Attitude-Based Conflict Management for Resolving Disputes over Water Quality of the Seymareh River in Iran

Document Type : Article

Authors

1 Department of Architecture, University of Tehran, Tehran, P.O. Box 1415564583, Iran.; Department of Systems Design Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Post Code: N2L 3G1, Canada.

2 Department of Systems Design Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Post Code: N2L 3G1, Canada.; Centre for International Governance Innovation, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada; and Balsillie School of International Affairs, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.

3 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Post Code: N2L 3G1, Canada.

Abstract

A strategic negotiation methodology for managing complex water-related conflicts is presented in order to consider the decision makers' attitudes. The developed approach systematically exploits the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution (GMCR) as an analytical and practical technique, and helps decision makers find the most beneficial outcomes for negotiating their disputes, assuming the competing needs, wants, and attitudes of decision makers. A real case study of a water-related dispute in Iran is used to demonstrate the implementation of the developed methodology and to emphasize the significance of decision makers' attitudes in identifying feasible negotiation outcomes for resolving complex disputes. In fact, the developed attitude-oriented methodology proposes an innovative engineering approach to help stakeholders address a wide range of conflicts, especially in complex water disputes in developing countries where human factors such as attitude play a significant role. The research can also help decision makers with the shortcomings of conventional decision making systems, such as original GMCR, through incorporating attitudes into conflict resolution tools in order to better clarify needs and interests, obtain equilibrium results, and generate more equitable solutions

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. References:

    1. Peters, N.E., Meybeck, M., and Chapman, D. The e_ects of human activities on water quality", In Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences, John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York, USA, pp. 1529{1553 (2005).
    2. Falkenmark, M. Forward to the future: a conceptual framework for water dependence. Volvo environment", Prize Lecture 1998, Ambio, 28(4), pp. 356{361 (1999).
    3. Doerpinghause, H.I., Schmit, J.T., and Yeh, J.J.H. Risk aversion, negotiation, and claims settlement strategies", Social Science Research Network, 2008 Social Science Electronic Publishing Inc., New York, USA (2005).
    4. Cheung, S., Yiu, K.T.W., and Suen, H. Construction negotiation online", Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(6), pp. 844{852 (2004).
    5. Fang, L., Hipel, K.W., and Kilgour, D.M., Interactive Decision Making: The Graph Model for Conict Resolution, pp. 112{161, ISBN: 0-471-59237-4, Wiley and Sons, New York, USA (1993). S. Youse_ et al./Scientia Iranica, Transactions A: Civil Engineering 27 (2020) 25{40 39
    6. Hipel, K.W., Jamshidi, M.M., Tien, J.M., and White III, C.C. The future of systems, man and cybernetics: application domains and research methods", IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C, Applications and Reviews, 37(5), pp. 726{743 (2007). DOI: 10.1109/TSMCC.2007.900671
    7. Youse_, S., Hegazy, T., and Hipel, K.W. Considering attitudes in strategic negotiation over brown_eld disputes", The American Society of Civil Engineering (ASCE), Journal of Legal A_airs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, 2(4), pp. 240{ 248 (2010).
    8. Pinnell, S. Partnering and the management of construction disputes", Dispute Resolution Journal, 54(1), pp. 16{22 (1999).
    9. Harmon, K.M.J. Resolution of construction disputes: a review of current methodologies", Leadership Management Engineering, 3(4), pp. 187{201 (2003).
    10. Richter, I.E. The project neutral: neutralizing risk, maintaining relationships and watching the bottom line", Construction Business Review, 8(2), pp. 52{56 (2000). 11. Hipel, K.W., Ed., Conict Resolution, 1, Eolss Publishers, Oxford, United Kingdom (ISBN-978-1-84826- 120-4 (Adobe e-Book), ISBN-978-1-84826-570-7 Library Edition (Hard Cover)) (Earlier versions of the papers appeared in the Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems.) (2009). 12. Hipel, K.W., Ed., Conict Resolution, 2, Eolss Publishers, Oxford, United Kingdom (ISBN-978-1-84826- 121-1 (Adobe e-Book), ISBN-978-1-84826-571-4 Library Edition (Hard Cover)) (Earlier versions of the papers appeared in the Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems) (2009). 13. Kilgour, D.M., Diplomacy Game: The Graph Model for Conict Resolution as a Tool for Negotiators, Part IV, pp. 251{263, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Germany (2007). 14. Howard, N., Paradoxes of Rationality: Theory of Metagames and Political Behavior, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA (1971). 15. Fraser, N.M. and Hipel, K.W., Conict Analysis: Models and Resolutions, North Holland, pp. 10{370, ISBN: 0-444-00921-3, New York, USA (1984). 16. Hipel. K.W., Hegazy, T., and Youse_, S. Combined strategic and tactical negotiation methodology for resolving complex brown_eld conicts", The Brazilian Journal of Operational Research, Special Issue of Pesquisa Operational on Soft OR and Complex Societal Problems, 30(2), pp. 281{304 (2010). 17. Hipel, K.W. and Fang, L. Multiple participant decision making in societal and technological systems", In Systems and Human Science - For Safety, Security, and Dependability: Selected Papers of the 1st International Symposium, SSR2003, Chapter 1, T. Arai, S. Yamamoto, and K. Makino, Eds., Osaka, Japan, published by Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 3{31 (2005). 18. Nash, J.F. Equilibrium points in n-person games", Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, 36, pp. 48{49 (1950). 19. Nash, J.F. Non-cooperative games", Annals of Mathematics, 54(2), pp. 286{295 (1951). 20. Fang, L., Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., and Peng, X. A decision support system for interactive decision making. Part 1: Model formulation", IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, 33(1), pp. 42{55 (2003). DOI: 10.1109/TSMCC.2003.809361 21. Fang, L., Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., and Peng, X. A decision support system for interactive decision making. Part 2: Analysis and output interpretation", IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, 33(1), pp. 56{66 (2003). DOI: 10.1109/TSMCC.2003.809360 22. Inohara, T., Hipel, K.W., and Walker, S. Conict analysis approaches for investigating attitudes and misperceptions in the war of 1812", Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 16(2), pp. 181{201 (2007). DOI: 10.1007/s11518-007-5042-x 23. Plaut, E. Iran industry spotlight: Water management", American-Iranian Council Website, http:// www.us-iran.org/resources/2017/7/24/industryspotlight- water-management (2017). 24. IWPCO, Iran Water and Power Resources Development Company (IWPCO), Accessed website on April 10, 2013: http://en.iwpco.ir/default.aspx (2013). 25. Hamouda, L., Kilgour, D.M., and Hipel, K.W. Strength of preference in the graph model for conict resolution", Group Decision and Negotiation, 13(5), pp. 449{462 (2004). DOI: 10.1023/B:GRUP.0000045751.21207.35 26. Youse_, S. and Bozorgzad, E. Negotiations for conict management during impoundment of large dams", The Proceedings of International Symposium on Dams for a Changing World, Annual Conference of International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD), Kyoto, Japan, June 2-6, pp. 2{65 to 2{70 (2012). 27. Youse_, S., Hipel, K.W., and Hegazy, T. Attitudebased negotiation methodology for the management of construction disputes", Journal of Management in Engineering, 26(1), pp. 114{122 (2010). DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000013 28. Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., Fang, L., and Peng, X. The decision support system GMCR in environmental conict management", Applied Mathematics and Computation, 83(2 and 3), pp. 117{152 (1997). DOI: 10.1016/S0096-3003(96)00170-1 29. Xu, H., Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., and Fang, L. Conict resolution using the graph model: Strategic interactions in competition and cooperation", In The Series on Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, Springer, Heidelberg, Germany (2018). 30. Youse_, S., Hajimirzaie, S.M., and Hosseinipour, E.Z. Attitude-based negotiations for resolving water and 40 S. Youse_ et al./Scientia Iranica, Transactions A: Civil Engineering 27 (2020) 25{40 environmental conicts", The ASCE World Environmental and Water Resources Congress, Florida, USA, May 22{26, pp. 47{56 (2016).
Scientia Iranica
Volume 27, Issue 1
Transactions on Civil Engineering (A)
January and February 2020
Pages 25-40

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 28 January 2017
  • Revise Date: 10 January 2018
  • Accept Date: 23 June 2018

Share

How to cite

Statistics