How to Influence Environmental Policy at a Community Level Through Conflict Resolution

Environmental policy conflicts often achieve mass public awareness when the issue reaches such a scale or complexity it becomes hard to ignore. In 2016, protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline at Standing Rock Sioux Reservation drew attention after the National Guard was brought in. And the millions of gallons spilled in the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster were impossible to ignore.

But there are less publicized environmental policy conflicts in communities throughout the country, where citizens and policymakers gather to try and resolve disputes before they become disasters.

Conflicts will differ in scale and intricacy. However, Alana Knaster, adjunct professor in Pepperdine’s online Master of Legal Studies program, explains that at their core, all conflicts come back to personal perspective.

“Whether a dispute is over a client who rebuilds thousands of acres versus a dispute over minor changes in a community or fixing a park, the conflicts are the same because people look at it from the lens of what is important to them,” Knaster said.

According to Knaster, who is a mediator specializing in public policy conflict resolution, that lens almost always focuses on some combination of three areas: economics, environment, and feelings. Those three areas can be inextricably linked, too. People’s hopes and fears are often tied to the future of the environment and the economy.

When those hopes and fears do not align across stakeholders, conflict can arise in the decision-making process. How can community members and policymakers collaborate for shared beneficial outcomes?

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is when the parties involved in a conflict reach an agreement without litigation and with the help of a neutral party. This includes mediation, minitrials, and arbitration.

Whatever the specific method, ADR always includes some form of consensus-building between parties representing different interests, such as government agencies, residents of a particular neighborhood and lawmakers.

Environmental conflict resolution (ECR) is when ADR is specifically applied to conflicts of an environmental nature. In this process, different groups reach an agreement over an environmental dispute with the help of a neutral party.

ECR became widespread in the 1980s and institutionalized by Congress in 1990, according to the American Institute of Biological Science journal, BioScience. Less than a decade later, ADR was formalized across all federal agencies.

Today, ECR is an increasingly popular choice among stakeholders. For example, the John S. McCain III National Center for Environmental Conflict Resolution (NCECR), which is a federal program that employs hundreds of mediators, has handled about 100 federal cases in the past two decades.

According to the NCECR, environmental conflict resolution is appropriate in the these situations:

What Kinds of Environmental Issues Need Conflict Mediation?

Most policy decisions have some sort of environmental impact. For example, the construction of a new stadium would remove green space, increase air pollution from traffic, and create tons of solid waste. Even smaller-scale decisions reverberate throughout an environment—for example, paving a new parking lot leads to biodiversity loss and increased carbon dioxide emissions.

The NCECR highlights five main sectors of environmental conflict:

Energy includes the development, production, and distribution of renewable and non-renewable sources such as oil, wind, and solar. Energy generation often disproportionately affects marginalized communities, such as members of the Native Nations. Conflicts include pipeline placement and oil spill cleanup.

Freshwater is water found in lakes, glaciers, and ponds and is where most suitable drinking water comes from. These conflicts include issues around providing safe drinking water, fishing, recreation, and energy supply. Freshwater supply is dependent on precipitation, so this resource is increasingly challenged by drought.

Oceans and coasts conflicts occur at the intersection of warming oceans, aquatic species, and human activity in the ocean. These conflicts also cross borders and require numerous levels of cooperation to manage. Some examples include managing aquatic invasive species, rising sea levels, and fisheries.

Public lands include governmentally managed land in the United States, such as national parks, monuments, and historic sites. Some are used for their natural resources like timber and mining while others are preserved for their environmental and cultural value. These conflicts would include issues of endangered species, forest management, and recreational access to public lands.

Transportation and infrastructure issues revolve around the development of systems like rail and roadways, buildings, and power grids in a way that supports sustainable development. These conflicts often include financial constraints and permitting regulations.

Often, these issues intersect with one another and with other goals surrounding economic and cultural development. Danya Rumore, director of the Environmental Dispute Resolution Program in the Wallace Stegner Center, explains that despite this tangled web of interests, people’s positions do not collide in the same way.

“That is a big part of why so many environmental and other public sector conflicts seem intractable,” Rumore said. “Our positions (such as designating an area as wilderness or not) are often mutually exclusive, whereas our underlying interest (such as a desire to recreate in certain ways, be able to find solitude, or protect wildlife) are not mutually exclusive.”

Confronting council members and policymakers as a local citizen might seem daunting or futile. However, Knaster made it clear that mediation wields the power of one. “Everybody has the same power when you’re trying to solve a problem, assuming that everybody wants to solve the problem,” she said.

Community members and organizers in the beginning of a conflict resolution process can use the resources and brainstorming lists below to assist in group development, planning, and research.

Identifying Stakeholders

All stakeholders need to figure out representation for conflict mediation, and some groups have more power in choosing who gets to the table. For each of the following questions, brainstorm groups or individuals who might fall into each category. 

For example, in the case of a new subway line proposal: Who lives in the area this policy targets? Will construction of new stations displace people? Who will have access to the subway through this line?

Who…

• Lives in the area this policy targets?
• Will use the eventual service provided?
• Has spoken up about this policy already?
• Has subject matter expertise in this area?

• Stands to gain the most from this policy?
• Is likely to be hurt most by this policy?
• Is a leader in these communities?

---

Create three tiers of priorities and categorize the different components of the issue here. Tier 1 priorities are the nonnegotiables or “must haves.” Tier 2 priorities are wants, and Tier 3 are things that would be “nice to have.” Align these within your group so that you have a clear understanding of what is most important to you.

Additionally, conduct some subject-area research on the policy and its implications. What kind of data can you collect on the potential environmental and economic effects of this proposal? Use the research tools below to gather open source data.

Preparing for Mediation

Before meeting with other stakeholders, community organizers should go through the mediation process internally. Knaster said this is important so you can reach your own consensus and have clear objectives. What do you disagree on? What are your priorities? What are you willing to give up?

To-Do List

Define leadership and individual roles.
Consider assigning roles and responsibilities, such as a primary point of contact for external stakeholders and a note taker for meetings.

Gather contact information for all stakeholders.
Collect the most up-to-date contact information for everyone involved, both internally and externally. How can you contact the policymakers? Who is the neutral party involved in mediation?

Set a schedule with regular check-ins.
Determine how often you expect to meet, either virtually or in person. At the end of every meeting, set expectations for what should be completed by the next meeting.

Agree on a mission statement and goal.
Consider what common purpose brings your group together, and try to define it in a few sentences. Who do you represent, and what primary outcome do you want to achieve through mediation?

Define priorities at each tier level.
Create three tiers of priorities and categorize the different components of the issue here. Tier 1 priorities are the nonnegotiables or “must haves.” Tier 2 priorities are wants, and Tier 3 are things that would be “nice to have.” Align these within your group so that you have a clear understanding of what is most important to you.

---

Create three tiers of priorities and categorize the different components of the issue here. Tier 1 priorities are the nonnegotiables or “must haves.” Tier 2 priorities are wants, and Tier 3 are things that would be “nice to have.” Align these within your group so that you have a clear understanding of what is most important to you.

Additionally, conduct some subject-area research on the policy and its implications. What kind of data can you collect on the potential environmental and economic effects of this proposal? Use the research tools below to gather open source data.

Knaster says there are two final goals in conflict mediation: consensus and compromise. Part of the process in preparing for negotiations should include reaching an honest understanding of whether your party is prepared to make concessions necessary to meet those goals.

“In the dispute resolution world, we aim for consensus. Consensus is unanimity, but it doesn’t mean everyone is happy,” Knaster explained. “It means that people can live with it; people see their input in the results and say, ‘This was important to me, and I was able to achieve my key goals.’”

To help move toward a solutions-focused outcome, consider your party’s interests and positions. Interests are the “why” of the issue—a stakeholder’s motivation and goals. Positions are the “how,” or the options a stakeholder presents to achieve their interests.

If you reach moments of impasse when discussing positions, try tracing your steps back to your  interest: What other positions can you take to help achieve your goals?

Additionally, the Wallace Stegner Center for Resources and the Environment (PDF, 234 KB) recommends investigating opposing parties’ positions the same way. Try questions such as these:

Knaster says if one or all parties are not willing to reach a compromise, conflict resolution and mediation are not the appropriate path. In these cases, the likely next option is litigation.

Created by Pepperdine Law’s online Master of Legal Studies program.