Conflict Analysis and Negotiations
Pairwise-comparison methods can effectively be used to generate ratio information about the benefits and the costs of possible concessions which may be exchanged between two parties in mutual conflict. The basic step is the evaluation of a one-to-one deal where each party offers exactly one concession. The trade-off between benefits and costs is judged in verbal terms which are subsequently converted into numerical values on a geometric scale. The information to be used by a mediator between the two parties appears to be scale-independent. The approach, originally developed for a conflict between two parties, can easily be extended to situations where three or more parties have conflicting interests.
KeywordsComparative Judgement Emission Target Geometric Scale Gradation Index Labour Capacity
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References to Chapter 9
- 2.IPCC, “Integrated Analysis of Country Case Studies”. “Report of the US/Japan Expert Group to the Energy and Industry Subgroup of the International Panel on Climatic Change”. United Nations, 1990.Google Scholar
- 4.Lootsma, F.A., “Comment on the Negotiation and Resolution of the Conflict in South-Africa”. OriON, Journal of the Operational Research Society in South-Africa 5, 52—54, 1989. In the same issue there is a Response by T.L. Saaty (pp. 55–57).Google Scholar
- 6.Messner, S., and Nakicénovic, N., “A Comparative Assessment of Different Options to Reduce CO2 Emissions”. Working Paper WP-92-27, IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria, 1992.Google Scholar
- 7.Saaty, T.L., “The Negotiation and Resolution of the Conflict in South-Africa: the AHP”. OriON, Journal of the Operational Research Society in South-Africa 4, 3–25, 1988.Google Scholar
- 8.Wang, S.Y., “An Approach to Resolve Conflicts by Trade-Off Analysis”. Systems Science and Mathematical Sciences 3, 1–15, 1990.Google Scholar