Two interesting and contradictory trends in American politics are germane to the field of dispute resolution: polarization and collaboration. The former gets a lot more attention than the latter. Let’s follow the trend and start with polarization.
A recent Pew Research Center report shows that Americans are more divided along political lines than any other category, including race, gender, age, and income. Additionally, the National Journal reported that, based on congressional voting records, 2010 and 2011 were the most polarized years on record. This polarization is preventing our government from solving pressing problems. For example, in the eleventh hour, Band-Aid solutions were implemented to the debt ceiling and the fiscal cliff issues. These types of solutions are preventing us from coming up with real solutions to urgent problems, such as the rising cost of medical care, the precarious fiscal future of social security, and the continuing backslide in the U.S. educational outcomes in comparison with other countries.
In spite of the polarization, or because of it, collaboration in government is increasing, too. Some of the benefits of collaborative problem solving of public issues include:
- EFFICIENT USE OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESOURCES. There are fewer federal, state, and local dollars available to deal with critical issues facing our society. Collaborative processes engage a range of public, private, and community institutions, as well as leadership, to bring a wider array of resources to bear on the problems.
- HIGH QUALITY SOLUTIONS. As people learn about each other’s views and needs, they learn more about the problems. In developing options together, they consider a wider variety of possibilities. In arriving at a plan or policy that reflects the concerns and ideas of all parties, they develop the best possible solutions.
- ACCELERATED PACES OF PROJECTS. Parties are less likely to block implementation if they understand that a plan or policy reflects their input and has been crafted to meet their basic interests. Parties involved in this process often have a high commitment to the success of the plan or policy.
- BRIDGED DIFFERENCES. Collaborative processes allow parties to better understand each other’s interests, build trust, improve relations, work together, and find mutually acceptable solutions based on common interests.
- SHARED POWER FOR DECISION-MAKING. This process brings a wide array of stakeholders to the table who seek mutually beneficial solutions as a response to the reality that power has become widely and thinly distributed with many interests desiring increased participation and able to block the possibility of action. Recent examples include the Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter movements.
Another reason that collaboration is increasing is that there are more and more wicked problems—problems that are complex and cross the jurisdictional boundaries for resolving them. Climate change is a perfect example of a wicked problem. Its sources and solutions are local and international, as well as social and technical.
Environmental conflict resolution gained a solid track record over the past ten years. While environmental issues certainly are wicked, many of our wickedest issues are polarizing social issues such as abortion, gay marriage, race relations, inequality, and police-community relations.It is fair to wonder whether collaborative problem solving is up to the task of addressing these issues. Will bringing such polarized parties together only escalate the tension? Is it possible to do collaborative problem solving when more of the issues are symbolic or subjective than objective issues which can be traded and negotiated? Are social issues that are rooted in belief systems and ideology negotiable?
The Minnesota Child Custody Dialogue (CCD) demonstrates that it is possible to resolve polarizing social issues using collaborative problem solving. This article will lay out what was accomplished by the CCD and how and what lessons the CCD offers for resolving other polarizing social issues using a collaborative approach.