Realistic rehabilitation

Rehabilitation involves re-establishing livelihood security among the poorest households in order to reduce vulnerability to future disasters, re-start the local economy in a sustainable fashion, and avoid dependency. This article discusses experiences of post-war rehabilitation in Mozambique and suggests that, although many households rapidly re-started crop production, they remain vulnerable because they have not been able to rebuild reserves. The author cautions against over-rapid withdrawal from relief programmes, and suggests that distributing cash and allowing households to buy what they need most is sometimes more appropriate than distributing food, seeds, tools, and selected household goods.     

State Wildlife Policy and Management: The Scope and Bias of Political Conflict

State wildlife policy and management are often characterized by divisive political conflict among competing stakeholders. This conflict is increasingly being resolved through the ballot-initiative process. One important reason the process is being used so often is the way state wildlife policy and management decisions are often made by state wildlife commissions, boards, or councils (the dominant way these decisions are made in the United States). These bodies are often perceived by important stakeholders as biased, exclusive, or unrepresentative of nonconsumptive stakeholder values. As a result, unsatisfied interest groups often try to take decision-making authority away from these institutions and give it to the public through the ballot initiative. Cases and examples from Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, and Idaho are examined in this context. The article finishes by outlining four broad alternatives that may be debated in the future: the no change alternative, the authoritative expert alternative, the structural change alternative, and the stakeholder-based collaborative conservation alternative(s).     

Conflict resolution symposium derails a potential tobacco “war”

Conclusion While it is, of course, very satisfying to see measurable results from a conflict resolution initiative, the immeasurable byproducts of the symposium are no less important. All who were present will never forget the evening at dinner when a preeminent cancer surgeon diagnosed skin cancer on the face of the oldest tobacco farmer and offered to fly across country to help treat him. The doctor who had earlier almost resorted to blows when the symposium began, made a commitment to visit North Carolina and see the plight of tobacco farm families firsthand.In debriefing the symposium's design and outcomes, many of the participants expressed desires that such processes could be used more routinely. Value was seen in having meetings throughout the country to teach such skills and model the processes of alternative dispute resolution. One member of the Congress even expressed a desire that training be offered on Capitol Hill, so that all members could benefit from becoming better at resolving disputes.What the tobacco symposium participants experienced is not unique. It demonstrates the positive experiences that can occur when people in conflict are empowered to resolve their differences in ways that uplift them and result in mutual gain. Instead of focusing on each other as enemies, their creative powers were focused on common problems and redirected; they were then able to design creative solutions. Dayle E. Powell is a Fellow and Director of Conflict Resolution Programs at the Carter Center of Emory University, One Copenhill, Atlanta, Georgia 30307. The Center, founded by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan institution focusing on conflict resolution, human rights, international affairs, and health policy.