The Process of Conflict Resolution in Public Project Disputes: Analysis by Settlement Methods

Abstract

This study examines thirteen recent public dispute cases in Korea with the objective of analyzing the process of conflict resolution and thereby assessing the role of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in public disputes. The focus is on dispute cases related to development of, or site selection for, public projects. Based on detailed accounts of events, the nature of the conflict, parties involved, pattern of actions taken, and final outcomes are analyzed. Only five cases were settled by ADR methods, indicating that ADR is rather ineffective in public conflicts. ADR seems to work better in locally confined, structured conflicts where participatory processes are used. An identifiable pattern in attempts at ADR is that ad-hoc committees are formed but often fail to reach agreement or are seen as lacking legitimacy, authority, and impartiality. Policy implications drawn from this study are that a higher priority should be given to developing community-based conflict resolution programs, that ADR should be incorporated into local government regulations to acquire greater legitimacy, and that conflict prevention procedures are a prerequisite for the success of conflict resolution programs.