Suchergebnisse

Abstract
This article examines how justice concerns arise during various stages of negotiation with attention paid to contending principles of procedural, distributive, and transitional justice. We review key themes raised by contributors to this special issue. The themes reveal that justice has many facets and surfaces in many contexts. The facets include the role played by voice, the utility of universal definitions of justice, the use of morality arguments, the salience of the equality principle, and the challenges of complex negotiating forums. The contexts vary from single to multiple case analyses. Looking forward, we suggest a number of issues for further research. These include the voice versus exit debate, culturally-sensitive definitions of justice, different forms taken by equality, and how best to develop the skills needed for implementing justice principles. These are a sampling of the issues that pave the way for future scholarship on the role of justice in negotiation.

Purpose
The purpose of this study was to determine the relative impact of positive and negative face threats in conflict scenarios on the relational quality between disputants. This study also sought to determine whether the contextual variables of relational distance and power differential mediated this relationship as predicted by politeness theory.


Design/methodology/approach
To test the hypotheses, a 2 × 2 × 2 design was implemented manipulating the variables face (positive and negative), relational distance (business and personal) and power differential (high and low power differential). Participants read one of the eight scenarios, then responded to the dependent variables which focused on the impact of the face threats on relational quality between the participants. Subjects were recruited using the M-Turk, Amazon platform. Manipulation checks were carefully constructed to ensure subjects understood them.


Findings
The results of this study indicated that positive face threats have significantly more impact on relational quality between disputants than negative face threats. Moreover, context did not mediate these results. Neither relational distance nor power differential impacted the extent to which positive face threats compromised the relationship between the disputants.


Research limitations/implications
This is the first study to explore the impact of face threats on relational outcomes in conflict. Prior studies focused only on the extent to which contextual variables would impact the choice of face threats that disputants might make in response to power and relational distance differences. This result suggests that face threats play a significant role in determining relational outcomes in conflict settings.


Practical implications
This study suggests that practitioners, such as mediators or group facilitators, should take steps to limit the kinds of positive face threats that disputants exchange during conflict. If positive face threats are allowed to escalate, then they can severely compromise the willingness of disputants to trust and continue to work toward an integrative solution.


Social implications
Political divisions often appear to widen in the context of positive face threats as individuals seek to belittle the identities of their opponents. As these face threats escalate, they can result in polarizing language that disempowers these individuals from wanting to work together in a trusting relationship to accomplish important social goals.


Originality/value
This is the first study to explore the relative impact of positive and negative face threats on the relational quality of disputants in conflict. It is also the first to explore the extent to which context mediates the impact of face threats.

This article contributes to the current discourses on China's diplomacy in the South China Sea disputes by asking: What does China want to achieve in the various negotiations? By comparing different versions of the multilateral Code of Conduct negotiations between 1992 and 2016, the authors find that the sovereignty issue has been shelved throughout the negotiations. We identify three factors that may account for this finding: the inconsistency of China's official claims over time, China's increased bargaining power, and the importance of the shelved sovereignty axiom since the era of Deng Xiaoping. The authors conclude that the normative game continues in the shadows of international norms represented by invalid sovereignty over the contested waters. (Pac Rev/GIGA)

In this article, we discuss the historical development of various methodological approaches used by social scientists. The well-known divide between the positivist and constructivist traditions is alive and well in the variety of recent methodologies including those discussed in these issues. More recent developments include nonlinear approaches intended to deal with the complexity of the world as it presents itself. The advent of new technologies has expanded the reach of quantitative methods while also increasing the efficiency of data collections and analyses performed by qualitative researchers. Another trend is toward making research findings more relevant to the communities being researched. Innovation is the key theme of each article that is summarized in this essay. The developments captured by the authors presage a brave new world of continuing innovation in social science methodologies.

Attaining durable peace (DP) after a civil war has proven to be a major challenge, as many negotiated agreements lapse into violence. How can negotiations to terminate civil wars be conducted and peace agreements formulated to contribute to lasting peace? This question is addressed in this study with a novel data set. Focusing on justice, we assess relationships between process (procedural justice [PJ]) and outcome (distributive justice [DJ]) justice on the one hand and stable agreements (SA) and DP on the other. Analyses of fifty peace agreements, which were reached from 1957 to 2008, showed a path from PJ to DJ to SA to DP: The justice variables were instrumental in enhancing both short- and long-term peace. These variables had a stronger impact on DP than a variety of contextual- and case-related factors. The empirical link between justice and peace has implications for the way that peace negotiations are structured.

Two approaches to the process of guided discovery learning are compared for their impacts on concept understanding. One, referred to as design, emphasizes invention and draws on the simulation literature. The other, referred to as case analysis, focuses on discovery and draws on the case-based reasoning literature. Following a lecture on four cognitive-bias concepts, management students were assigned randomly to a design, case analysis, or lecture-only condition: A first experiment compared a design with a lecture-only condition and a second experiment compared case analysis with a lecture-only condition. Both design and case analysis students understood the concepts better than lecture-only students. Designers in the first experiment retained their understanding of the concepts better than the case analysts in the second experiment. The impacts on learning for design were similar to those obtained in earlier research where design was compared with role-playing and a classroom lecture. Implications of the findings for theory development and practice are discussed.

Are negotiators who rely on justice principles in the process of bargain- ing and drafting agreements more—or rather less—effective than others? This article examines whether adherence to principles of procedural and distributive justice in negotiations contributes to more effective results, with a focus on international envi- ronmental negotiations. Effectiveness is defined in terms of the extent of agreement (among parties and on issues), time to reach agreement, and comprehensiveness of the agreement. A set of hypotheses is evaluated on a selection of bilateral and mul- tilateral cases of environmental negotiations, using statistical methods. The analyses reveal that adherence to principles of procedural justice contributes to more effective results in multilateral environmental negotiations. These principles are found to hin- der effectiveness in the bilateral cases. On the other hand, adherence to principles of distributive justice is only moderately related to effectiveness in both the bilateral and multilateral cases. ; Justice and international negotiations

Attaining durable peace after a civil war has become a major challenge, as many negotiated settlements relapse into violence. How can civil war negotiations be conducted and peace agreements formulated so as to contribute to lasting, durable peace? Previous research has focused on the durability of peace agreements, measured as the absence of violence. This study develops an index to measure durable peace for a period of 8 years after the agreement had been reached, and evaluates the new measure using an existing data set. We ask whether impacts on durable peace are similar or different to those found for the durability of agreements. This question suggests a number of hypotheses that are evaluated with 16 cases of peace agreements. Stable agreements are shown to mediate the relationship between equality provisions in peace agreements and durable peace, and to also mediate the relationship between procedural justice and the reconciliation component of durable peace. Interestingly, economic stability is not a dividend of peace agreements.

Six decades of JCR research on negotiation and mediation are celebrated in this article. Starting with the earliest articles on these topics, we trace the development of recurring themes. The themes serve to organize a review of findings reported in the journal. The research on negotiation covers processes and conditions that occur prior to, during, and at the end of negotiation. The work on mediation provides insights into mediator approaches and impacts. This article concludes with suggestions for integrating and better understanding of the negotiation and mediation processes.