1 thesis proposals conference, 09.feb.2001 welcome benefits and limits of environmental mediation in...

1

Thesis Proposals Conference, 09.Feb.2001

Welcome

Benefits and Limits of Environmental Mediation

in Germany: A Case Study

2



Overview

Background and motivation for the study

Research issues

Methodology

Findings & Conclusion

Discussion

3



Background and motivation for the study

Environmental disputes end up in court

Increasingly difficult to make or implement decisions

Frankfurt airport extension (1984 / 1998)

Mediation prompts procedural justice, spatial/social equity

“The mediation is over, the quarrelling starts”

4



Research Issues

Was the mediation a success?

Mediation as an idealistic concept

How to increase successful mediation in Germany?

Mediation in the German context

5



Methodology

Internet-publications / wide spectrum of opinions

Translate/paraphrase quotations

Qualitative text analysis

Problem: trust is a crucial element of mediation

procedural problems within the mediation group are not published.

6

The Case / facts

• Frankfurt airport is the 2nd largest airport in Europe

• Located in the middle of the prosperouse Rhein-Main Region, Germany

• Owned by the federal Land Hesse (45%), city of Frankfurt (29%) and the Federal

Republic of Germany (26%)

• In 1999 439.093 airplane movements; in 2015 660.000 (with new runaway)

• For the extension the adjacent has to be clear-cut trees

• With the new runaway 362.000 people (+142.000) would be affected by noise

• Environmentalists are concerned about its environmentalists

• Proponents emphasize the economic importance of the airport for the whole region

• At Prime Minister Eichel’s suggestion a commission defined the task for the mediation

• The mediation ended in January 2000 (21 representatives & 3 mediators)

• The mediation result (a package) must be treated as a unit and contains five points:

Optimizing the existing System

Expansion throughout a new runway (3 alternatives proposed)

Ban on night flights

Anti-noise-pact

Regional dialogue forum

7

Findings and Results -Was the mediation a success?-

Criteria: Result-related criteria Pre-conditions Process criteria

Results developed/imposed

not by the mediator

Shared view of the problem Voluntary participation

Agreement was found with

consensus

Mediation provide the least-

costly method

Mediator is a neutral party

Improved understanding Mediation provide the highest

joint benefit

Mediator served as

a messenger

Long lasting settlement Openness with regard to the

result

Mediator helped to identify main points

Shared commitment Transparency

Result dealt with most/all

relevant aspects

Dialogue between parties

Support by the participants’

organization

Recognize various groups and interests

Procedure shortened the time

to resolve the problem

Accommodate the opposing party

Monetary costs of planning

were lower as a result of

mediation

Recognition of the legitimacy of opposing

demands and right to represent them

Work together again? Constructive communication

Sharing information

All relevant actors participated

Consensus on mediator

Consensus on ending the procedure

8

Findings and Results -Was the mediation a success?- Positive

An agreement within the mediation group was found with a certain degree of

consensus

An improved understanding is assumable

The mediation process dealt with most of the ‘defined’ relevant aspects

Negative

There is a strong sign that the final results were imposed by the mediators`

choice.

There was no shared understanding about what the problem is.

It is not very probable that the costs of planning will be lower as a result of

mediation.

The mediation has no impact on administrative procedures and it seems

unavoidable that the airport extension will be the subject of several court cases.

Not all the relevant actors participated; the environmental groups and the local

interest groups refused to take part in the mediation.

We have an unstable mediation result, because its parts, and with that its

balance, are likely to be threatened through legal actions by the opponents.

The openness, regarding possible results, is questionable.

The costs and benefits are spatially unequally distributed and it seems difficult to

make a tradeoff between costs and benefits.

9



Conclusion

The findings above show that in this particular case the prerequisite of mediation process were not fulfilled.

A win-win-situation for all stakeholders was not possiblePoliticians initially reduced the openness of the process and the possible results.It is doubtful that the mediation process was the least costly method to settle the dispute.

It is controversial if the mediation provide the highest joint benefit.

10



The broader, German specific context

Culture of conflict and scope of compromise

If possible a German demands his rights

Increasing number of conflicts brought to the Federal Constitutional Court

Political Culture

Contradicting to the desire of participation there is a

mentality of total service through the state and poor social solidarity

Poor response to the internet discussion forum of the mediation group

Lively discussions on the opposition group’s internet forum

11

Self-conception of the state

Consistent with poor tradition of participation, there is a hierarchical self-concept of the state. The state claims sole responsibility for societal welfare.

Only the state is capable and legitimated to balance societal interests

The mediation process has absolutely no legal meaning

The unreadiness to negotiate/ attitude to financial compensation

A compromise is still primarily interpreted as the abandonment of a position and therefore infamous.

Accepting a financial compensation is not only the abandonment of a position, much worse it is sold against money and not acceptable on moral grounds.

In the airport case environmental groups refused to participate because of that.

The broader, German specific context

12



Conclusion : following changes could make mediation in Germany

more successful. Fostering factors Impeding factors

Strong position of local interest groups Lack of informational or control rights

Pragmatic self-conception of the state Hierarchical self-conception of the

state

Dialogue orientated culture of dispute Confrontation orientated culture of

dispute

Policy formulation as goal Site selection as conflict issue

Developed awareness of individual

responsibility

Leave the responsibility to the state

Problem definition with all stakeholders Define the problem out of a

hierarchical position

Congruency between decision-maker

and affected people

Flexible procedures Standardized and formalized

procedures

Little regulated field Highly regulated and structured field

Acceptance of compensation Ethical ban on financial compensation

13



Thank you very much for your attention.

Time for Question & Discussion

1 thesis proposals conference, 09.feb.2001 welcome benefits and limits of environmental mediation in...

Documents