheorie. 3rd Edition. Stuttgart: UTB.
4.55
MODULE GUIDE
Sub-Module 4.3
Constructive Conflict Handling and Mitigation
SUB-MODULE
OVERVIEW
While conflict is a natural phenomenon, we problematize its causation and levels of escalation
and their consequences in terms of loss of lives, property, erosion of social trust and decay of
institutions that government human behavior. There are ways of converting conflict into an
empowering process that seeks to transform structures, attitudes and behavior. The challenge is
how to design a practical, achievable and cooperative of constructive conflict management
(Bloomfield and Reilly, 1998).
Taking off from the preceding modules, this session guides participants into the essentials of
conflict transformation, risk management and conflict referral. It begins with an examination of
conflict intervention models, timing and levels of intervention. At the core of the session is
conflict transformation as a preferred conflict intervention and peace building approach.
The effectiveness of conflict transformation requires essential capacities of third party

interveners and conflict parties themselves. In addition to understanding concepts and theories
of conflict and skills in conflict analysis, three other skills areas will be introduced into this
session, namely: bargaining and negotiations, mediation and risk management.
Any third party intervention is accompanied by risks. There are security and other risks emanating
from the conflict being managed and other risks internal and external to the project or program.
The participants will be introduced to risk management theory and some tools for managing risks
and integrating such into their development strategies.
Finally, the participants will be introduced to Conflict Referral as third party intervention option.
This is a recent innovation developed by GIZ-ENRD from its handling and mitigation of local
conflicts.1
LEARNING
OBJECTIVES
At the end of Sub-Module 4.3, the participants are expected to constructively handle micro
conflicts in their communities with following knowledge and skills:
1. Basic understanding of the concepts and models of third party intervention.

2. Basic understanding of risk analysis and management.
1
See: Quitoriano, E. 2013. ConRefSys: The Conflict Referral System. Manila: GIZ.
4.56
3. Basic understanding of mediation and negotiation.
4. Ability to apply the conflict referral system.
TIME ALLOTED
1 -2 days
SESSION GUIDE
1. Warming up: recap and reflections on lessons learned from the preceding session.
(Duration: 30 minutes)
2. Expectations check on this session. The facilitator asks participants to write their
expectations on metacards. These will be pinned on the board as a daily reminder and as
baseline reference to be used during the evaluation.
3. Quick review of house rules.
4. Overview of the session: learning objectives, main topics and methodology.
5. Lecture-visual presentation (and open discussions at the end of each key topic):
a) Third Party Interventions and Conflict Transformation

b) Risk Management
c) Mediation and Negotiations
d) Conflict Referral
6. Practical Exercise 1: Risk mapping and risk analysis.
7. Practical Exercise 2: Mediated Negotiations (simulation). (Duration: 2-3 hours).
8. Practical Exercise 3: Applying the Conflict Referral System to a specific conflict.
(Duration: 2 hours)
RESOURCES
To facilitate this session, the following resources are needed:
Facilitator, documenter and process observer

Facilitators lecture guide and powerpoint presentation
Handouts
Supplies (manila paper, pentel pens, metacards, notebooks)
Equipment: beamer, laptop or desktop, printer
Maps used or developed in the preceding sessions
4.57
LEARNING POINTS
Module 4 Sub-Module 4.3
Constructive Conflict Handling and Mitigation

Key Questions The key questions in third party intervention are about the mode and
in Third Party timing of intervention. Development agents working directly with
Intervention communities may have a better chance of predicting contingencies and
proactively defining the timing and mode of intervention. In micro
conflicts, it might be easier to choose viable options such as
facilitation, mediation, mediated negotiations, arbitration or referral
when third party interveners are in close contact and have open
communication with conflict parties.
Conflict Conflict transformation is a comprehensive and multi-dimensional

Transformation approach that focuses on developing capacity and support for
structural change rather than facilitation of outcomes and conflict
settlements.
It also provides space for the mobilization of other development tools
consistent with the goals of poverty alleviation, democratization, good
governance and human rights
Peace building The Lederach Pyramid is one of the most prominent conflict
tracks transformation approaches currently in use. Lederach divides the
(Lederach conflict transformation actors into a pyramid of three layers, namely,
Model): top level, middle level and grassroots level. They represent
interdependent tracks of processes and actions where the actors
perform different but complementary roles. The approach integrates
simultaneous but pace-differentiated activities (Lederach, 1997:46).
Fig. 4.3.1 Lederach Pyramid
4.58
Galtungs triangles of conflict, violence and peace suggest that
conflict transformation occurs at the level of structure (of the
interaction of conflict parties), attitudes and behavior. The argument
also suggests that conventional approaches to poverty alleviation,
democratization and sustainable development could contribute to
transformation, at least at the level of structural transformation.
Building on Galtungs work, Curle (1971) proposes conscientization,

confrontation, negotiation and development as means of transforming
asymmetric conflicts from an unbalanced to a balanced relationship.
Rupesinghe (1995, 1998) proposes a multi-track intervention that

resembles the Lederach approach: building peace constituencies at
the grassroots and across parties at the level of civil society; creating
alliances, including alliances with business groups, media and the
military; and, Track 1 interventions including diplomatic interventions
and peacekeeping.
Kriesberg (2004, 2008) suggests that conflict transformation falls

within the much broader approach of managing and resolving social
conflicts generally known as conflict resolution, a view shared by
Lederach (1997), Rupesinghe (1995), Crocker et.al. (2005) and
Ramsbotham et al. (2005). He argues that conflict transformation
takes place at different points of the conflict (such as before escalation
or after a violent episode) and the pace of transformation differs
between parties of the conflict.
Hugh Miall (2004) suggests five (5) areas of transformation (or
transformers), namely:
Context transformation or a change in the context of the conflict
that may radically change the perceptions of the conflict parties
(on the conflict situation) and their motives.
Structural transformation or the change in the basic structure of
the conflict. This refers to the set of conflict actors, issues,
relationships and incompatible goals as well as to the larger
society, economy and the state where the conflict is embedded.
Actor transformation or the decision of the conflict actors to
change their goals and their general approach to the conflict. This
may include decisions to initiate peace processes, change in
leadership, change in the situation of the public constituencies
and supporters of the political leaders on both sides of the
conflict.
Issue transformation or the reformulation of actor positions on
key issues at the heart of the conflict. One example is the
decision of the MNLF (in 1996) to accept autonomy, which is a
radical departure from its original goal of secession from the
Republic of the Philippines.
Personal transformation or the changes in the hearts and minds
individual leaders or small groups of decision makers make at
crucial moments. External interveners directly influence some of
4.59
these changes (Curle 1987; Mitchell 2000). For Miall, personal
transformation requires competencies at the individual level.
The transformers are argued to correspond to conflict causes. The
difficulty of personal transformation could be a question of
competence. Structural transformation usually happens at the
state or society level and actor and issue transformation happens
at the level of conflict parties and elites.
For Vayrynen (1991), conflict transformation is a process of moving

from conflict-habituated systems to peace systems but also recognizing
that the transformation could go towards more violence and terrorist
movements. He argues that transformation can take the following
forms:
Actor transformation the internal transformation in major
conflict parties or the emergence and recognition of new actors;
Issue transformation a change in the political agenda of the
conflict and emphasis on shared concern for new issues;
Rule transformation the redefinition of the norms governing the
behavior of conflict parties when dealing with each other; and,
Structural transformation the profound changes relating to the
structure of the relationships between actors.
For Hamber (2003: 228) reconciliation is a process, not an outcome,

and conflict transformation is a continuous aspirational progression.
He argues that transformation occurs at various levels and is
dependent on different levels of structural change, stability, social
delivery and the relationships of citizens with the structural change.
Dieter Senghaas (2004) introduces the notion of constructive pacifism
as a guiding notion for conflict transformation. Based on examination
of the European experience, he proposes six (6) essential conditions
for the non-violent resolution of conflicts, namely:
Legitimate monopoly of force by the state and disarming of
citizens to force them to conduct conflicts over identity and
interests through peaceful negotiations;
Rule of law as the epitome of the modern constitutional state;
Affect control to avoid fragmentation of diverse societies;
Democratic participation as basis for legal development;
Social justice as counter-measure against prevailing social
inequality in capitalist/market-based societies; and,
Constructive conflict management.
What is Negotiation is an everyday life practice. . It is a voluntary process

Negotiation? and it is a common tool for transforming conflicts into a constructive
process.
4.60
Negotiation in In conflict situations, especially in highly escalated asymmetrical
Conflict conflicts, the usual call from third party interveners is for the conflict
Situation actors to negotiate. Under conditions of asymmetry, where one party
has a dominant position, resource or power, it is difficult to imagine
voluntary negotiations. Here, the crucial role of the third parties is to
facilitate or mediate restoration of certain level of equilibrium.
Types of Positional Negotiations occur when:

Negotiation The stakes are high
according to Parties are negotiating over resources which are limited such
Moore: as money or time;
Positional and There is little or no trust between parties;
Interest-Based
A party perceives that it benefits from making the other party
lose
The parties need for a continuing cooperative relationship is
of lesser priority than a substantive win at the table; and,
Parties have sufficient power to damage the other if they reach
an impasse
Interest-based Negotiation is more difficult but mutually beneficial
and has potential of long-lasting effect.
It seeks to reconcile needs, desires and concerns of conflict
parties
It encourages conflict parties to move away from their positions
and focus on interests as the objective criteria for reaching a
mutually beneficial or a win-win agreement
Three Types of Substantive interests or those that pertain to physical resources

Interests such as money, land or time;
Psychological interests or those that pertain to issues of trust,
fairness and respect; and,
Procedural interests or those that pertain to the manner by
which the dispute is resolved, who will be involved and how
decisions will be made.
Key Principles Interest-based negotiations are also guided by certain principles such
of Interest- as:
Based Attitude towards the conflict; that the conflict parties focus on
Negotiations the issue/s as the common concern rather than an us versus
them attitude. This also refers to a conciliatory attitude by
which both parties show concern to each other.
Focus of the negotiations, i.e. the conflict in context of the
relationship between parties
Flexibility and openness of conflict parties to various
possibilities
Genuineness or sincerity to negotiate as against negotiation as
a way of manipulation.
Willingness of parties to main communication even if no
agreement has been reached.
4.61
The outcome represents mutual benefit and is a product of the
independent wills of both parties.
Essentials for For negotiations to work, the following essentials must be in place:
Effective Psychological readiness of conflict parties to negotiate
Negotiation voluntarily. This requires conciliatory gestures by one party or
the other.
Procedural readiness. This means that the conflict parties are
prepared to organize themselves. This includes readiness of the
principals to designate and bestow trust on their negotiators.
Ability to communicate positions or interests. Ideally,
negotiators should be trained how to communicate and to
understand the distinction between explicit and implicit
messages from the language (including language) and tone of
the exchanges. A negotiator should know not only how to
explicitly communicate but to also listen and hear what the
other is saying.
Availability of information to support the positions or to justify
the interests.
A favorable environment for negotiations that could range from
seating arrangements to the overall physical arrangement of
the venue.
What is Mediation is a process that resolves substantive, psychological and

Mediation procedural interests of conflict parties rather than making judgments
on who is right or wrong or who should win or lose. Mediation creates
space for renewing relationships and correcting perceptions
Characteristics Mediation is characterized by the following attributes:

of Mediation It is a voluntary process and works best in interest-based
negotiations.
The decision-making authority is vested on the negotiating
parties. The mediator can suggest solutions but the conflict
parties determine the outcome of the negotiations. The
mediator does not act as a judge and arbiter and does not claim
ownership or personal success for the outcome.
The mediator should be acceptable to the conflict parties.
The mediator is an impartial third party but is not necessarily
neutral when the substantive issue is about injustice and human
rights violations.
The process is designed and should have a clear structure, set
of agreed rules, sequence of actions and expected outputs to
support the desired outcome.
Types of There are several types of mediation approaches such as:

mediation High-power mediation (HPM) -based on the personality of the
mediator and the resources available to him or her;
4.62
Neutral-low power mediation (NLPM)- associated with
transformative mediation or a mediation that is based on
relationships between the mediator and conflict parties;
Lip-service mediation or a mediation that lacks design and is
merely for show;
Problem solving approach also known as the Harvard Model of
mediation that is commonly used in mediating business related
conflicts
A mediation approach could also be a hybrid of high-power, low-
power and problem solving. The type of approach depends on the
context.
What the Mediators need to be adequately prepared:

mediator needs Substantively, to be familiar with the actors and the issues and
to know the causes of the conflict;
Procedurally, to be in control of the procedure inclusive of the
clarity of the process flow, rules and extra mileage such holding
pre-mediation caucuses and one-on-one meetings with the
conflict parties; and,
Psychologically, by securing legitimacy and acceptance of the conflict
parties.
Desirable The desirable traits that a mediator must have are: persuasion,
powers of the empathy, commitment, demonstrated reliability, creativity in
mediator finding solutions, moral authority and capacity to mobilize external
resources.
What he or she should avoid are:

To show off as an all-knowing personality and having all the
answers;
Giving advice to one or the other party;
Taking sides;
Unable to keep lid on critical and confidential issues;
To show discomfort when everyone is silent; and,
To claim the agreement as a personal success.
Spoilage The notion of spoilage is a binary between those who are for and
those who are against settlement or resolution of conflicts and this
is part of peace processes (Newman and Richmond, 2006: 4).
Spoiling may be described as a hindrance or obstruction to conflict

settlement by spoilers and spoiling tactics and activities through
a variety of means and motives (Newman and Richmond, 2006:1). It
happens not only during peace processes but also in the course of
implementation of peace agreements.
Risk Risk is about this uncertainty of the possible outcomes (HM Treasury,
Management 2004). Projects, programs, organizations for whatever purpose have to
4.63
grapple with uncertainties with threats that pose risks to success or
opportunities that may enhance the desired success.
Risk Tool Provides a simple way of estimating the level of risk the organization
or project is confronted with
Table 4.3.1 Table Guide for assigning numbers to level of
consequence and vulnerability
Level Impact Level Vulnerability (or
(Category) (or Degree of (Category) Level of Exposure)
Consequence)
1 Very Low: e.g. 1 Very Low:

minor occurrence of threat
inconvenience every 5 years or
that might lead more; very low
to half a day exposure to risk
work or a
financial
inconvenience
for staff
2 Low: small 2 Low: exposure to

disruptions to risk within 2 to 4
programs, years
restrictions to
movement or
social behavior
3 Medium: 3 Medium: exposure to

suspension of risk once a month or
program, minor once a year
injury to staff,
loss of reputation
4 High: pull out of 4 High: exposure to

staff, serious risk on a weekly
injury, significant basis
loss of assets or
damage to the
organizations
reputation
5 Very High: 5 Very High: exposure

death, rape, to risk on a daily
kidnapping, basis
evacuation
Computing Vulnerability x Threat divided by total number of identified threats.

Overall Risk
Factor
4.64
For easier mapping, the assigned numbers for each identified threat
could be overlaid on a 5x5 risk matrix, which is mapped in security
zones.
Fig. 4.3.2 Risk Analysis Matrix
Hierarchy of Risks are managed at various level depending on the level of

Risks uncertainty and their implications to decision making. In financial
markets, strategic decisions are usually made about diversification or
what is described as mixed risk management strategy (Yu, 2008).
Others use the simple your mother should know approach by not
following the mistakes made by others (Ingram, 2008).
In the development community, donor countries and big donor-funded

programs usually make prior strategic decisions when operating in
conflict-affected countries.
Fig. 4.3.3 Hierarchy of Risk
4.65
Integrated risk The basic requirement in this framework is the basic requirement is to
management communicate actual or perceived threats and the individuals initial
framework assessment of risk. This also means keenness in observation and
documentation of the basic information such as what, when, where,
how and why.
Conflict Conflict referral is a third-party intervention approach to conflict

Referral management that takes into account conflict risks based on estimation
of risk factors along a conflict escalation model. Horizontal conflicts
often have multiple causes and sources that are linked to intervening
factors such as laws, policies, rules and regulations, science-based
data and imbalances in access to such data. It is hypothesized that
third party intervention through the referral system will de-escalate
conflicts and provide an environment for transformation in the areas
of interests, relationships and structure of the conflict.
Conflict The system consists of six key elements, namely: (a) inventory of
Referral System observed conflicts; (b) conflict referral scope; (c) conflict contingency
(ConRefSys) model; (d) conflict monitoring system and tools; (e) process diagram
and procedures; and, (f) identification of key actors and their roles.
Objectives of The ConRefSys is specifically aimed at supporting a development

the System agents function in crisis prevention, conflict transformation and peace
building and the achievement of its commitment to constructively
handle and mitigate conflicts. Specifically, it aims:
To support the constructive handling of recorded conflicts,
specifically, the prevention of conflict escalation;
To support the mitigation of recorded conflicts, specifically,
the single or multiple level de-escalation of conflicts;
Through the referral processes, to promote multi-stakeholder
cooperation and empowerment of the poor and vulnerable
sectors of society that are often the aggrieved parties of a
conflict and to help enhance effectiveness of state
administrative functions in the environment and natural
resources sector;
Building of local capacities for peace especially in the areas of
facilitation and mediation of constructive dialogues.
Benefits of As a cross cutting product, the ConRefSys enhances conflict sensitivity

ConRefSys and the strategies of sector-based interventions such as:
Natural resources governance sector engaged in land use and
development planning especially in areas where conflicts pose
constraints to plan implementation;
Coastal resources management and fisheries sector, especially
in areas where conflicts pose risks to coastal and fisheries based
livelihoods, environmental integrity and ecological balance;
and,
Forestry sector engaged in forest land use planning and
management especially in areas where overlapping claims and
conflicts tend to exacerbate forest and watershed degradation.
4.66
Conflict The system is applicable to micro conflicts where the conflict causes
Referral Scope and sources are traceable to specific intervening factors and
institutions
Classifications This classification guides local authorities, development agencies, civil

of ConRefSys society organizations and peace advocates in determining the location
and timing of intervention.
Science and Information Referral. When the conflict source is
traceable to lack of data, varying access to data or varying
interpretations of data and where an acceptable third party
source or authority (such as a government agency, academic
institution, research institution, etc.) could provide commonly
accessible and authoritative information.
Legal, Administrative and Judicial Referral. When the conflict
cause is linked to certain laws, policies and rules and regulations
and where administrative structures of the state could serve as
the proper venue for the settlement of issues.
Security Referral When there are negative third parties
instrumentalizing the conflict or causing spoilage of relationships
between the direct parties to the conflict and where violence has
escalated between Level 2 and 3.
Features of Timing of the intervention is important for any third party intervention
ConRefSys model and approach. One of the key foundations of the referral system
is the contingency model for early warning. Early warning is concerned
with the monitoring and analysis of early signals of potential conflict,
escalation of violence and impending humanitarian disasters. The
ConRefSys is anchored on and is a calibrated and pre-emptive response
to micro-level early warning methodology that is also designed to assist
government in providing guided responses.
Local Capacity refers to building and strengthening of local capacities

for peace.
Process Model The referral process is multi-dimensional. The core

technical process is complemented and accompanied by parallel
political, social, legal and administrative and external support
processes.
The referral process is multi-dimensional. The core technical process

is complemented and accompanied by parallel political, social, legal
and administrative and external support processes.
(a) Technical Procedure

The technical procedure consists of four (4) modules and 21 sub-steps
and a regular monitoring process that cuts across the four modules.
Table 4.3.2 Referral Process

Sub- Main Steps
Steps (1) (2) (3) (4)
Preparation
4.67
Dialogues and Legal and/or Evaluation
Pre- Administrative and Lesson
Negotiations Referral Learning
1 Conflict Identification of Facilitated pre- Micro-level
identification facilitating negotiations Participatory
and clustering agent or between Conflict
by conflict mediator conflict parties Impact
typology and relevant Assessment
government (PCIA)
agencies
2 Participatory Identification Legal research Local
Conflict and selection of and sorting out partners
Analysis initial set of of legal and facilitate
(PCA) participants administrative cross-learning
from direct issues with other
parties to the conflict
conflict parties and
intervening
actors
3 Do No Harm Conduct of Determination Dissemination
Check dialogues for of process time of knowledge
relationship and costs and lessons
building and learned to
issue reduction wider
audiences
4 Development Identification of Conflict parties Secure
and adoption conflict causes re-affirm sustainability
of conflict with links to commitment to of
escalation existing laws, proceed and agreements
paradigm and policies and nominate their through
conflict rules and negotiators; provision of
monitoring regulations parties reaffirm technical
tool consent to support and
external structural
facilitation measures
5 Selection of Secure Risk analysis
cases for commitment of and
referral and conflict parties determination
clustering to undertake of risk
into: Science legal and management
and administrative options
Information processes
Referral;
Legal and
Administrative
Referral and
Security
Referral
6 Initial training Provision of GIZ partners
activities and training on maintain
building of communication, dialogue with
local relevant
4.68
capacities for bargaining and government
peace (e.g. negotiations agencies
creation of a
Trainors Pool
and/or pool of
facilitators
and
mediators)
7 Conflict Conflict Conflict Conflict
monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring
(b) Administrative Procedures

When the referral process reaches Step 3, the details and process
time of administrative procedures will be mainly determined by
what is prescribed in implementing rules and regulations and
guidelines pertinent to specific laws and policies influencing
certain types of conflict.
(c) Political Processes

In the ConRefSys, political processes are about decision-making,
legitimacy and authority to enforce agreements. It is not about a
purely hierarchical referral that submits decision making to the
topmost ladder of the conflict pyramid. The system is about
empowering the grassroots and invoking reforms in the institutional
framework conditions. Facilitators and mediators need to
recognize and respect political decision making in several
dimensions such as:
The political process of decision making within each group of
conflict actors, i.e. to commit to the referral process and to
abide by whatever agreements that may be derived from the
process;
The ladderized decision making authority of intervening actors.
The consensual political act of conflict parties and intervening
actors to go through the transformation process, fulfil
commitments or enforce agreements.
(d) Social Processes

In the ConRefSys, social processes pertain to horizontal
negotiations within each group of conflict parties and negotiations,
consensus building and relationship building between two or more
groups of conflict parties. The inner group processes are often
difficult due to variances of goals, interests and positions even
within a family, clan or a sector. In some cases, social processes
are constrained by external interests from political elites.
It is incumbent on facilitators and mediators to facilitate social
processes within each group of conflict parties before facilitating
a dialogue between two sets or competing conflict parties.
(e) Complementary Measures

The state has the obligation to protect the rights of citizens. This
obligation is often difficult to fulfill when the government itself
becomes a party to the conflict and is positioned against the
interests of its citizens. This happens when a program or a law is
4.69
perceived to be exclusionary owing to prioritization of resource
flows or differential effects of the application of the law.
Stakeholder Roles The ConRefSys is a multi-stakeholder, participatory

and consensual undertaking. The main actors are the direct and
indirect parties to the conflict (or the primary stakeholders), the
intervening parties (e.g. government, academic and research
institutions) that have the power and resources to influence the
dynamics of the conflict and facilitating and/or mediating agents who
have the power and resources to influence the behavior of conflict
parties.
Application of The system can be applied based on the following minimum conditions:
ConRefSys Willingness of conflict parties to communicate and
undertake interest and relationship based negotiations;
Readiness to accept third party intervention;
Readiness of intervening parties, especially local
governments and mandated national government agencies,
fairly administer laws and policies and apply prescribed
rules and regulations; and,
Availability of local capacity for facilitation and mediation.
It can be initiated by LGUs, civil society organizations or concerned

citizens. With adequate provision of information and education on the
value of the system, conflict parties may, on their own account, seek
support for referral or jointly and consensually refer their issues to
third parties. In ancestral domains, representatives of Indigenous
Peoples Organizations (IPOs) or their NGO and LGU allies could initiate
the process.
4.70
GUIDE TO
PRACTICAL
EXERCISE 1:
Sub-Module 4.3
Risk Mapping and Analysis
EXERCISE OVERVIEW
Risk mapping and analysis is about identifying relevant threats, measuring the possible
consequence or impact and measuring ones vulnerability. The information derived from the
exercise is then used as reference for determining courses of action.
TIME ALLOTED
1-2 hours
PROCESS FOR
EXERCISE 1
1. Divide the participants into sub-groups.

2. Each group selects a conflict case. Better if the selected cases are the same cases shared
during the conduct of Sub-Module 4.1. Each group makes sure that a resource person (or
someone knowledgeable about the conflict) is available.
3. The resource person narrates the conflict. Group members ask questions and take notes of
important data using the variables.
4. Collected data during the narration is organized into a matrix or a diagram similar to figure
below.
5. Review the profile and identify data gaps for further research.
PROCESS FOR
EXERCISE 2
4.71
1. Divide the participants into sub-groups. Each group should have a common reference such
as common knowledge of a program or project or being part of an agency or local
government unit around which the relevant threats are identified.
2. Each group selects one program, project or agency or local government unit as point of
reference.
3. Follow the steps outlined in Table 4.3.3 and also refer to Figure 4.3.4.
a) Identify Table 4.3.3 Sample Risk Factor Analysis, Coastal Resources

relevant Management Program of LGUs in Negros Occidental
threats
(internal and
external)
that pose LEVE
risks to the L OF SOURCE OF
INTENSIT VULN TOTA CURRENT INFORMATION
project or THREAT
Y OF ERABI L TREND RELATED
program THREAT LITY COMMENTS
(1-5) (1-5)
1.
b) Estimate Withdrawal
level of of Member 3 3 9 KAHIL
intensity and LGUs from
level of KAHIL
vulnerability 2. Loss of
. Calculate Financial &
the Risk Technical
Factor. Support of
3 2 6 KAHIL/PEMO
Funding
Agencies
3. Non-
Realization
3 2 6 KAHIL/SB/SP
of Common
Fishery Law
4. Neglect of
Fisherfolk
(Rights & 3 2 6 FARMC/MAO/CAO
Opportunitie
s)
5.
Unregulated DENR/BFAR/MAO/
Utilization of 3 3 9 CAO/
Natural PEMO/CENRO
Resources
6. Water
KAHIL/MPDC/CPD
Boundaries 4 3 12
C
Undefined
4.72
7. Physical
Injuries
PNP/BANTAY
Between 3 2 6
DAGAT/BRGY
Enforcers &
illegal fishers
54
RISK
FAC 7.7
TOR
Source: Facilitators Report on the Conflict Sensitization Workshop,
Bacolod City, 26-29 April 2011
c.) Visualize the

Risk Factor by
placing the Fig. 4.3.4 Sample Risk Analysis (Matrix)
identified threats
on a color-coded
matrix.
d.) Identify Determining Courses of Action

courses of action
such as possible Threat Risk Factor Steps towards Who is
re-design of the reducing risks responsible?
project or
program,
formulation of
security
guidelines, rules
and procedures
and others.
4.73
GUIDE TO
PRACTICAL
EXERCISE 2:
Sub-Module 4.3
Mediated Negotiations (Simulation)
EXERCISE OVERVIEW
This exercise aims to test participants knowledge and skills in communication, negotiation and
mediation through a simulation of a documented case or cases.
TIME ALLOTED
1-2 hours
PROCESS FOR
EXERCISE 2
This exercise is designed for the TOT but, if time and resources permit, could also be undertaken
during the conflict sensitization workshop.
1. The participants are divided into 2 groups for comparability of results.
2. Earlier, facilitator shall have prepared scenarios and scripts adapted from actual conflicts
or case studies of actual mediation-negotiation.
3. In each group, the facilitator shall pre-select the Mediator and his/her assistant who will
act as documenter. Depending on the number of key actors in the conflict scenario, each
group will be further subdivided into two sets of opposing parties as negotiators. The
rest of the participants will be assigned as observers.
4. The scripts are contained in sealed envelopes, each with a foreword describing the pre-
negotiation scenario that contains information common to all participants such as the
core conflict issue that needs to be resolved, the conflict parties, the history of the
conflict and the perceived impacts and consequences that serve as the rationale for the
mediated negotiations. The negotiators will randomly pick the sealed envelopes.
5. The individual scripts contain the names of the actors, the stakeholders they represent,
their goals and interests and the initial positions over the conflict issue at hand. Upon
receipt of the sealed envelopes, they will be given 15 minutes to examine the conflict
scenario and the scripts.
4.74
6. The facilitator guides the participants to go through the process outlined below:
Stage 1: The Mediator gives an opening statement that contains the

following: objectives, process flow, rules. He/she then asks the
negotiators to introduce themselves, show their credentials and
make their opening statements and initial proposals.
Stage 2: Q&A on the proposals, information seeking and initial debates on

the opening proposals. After the debate, the facilitator proposes
a break during which the negotiators will be allowed to approach
one another and seek more information. If the situation allows, the
emerging alliances will be formed into working groups to further
clarify the issues and proposals.
Stage 3: Trade-offs and issue reduction. Building on the results of Stage 2,

the negotiators will try to clarify and reduce the issues until a
potential agreement takes shape. If the situation is ripe, the
Mediator suggests the creation of a working group to draft a
probable agreement.
Stage 4: End Game. The Mediator creates an environment by which the draft
agreement will be presented. The negotiators will be encouraged
to close gaps. Closing the gap means ensuring that the draft
agreement is voluntary, mutually beneficial and feasible. In a real-
life negotiations scenario, the negotiators will consult their
principals and constituents on the emerging agreement. In this
exercise, the Mediator will allow time for sidebar meetings during
which the negotiators will spontaneously iron out the gaps
through beneficial trade-offs. In certain cases, the Mediator will
use his/her mediators shot or insert some ideas for closing the
gap which could be a phrase, a sentence or even a comma. Once
the gap is closed, the negotiators proceed with the final packaging
of the agreement. The Mediator will ask the documenter to encode
and print the agreement.
Closure. In a caucus, the Mediator and negotiators will agree on who reads
the final agreement for the public to know. For better effect, a
simulated press conference could be organized for the purpose.
Evaluation. Two evaluation exercises shall be conducted: (1) Evaluation of the

Mediator. The negotiators and observers shall evaluate the
Mediator (on a scale of 1-5) using the criteria of psychological
preparedness, procedure and content of the agreement; (2)
Evaluation of the Negotiators. The Mediator, documenter and
observers will evaluate the negotiators (on a scale of 1-5) using
the criteria of quality of bargaining, psychological preparedness,
and observance of rules.
4.75
GUIDE TO
PRACTICAL
EXERCISE 3:
Sub-Module 4.3
Formulating a Local Conflict Referral Procedure
EXERCISE OVERVIEW
GIZ-ENRD has disseminated a knowledge product - Conflict Referral System (ConRefSys) - that
is designed to support local capacities for peace and constructive handling of conflicts. This
exercise is aimed at honing the knowledge and skills of the participants by focusing on a specific
micro conflict as reference for developing a conflict referral procedure.
TIME ALLOTED
1-2 hours
PROCESS FOR
EXERCISE 3
1. Identify or choose a specific local conflict. Make use of the data generated from Sub-Modules
4.1 and 4.2.
2. Lay the conflict map and overlay the conflict sources and causes.
3. Trace the links of the conflict sources and causes to laws, policies, rules and regulations,
guidelines and mandated agencies. In other cases, trace the links of the causes to sources
of data such as research institutions, national government agencies and other institutions.
Also, if the conflict is ripe for negotiations and mediation, it may be referred to a mediator.
4. Identify courses of action and create a step-by-step process diagram.
5. Identify the conflict referral agent (or facilitating agent) and other stakeholders who will be
involved. Define their roles and functions.
6. Estimate process time and costs.
Integration to Planning
Ways of Integration in First, by establishing the location of CLUP, FLUP, CDP and ADSDPP
Planning in the realm of structural measures that could contribute to conflict
transformation;
4.76
Second, by developing the capacity of implementing agents to
choose the best options and timing of intervention depending on the
status of conflicts at the time of plan formulation; and,
Third, through the conflict transformation and risk management

lenses and tools, for planning agents to actually identify interfaces
and inter-phases through which conflict transformation tools could
be applied.
Points to Remember A plan embeds resource use and allocation and the accompanying
about Planning function of power allocation and decision-making. While it is
designed as a common guide for achieving aspirations,
implementation of plans comes face to face with ethnic and social
diversity that may blur the desire for collective thinking and
commonality of interests. The plan could also serve as an arena for
competition over resources, assertion of identity and rights and a
forum for political demands. At any moment, the implementation
of a plan could be mired in conflict either as a source of identity
and economic grievance or a weapon for political dominance. Even
at the LGU level, vested political interests in budget and
expenditure management could produce risks to implementation.
Conflicts form part of the planning and implementation

environment, they should be constructively managed and the ways
of management should be integrated in the plans.
Conflict transformation processes may occur at any moment of the

conflict and at various levels. Plans should be able to flexibly
accommodate the various options.
At the least, a plan should be able to guide human behavior towards

non-violent actions and positive transformation of conflict.
Optimally, a plan could explicitly support local capacities for peace
through the development of capacity for risk management, conflict
analysis, mediation, arbitration and other specialized knowledge
and skills.
Integration to SIMPLE
The ConRefSys can be integrated to the application of SIMPLE in LGU territories with
ancestral domains and IP communities.
ConRefSys Interface with The link of conflict sources to intervening factors such as laws,
Indigenous Structures policies, rules and regulations and structures should be interfaced
and Processes. with IP customary laws, rules and regulations and governance
structures. A micro-referral process within ancestral domains,
based on customary law, indigenous knowledge systems and
practices (IKSP) and indigenous structures, should be respected.
This means that the conflict referral system must adapt to the
internal structures and processes of IP communities. In IP
4.77
communities with strong adherence to customary law and
traditions, there are counterpart structures for the environment,
agriculture and fisheries, forestry, defense and others.
ConRefSys in the SIMPLE- Preparatory Steps: In Phase 1.4 of SIMPLE and Phase I of ADSDPP,
ADSDPP Inter-Phase. the ConRefSys could form part of specialized training topics.
Selected members of the IP community could be invited as
participants (and as resource persons) for the training. Jointly, the
participants could already map out conflict cases that could be
referred to state administrative structures and IP governance
structures.
In Phase 2 of SIMPLE (linking of provincial and municipal/city

development strategies) the review of the provincial physical
framework and development plan should include a review of the
ancestral domain physical and development framework.
In Phase 3, Parts I and II of SIMPLE and Phase 2 of the ADSDPP,

the collection and consolidation of data should include identified
conflicts. Within this conflict map, cases for immediate referral
could already be identified and acted upon in the course of
planning.
In Phase 4 of SIMPLE (linking plans and budgets; comprehensive

development and investment programming) and Phase 3 of the
ADSDPP (Planning), budgeting and investment programming are two
essential gaps in the ADSDPP. The LGU process could be inter-
phased with the ancestral domain process where the Indigenous
Political Structure (IPS) should be able to consult with the LGU on
possibilities of budget support for certain aspects of the ADSDPP as
well as modus vivendi on investment programs that affect ancestral
domains. In this regard, the IPS could share the ADSDPP with the
Municipal or City Development Council (MDC or CDC) and the local
legislative council. Conversely, the LGU could share information on
the municipal or city budgets and investment programs to the IP
community. Where conflicts occur between LGU and IP budget and
investment priorities, the matter could be referred to higher-level
authorities for resolution.
In Phase 5 of SIMPLE (implementation, enforcement and

monitoring) and Phase 4 of the ADSDPP (plan promotion and
monitoring), the monitoring scope should include conflict
monitoring especially conflicts that tend to escalate and pose risks
to implementation and enforcement. The LGU and IPS could agree
on an inter-operable monitoring tool that facilitates recording of
mutually useful data.
4.78
REFERENCES AND
SUGGESTED READINGS
Aggestam, K. 2006. Internal and external dynamics of spoiling: A negotiation approach, in

Newman, E. and Richmond, O. eds., 2006. Challenges to Peacebuilding: Managing Spoilers
During Conflict Resolution. Tokyo: United Nations University Press, pp. 23-39.
Bloomfield, D. and Ben Reilly 1998. The Changing Nature of Conflict and Conflict
Management, in P. Harris and B. Reilly (eds.), 1998. Democracy and Deep-rooted
conflict. Stockholm: Institute for Democracy
Chatzivaziloglou, I. and C. Fytros. (2008). It is Time to Decide What Kind of Crises We Want to
Have in the Future, in Society of Actuaries. 2008. Risk Management: The Current
Financial Crisis, Lessons Learned and Future Implications.
www.soa.org/library/essays/rm-essay-2008.pdf, pp. 18-19.
Crocker, Chester A., Fen Osler Hampson and Pamela Aall (eds.) 2005. Grasping the Nettle:
Analyzing Cases of Intractable Conflicts. Washington, DC: United States Institute of
Peace Press.
Curle, A. 1971. Making Peace , London: Tavistock.
Curle, A. 1987. In the middle: non-official mediation in violent situations , New York: Berg.
Curle, A. 1996. Another Way: Positive Responses to Violence . Oxford: John Carpenter.
Dale Spencer and William Spencer, Third-Party Mediation and Conflict Transformation:
Experiences in Ethopia, Sudan and Liberia in Conflict Transformation, ed. K.
Rupesinghe, New York: St Martins Press, 1995, pp. 16364.
Fisher, Roger and Ury, William 1981. Getting to Yes. Negotiating agreement without giving
in.Boston MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Guelke, A. 2003. Negotiations and Peace Processes, in J. Darby and R. MacGinty, eds.,
Contemporary Peacemaking: Conflict, Violence and Peace Processes. London: Palgrave
Macmillan, pp. 53-64
Guelke, A. 2003. Negotiations and Peace Processes, in J. Darby and R. MacGinty, eds.,
Macmillan, pp. 53-64
Hamber, B. 2003. Transformation and Reconciliation, in in J. Darby and R. MacGinty, eds.,

Macmillan, pp. 224-234.
HM Treasury. 2004. The Orange Book: Management of Risk Principles and Concepts.
www.who.int/management/general/risk/managementofrisk.pdf
4.79
Ingram, David. 2008. Your Mother Should Know, in Society of Actuaries. 2008. Risk
Management: The Current Financial Crisis, Lessons Learned and Future Implications.
www.soa.org/library/essays/rm-essay-2008.pdf, pp. 22-23.
Kriesberg, L. 2004. The State of the Art in Conflict Transformation. Berghof Research Centre
for Conflict Management. http://www.berghof-
handbook.net/documents/publications/miall_handbook.pdf
Kriesberg, Louis 2007a. Constructive Conflicts: From Escalation to Resolution. 3rd edition.
Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Kriesberg, Louis 2008. Conflict Transformation, in: Lester Kurtz (ed.). Encyclopedia of
Violence, Peace, & Conflict, Volume 1. Oxford: Elsevier, 401-412.
Lederach, J.P. 2003. Cultivating Peace: A Practitioners View of Deadly Conflict and
Negotiation, in J. Darby and R. MacGinty, eds., Contemporary Peacemaking: Conflict,
Violence and Peace Processes. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 30-37
Lederach, John Paul 1997. Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies.
Lederach, P. 2003. The Little Book of Conflict Transformation. Intercourse, PA: Good Books
Mac Ginty, R. 2006. Northern Ireland: A peace process thwarted by accidental spoilin, in
McCartney, Clemm. (2006). Dilemmas of third-party involvement in peace processes: Reflections

for practice and policy from Colombia and the Philippines. London: Conciliation Resources
Miall, H. 2004. Conflict Transformation: A Multi-Dimensional Task (edited version). Berghof

Research Centre for Conflict Management. http://www.berghof-
handbook.net/documents/publications/miall_handbook.pdf
Mitchell, C. 2003. Mediation and the Ending of Violent Conflicts, in in J. Darby and R.
MacGinty, eds., Contemporary Peacemaking: Conflict, Violence and Peace Processes.
London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 77-85
4.80
Newman, E. and Richmond, O. 2006. Obstacles to peace processes: Understanding spoiling, in
Newman, E. and Richmond, O. eds., 2006. Challenges to Peacebuilding: Managing Spoilers During
Conflict Resolution. Tokyo: United Nations University Press
Osgood, Charles E. 1962. An Alternative to War or Surrender. Urbana: University of Illinois

Press.
Paris, Roland 2004. At Wars End: Building Peace After Civil Conflict. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Quitoriano, E. 2013. The Conflict Referral System. Makati: GIZ
Rupesinghe, K. (ed.) 1995. Conflict Transformation , London: Macmillan.
Rupesinghe, K. 1998. Civil Wars, Civil Peace , London: Pluto
Rupesinghe, Kumar (ed.) 1995. Conflict Transformation. New York: St. Martins.
Vayrynen, R. 1991. To Settle or to Transform? Perspectives on the Resolution of the National

and International Conflicts in New Directions in Conflict Theory, ed., 1991. R.
Vayrynen, London: Sage, pp. 46.
Senghaas, D. 2004. The Civilization of Conflict: Constructive Pacifism as a Guiding Notion for
Conflict Transformation. Berghof Research Centre for Constructive Conflict
Management. http://www.berghof-handbook.net
Stewart, S. .2004. The Role of International NGOs in the Transformation of the Georgian-
Abkhazian Conflict. The Global Review of Ethnopolitics, Vol. 3, No. 3-4, March/June
2004, pp. 3-22. www.ethnopolitics.org
UNDESA/UNDP and the Centre for Conflict Resolution. Skills Development for Conflict
Transformation: A Training Manual on Understanding Conflict, Negotiation and
Mediation.
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan001363.pdf
Vayrynen, R., To Settle or to Transform? Perspectives on the Resolution of the National and
International Conflicts in New Directions in Conflict Theory, ed. Vayrynen, R., London:
Sage, 1991, pp. 46.
Voyame, M. 2011. Linking Security Risk Management and Conflict Sensitivity: Afghanistan and
beyond. http://www2.gtz.de/dokumente/bib-2011/giz2011-0346en-security-
afghanistan.pdf
Yu, W. 2008. Mixed Risk Management Strategies Diversification That You Can Count On, in
Society of Actuaries. 2008. Risk Management: The Current Financial Crisis, Lessons
Learned and Future Implications. www.soa.org/library/essays/rm-essay-2008.pdf, pp.
24-25.
Zartman, I William et al. 1994. International Multilateral Negotiation: approaches to the

management of complexity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4.81
Zartman, I. W. 1995. Dynamics and constraints in negotiations in internal conflicts, in I. William
Zartman, ed., 1995. Elusive Peace: Negotiating and End to Civil War. Washington D.C.:
Brookings Institution.
Zartman, W. I. 2000. Ripeness: the Hurting Stalemate and Beyond, in P. Stern & D. Druckman
(eds.), International Conflict Resolution after the Cold War. Washington, D.C. National
Academy Press.
Zartman, W.I. 2003.The Timing of Peace Initiatives: Hurting Stalemates and Ripe Moments, in
in J. Darby and R. MacGinty, eds., Contemporary Peacemaking: Conflict, Violence and
Peace Processes. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 19-29
4.82
SUB-MODULE
GUIDE
Sub-Module 4.4
Conflict Management: Practicum
SUB-MODULE
OVERVIEW
This module is designed mainly for the Training of Trainers (TOT). It aims to build local capacity
for constructive management of conflict and application of specific approaches and tools
according to the local context. It is assumed that the participants have completed all the
preceding modules. It is further assumed that they agree to commit full time and attention during
the practicum period.
In the experience of GIZ-ENRD, the practicum could be conducted as a cooperation project

between the program and a local university. The program supported ten (10) scholars for a
graduate course on land management that included a practicum on conflict management.
This sub-module guides the participants in walking through and further deepening of the
understanding of the topics presented in Sub-Modules 4.1 to 4.3, at each step undertaking
practical exercises. It is similar to on-the-job training where the participants test or apply what
they have learned. For each sub-module, they will develop their own modules and methodologies
and immediately apply them on pre-selected participants and/or communities.
LEARNING
OBJECTIVES
At the end of the practicum, the participants shall have gained adequate knowledge and skills
and the confidence:
To becoming trainers: at the minimum, to facilitate conflict sensitization workshops; and,
At the optimum, to transfer knowledge and skills to other potential trainers.
Some are expected to develop particular skills and become practitioners in mediation and
conflict referral or other fields of work such as becoming specialists in conflict sensitive
planning, implementation and M&E, Do No Harm, conflict transformation, risk
management and conflict research.
TIME ALLOTED
4.83
7-10 days
SUB-MODULE
CONTENT
1. Review of Research Methods

2. Practicum 1: Field Research on Participatory Conflict Profiling and Mapping
3. Practicum 2: Development of Conflict Escalation Model
4. Practicum 3: Development of Conflict Referral Model
5. Practicum 4: Development of Customized Conflict Sensitization Model
6. Evaluation
PRACTICUM GUIDE
The conduct of this module is a combination of module review meetings and refresher
discussions, practical exercises and fieldwork. The whole sessions takes about 1-2 weeks to
complete including the field research. It is suggested that the training follows the following
sequence:
1. Warming up session: sharing of participant experiences on application of lessons learned

from the preceding sub-modules and how they feel about being selected as members of
the TOT. (Duration: 30 minutes)
2. Expectations check on the Practicum. The list and ranking of expectations shall serve
as baseline reference for the end-of-practicum evaluation. (Duration: 30 minutes)
3. Orientation on the sub-module (overview, learning objectives, methodology or
practicum guide) (Duration: 20 minutes)
4. Review of research methods. This is an optional refresher topic depending on the state
of acquired knowledge of the participants. It would be best to ask the participants if this
topic would be relevant or useful. The topic deals with basic research methods such as
how to conduct interviews and focus group discussions, how to develop data collection
instruments, how to develop the research questions and methodological approaches, how
to organize the data, how to analyze the data and how to present the research findings.
(Duration: 1 hour)
5. Agreement house rules and field work rules, conflict sensitivity and security
protocols. It would be best if the participants themselves develop the rules, especially
applying the conflict sensitivity and Do No Harm checklists. (Duration: 10 minutes)
6. Practicum 1: Field research and participatory exercises on conflict profiling and
mapping in selected communities. The facilitator divides the group into several sub-
groups or teams. The number of sub-groups depends on the total size of participants. At
least there should be 3 members (and a maximum of 5) in each group or team. To prevent
haphazard research, the team should be able to select the most appropriate site based
on initial information gathered, accessibility and availability of local partners. On field,
each team echoes the facilitation of Sub-Modules 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 in a concise and
localized format. On field, the following sequence could be followed: (Duration: 3-5
days, with community immersion)
4.84
a) With prior coordination and preparation, the TOT team and local partners select 7-15
community participants for the participatory conflict analysis. The selected
participants should consist of a mix of men and women, young and old and across
income classes and sectors.
b) The TOT team conducts a half-day a customized session on Understanding Conflict

(Sub-Module 4.1).
c) Using the results of Sub-Module 4.1 (i.e. identified conflicts), the TOT team and
selected participants, divided in sub-groups, go out on field to conduct interviews and
FGDs for the purpose of gathering more information on the conflicts identified during
the preceding session. The team is expected to pre-formulate the interview and FGD
guide. (Expected duration is about half a day to one day).
d) The TOT team and community participants reconvene for the next exercise. The team
divides the participants into sub-groups. Using the results of the short field research,
each sub-group of community participants selects one conflict to be analyzed. The
product of the analysis should include the whole profile of the conflict (issues, actors,
causes, sources, effects, history) and the conflict map.
e) Each sub-group shares the results to the plenary for mutual critiquing.
f) The facilitator ends the fieldwork with a short evaluation, lesson learning and a closing
exercise.
7. Practicum 2: Develop escalation model of profiled conflicts. At this time, the TOT
participants should be back from the field and in possession of the conflict analysis,
specifically the conflict profile and the conflict map, developed by the community
participants. The exercise could be done in the following sequence (Duration: 2-3 hours):
a) The facilitator divides the participants into sub-groups or teams. One option is to
maintain the previous sub-organization for the fieldwork. The other option is to re-
mix the group.
b) Each team selects one particular conflict from among the list of conflicts profiled and
analyzed during the fieldwork.
c) Using the GIZ-ENRD Conflict Escalation Model, each team identifies the current
variables to determine the current status of the conflict (level of escalation or de-
escalation).
d) Using its own analysis, each team creates an escalation model and identifies the
criteria or variables as bases for predicting the possible escalation or de-escalation.
e) Each team presents the results to the plenary. The other teams make their critique
on the presentation, specifically on the key arguments presented.
f) At the end, the facilitator conducts a quick lesson-learning exercise.
8. Practicum 3: Develop referral model of selected conflict cases. At this time, the TOT
participants shall have completed Practicum 1 and Practicum 2 and shall have in their
possession selected conflict cases, profiles, conflict maps and escalation models. Using
these results, the TOT participants undertake an exercise on developing a local conflict
referral system. This exercise can be done in the following sequence (Duration: 2-3
hours):
a) Using the GIZ-ENRD ConRefSys as reference, the facilitator conducts a short

orientation (or review of the referral system).
4.85
b) After leveling off on the concept, essential elements and procedures, the facilitator
divides the TOT participants into sub-groups.
c) Each sub-group undertakes the following tasks:
Select one conflict case.

Bring in the conflict profile, conflict map and escalation model.
Review the main conflict issue/s and the conflict causes and sources.
Identify intervening factors (e.g. lack of maps, lack of information, conflicting
land tenure instrument, etc.) and third parties that could influence the
clarification of the conflict source. (e.g. if the source is availability of data on
forest land tenure, the third party is the DENR).
Place the conflict map on the table. Place the conflict causes, sources and
relevant third parties on metacards and pin them on the outer ring of the conflict
map. Then connect the issue to the conflict cause, conflict source and relevant
third party/parties.
On metacards, write the laws, policies, rules and regulations and other
information relevant to the conflict cause and source and pin them on the map
underneath the line that connects the conflict source to the relevant third party.
Construct a process diagram indicating the sequence of steps for the referral
system appropriate to the conflict being analyzed. At each step, identify the legal,
administrative, social and political processes involved. Estimate the cost of
undertaking the procedures.
Identify stakeholders and their roles.
Present the process diagram and the whole referral system to the plenary for
critiquing.
d) At the end, the facilitator conducts a quick assessment and lesson learning exercise.
9. Practicum 4: Development of a conflict sensitization module customized for

particular sectors of a local community. This is the final practicum. Harnessing the
results of Practicum 1, 2 and 3, the participants will be asked to develop training modules
customized according to a particular audience and conflict context. This session can be
conducted in the following sequence (Duration: 1.5 days):
a) Divide the TOT participants into sub-groups. Each group self-organizes and assigns a
team leader, lead writer, layout designer and presenter.
b) The facilitator prepares sealed envelopes, each containing a specific NRM sector (e.g.
fisheries, forestry, agricultural zones, protected areas, urban residential zones, etc).
He/she then asks each sub-group to pick an envelope.
c) Based on the selected NRM sector, each group prepares a customized training module.
The customization is based on the sector context, observed conflicts, actors and
relevant laws, policies, rules and regulations, programs and projects and other
relevant information. The examples and anecdotes used in this module should be
relevant to the sector. The module should be concise and something that could be
completed in a one-day workshop, focusing on key concepts, approaches and tools
applicable to the sector.
d) Each sub-group presents the module to the plenary for quick critiquing and collective
editing.
e) Each group tests the edited module to specific audiences. There are two viable
options: either to invite 5-7 people for a one-day workshop in the training venue or,
each sub-group goes on field and conducts the sensitization workshop in the
community.
f) At the end, the facilitator conducts an assessment and lesson learning exercise.
4.86
10. At the end of the practicum, the facilitator conducts and evaluation of the whole sub-
module. The best approach is an assisted self-evaluation where the TOT participants
themselves assess the results with the expectations check as baseline reference.
APPLICATION IN ANCESTRAL
DOMAINS AND IP
COMMUNITIES
When the Practicum involves or includes members of the IP communities, it is important to

look into the following considerations:
To consult coordinate with the NCIP and consult with the indigenous political structure
(IPS) or the Indigenous Peoples Organization (IPO).
To ensure that the IP participant gets the mandate from his community through the IPS
or IPO.
To ensure that the language of the practicum and behavior of the other participants are
culture-sensitive bearing in mind that cultural traits and traditions vary between tribes
and level of social development. This includes respect for religious/spiritual preference
and ritual.
RESOURCES NEEDED
This sub-module requires adequate preparations in terms of logistics, budgets and networking
with local partners and communities. The following resources are needed:
Budget for food, accommodation, vehicles, fuel and supplies and other equipment.
Facilitator, documenter and process observer.
Equipment: vehicles, pin boards, beamers, desk top or laptops, cameras, audio recorders
and flip charts
Supplies: metacards, usb flash discs, pentel pens, manila paper and bond paper
Social networks: LGUs, communities, private sector allies, civic organizations, academic
institutions
The participants should be encouraged to anticipate potential risks owing to extreme weather
events and disasters. The protection measures should be adaptive to these risks.
4.87

Module 4 Conflict Management GG 1 With Inputs From FCC GG 20140108

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Module 4 Conflict Management GG 1 With Inputs From FCC GG 20140108

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Published by

Environment and Rural Development Program

Dr. Andreas Lange

Printed and distributed by

Place and date of publication

Sub-Module 4.1 Understanding Conflict 4.9

4.1.1 Understanding Conflict 4.11

Sub-Module 4.2 Conflict Analysis 4.32

4.2.2 Conflict Mapping 4.41

4.2.3 Contingency Modeling 4.45

4.2.4 Relevance of Conflict Analysis to Ancestral 4.51

4.2.5 Integration to SIMPLE 4.53

References and Suggested Readings

Sub-Module 4.4 Conflict Management: Practicum 4.83

Guide to Practical Exercises

The management and constructive handling of conflicts is part of an empowering discourse

1. Recognize conflict as a natural phenomenon and is an integral part of natural

10-15 days, when used for TOT

1. Sub-module 4.1: Understanding Conflict. This serves as an introduction to the

3. Sub-module 4.3: Conflict Handling and Mitigation. Progressing from Sub-module

This sub-module also introduces the participants to a particular approach to conflict

4. Sub-module 4.4: Practicum (for TOT). This sub-module is designed as a refresher

Training facilitator, documenter and assistant facilitators who may double up as

The core objectives of this session are:

1. Conflict concepts and theories

1. Gained knowledge and understanding on the concepts, theories, and categories of

The core objectives of this session are:

1. Introductory Exercises (Duration: 1 hour)

2. Introduction to the session (Duration: 30 minutes)

3. Lecture-visual presentation-open discussions

a. Leveling off on definition of terms (Duration: 20 minutes)

4. Practical Exercise 1: Sub-group and individual sharing of experiences on

5. Practical Exercise 2: Do No Harm Assessment. (Duration: 1 hour)

6. Evaluation and closing. (Duration: 30 minutes).

Conflict the pursuit of incompatible goals by

Why Study Conflict is normal in human relationships and

The road less traveled is the challenge of understanding and

There is no unified theory of conflict. Unlike focused hard

Johan Galtungs (1969, 1996) Conflict Triangle is an

Galtung (1990) uses the same triangle to illustrate violence

Drawing from datasets compiled since the 1970s, Edward Azar

Communal content or the presence of identity groups

Greed and grievance are two contending, but often

The greed thesis is a provocative proposition that emerged

The grievance thesis is a long-standing proposition. It is about

Beyond greed and grievance is an attempt to overcome the

In 1999, Mary Andersons work Do No Harm: How Aid can

Conflict sensitivity is about understanding the relationship

Conflict sensitivity is defined by the following criteria: (a)

The application of conflict sensitivity and Do No Harm

1. Conflict analysis. This includes profiling and specific

3. Peacebuilding needs analysis. As a general starting

4. Consider areas for redesigning the

Conflict sensitivity and Do No Harm tools require further

The Do No Harm criteria for plans, programs and projects of

Learning from the conflict theories and concepts discussed

It is too expensive to back up local planning with academic

At the minimum, local plans such as the comprehensive land

In the preparatory steps - the inclusion of this module

1. Sharing of Ideas and Experience on Conflict. It takes time to internalize newly

At the end of the session, the participants should be able to:

1. To apply conflict concepts and theories as lenses in understanding their own

Table 4.1.1. Sample DNH Assessment of Negative Impacts