Experimenting with ARIA Globally: Best Practices and Lessons Learned

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Peace Psychology Book Series book series (PPBS)

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the ways in which the Center for International Development and Conflict Management (CIDCM) at the University of Maryland, College park has made wide use of ARIA in several continents, in transforming conflict both across and within borders. Practitioners Edy Kaufman and John Davies discuss their extensive use of ARIA in Innovative Problem-Solving Workshops (IPSW) around the world. The CICDM application of ARIA is presented through three unique types of conflict case studies: Israel/Palestine, Peru/Ecuador, and Lesotho.

Keywords

Civil Society Conflict Situation Consensus Building Integrative Stage District Administrator 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Azar, E. (1990). The management of protracted social conflict: Theory and cases. Aldershot: Dartmouth.Google Scholar
  2. Azar, E. (2003). Protracted social conflicts and second track diplomacy. In J. Davies & E. Kaufman (Eds.), Second track/citizens diplomacy: Concepts and techniques for conflict transformation. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  3. Azar, E., & Burton, J. (Eds.). (1986). International conflict resolution: Theory and practice: Lebanon a case example. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  4. Baskin, G. (2011, October 19). My part in the prisoner exchange deal. Jerusalem Post. Google Scholar
  5. Beach, H., Hamner, J., Hewitt, J., Kaufman, E., Kurki, A., Oppenheimer, J., & Wolf, A. (2000). Transboundary freshwater dispute resolution: Theory, practice and annotated references. New York: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Davies, J., & Kaufman, E. (Eds.). (2003). Second track/citizens’ diplomacy: Concepts and techniques for conflict transformation. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  7. Davies, J., Fekade, W., Hoohlo, M., Kaufman, E., & Shale, M. (2009). Partners in peacebuilding in Lesotho. In C. Zelizer and R. Rubinstein (Eds.) Peacebuilding in practice: Reflections from the field. Sterling: Kumarian.Google Scholar
  8. De Bono, E. (2009). Lateral thinking. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
  9. Fisher, R. (2005). Paving the way: Contributions of interactive conflict resolution to peacemaking. Boston: Lexington.Google Scholar
  10. Hewitt, J., Wilkenfeld, J., Gurr, T. R., & Heldt, B. (Eds.). (2011). Peace and conflict 2012. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Kaufman, E., & Sosnowski, S. (2005). The Peru-Ecuador peace process: The contribution of track-two diplomacy. In R. J. Fisher (Ed.), Paving the way: Contributions of interactive conflict resolution to peacemaking. Oxford: Lexington.Google Scholar
  12. Kaufman, E., Salem, W., & Verhoeven, J. (Eds.). (2006). Bridging the divide: Peacebuilding in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  13. Kelman, H. (2003). Interactive solving problem as a tool for second track diplomacy. In J. Davies & E. Kaufman (Eds.), Second track/citizens’ diplomacy: Concepts and techniques for conflict transformation (pp. 81–106). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  14. Kuttab, J., & Kaufman, E. (1998). An exchange on dialogue. Journal of Palestine Studies, 17(2).Google Scholar
  15. Mitchell, C. (1981). Peacemaking and the consultant’s role. New York: Nichols.Google Scholar
  16. Montville, J., & Davidson, W. (1981). Foreign policy according to Freud. Foreign Policy, 45, 145–157.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Nan, S. A. (2005). Track one-and-a-half diplomacy: Contributions to Georgian-South Ossetian peacemaking. In R. J. Fisher (Ed.), Paving the way: Contributions of interactive conflict resolution to peacemaking. Lanham: Lexington.Google Scholar
  18. Nan, S. A., Druckman, D., & El Horr, J. (2009). Unofficial international conflict resolution: Is there a track 1 ½? Are there best practices? Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 27(1), 65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pruitt, D., & Kim, S. H. (2004). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  20. Rothman, J. (1988). A guide to Arab-Jewish peacemaking organizations in Israel. Jerusalem: New Israel Fund.Google Scholar
  21. Rothman, J. (1989). Supplementing tradition: A theoretical and practical typology for international conflict management. Negotiation Journal, 5, 265–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rothman, J. (1992). From confrontation to cooperation: Resolving ethnic and regional conflict. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Rothman, J. (1997). Resolving identity-based conflict in nations, organizations, and communities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  24. Volkan, V. (1988). The need to have enemies and allies: From clinical practice to international relationships. Northvale: Jason Aronson.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace, Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael
  2. 2.Partners in Conflict and Partners in Peace building & Center for International Development and Conflict Management, The University of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  3. 3.University of MassachusettsAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations