Section A Based on the research question you created, complete the following tasks: Fit a multiple regression model, testing whether a mediating variable partly or completely mediates the effect of an initial causal variable on an outcome variable. Think about whether or not the model will meet assumptions.Fit the model, testing for mediation between two key variables.Analyze the output, determining whether mediation was significant and how to interpret that result.Reflect on possible implications of social change. Write a 1- to 2-paragraph analysis. The research question: “Does the hours of work every week, the level of education and the hours of TV watching every day has a significant effect on income?” Section B Write a 2- to 3-page critique of the research you found that includes responses to the following prompts: Why did the authors use mediation in their multiple regression model?Do you think mediation is the most appropriate choice? Why or why not?Did the authors display the results in a figure or table?Does the results table stand alone? In other words, are you able to interpret the study from it? Why or why not? Resource Warner, R. M. (2013). Applied statistics: From bivariate through multivariate techniques (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.you can glance at the article for information
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Issue 25, October 2018
Mano River Basin:
of Negotiation and Mediation Techniques
Olugbemiga Samuel AFOLABI
Harrison Adewale IDOWU
Abstract. This paper interrogates the negotiation and mediation techniques that was used following aggression, violence and social disruptions in Mano River basin, particularly against the recent
return to democracy in the region. While peace has largely been restored, the scattered but continuing incidence of aggression, violence and social disruptions in the Basin has raised questions about
the viability of negotiation and mediation techniques. The success or failure of these techniques has
effect on the sustainability of State, individual and social structures in the region. Therefore, the
paper argues that enough attention has not been paid to the ethical, moral and historical dimensions
of the problem of negotiation and mediation, especially the role of traditional institutions and civil
society agencies as critical components in conϔlict resolution. Given this, the paper draws attention
to some of the gaps and challenges embedded in ‘imported’ negotiation and mediation techniques
that leverage the certiϔication of conϔlicts in Africa as being “ethnic and racial”. Using secondary
data and drawing on personal experiences in the Mano River Basin (MRB) countries in West Africa,
the paper also raises critical questions about the
relationship between negotiation and mediation
techniques and conϔlict resolution and the lessons
learned so far. It also suggests ways of addressOlugbemiga Samuel AFOLABI
ing those aspects of negotiation and mediation
Department of Politics and International Relations
techniques deϔicits as a basis for suggesting opUniversity of Johannesburg, South Africa
E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] tions that will likely reduce recourse to conϔlicts,
encourage dialogue and inclusive participation,
Harrison Adewale IDOWU
as well as increase the chances for peace in the
region and Africa.
Department of Political Science
Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
Con lict Studies Quarterly
Issue 25, October 2018, pp. 3-19
Keywords: Negotiation, Mediation, Mano River,
Published First Online: 05/10/2018
Conϔlict Studies Quarterly
The Mano River Basic (MRB) Region, which is made of four West African countries Sierra Leone, Guinea, Liberia and Cote d’Ivoire – is renowned for its porous borders
which allows the low of weapons, the movement of former combatants and the transnational exploitation of resources (Afolabi, 2017). The violence arising from the in low
of Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALWs) into the region has led to violence, con licts
and social disruptions for more than two decades. At a point, UNDP (2006) noted that
the proliferation of (SALWs) in the Mano River Region made it one of the most unstable
areas on the planet. Therefore, the high incidence of violence and con licts in the Mano
River of West Africa raised a lot of concern and questions about the viability of life,
peace, social structure and the state in the four countries. It has also raised issues and
questions about the effectiveness of negotiation and mediation. However, it should be
noted that, while through negotiation and mediation these con licts and violent incidences have reduced drastically, the continued possession and proliferation of (SALWs)
and the continued intermittent pockets of con licts in the region are security threats
(Garuba, 2013; Isiche, 2002).
In a related manner, the introduction of electoral democracy with its ierce competition
for power, following the decades of armed con lict and political strife, including civil
wars in Sierra Leone and Liberia, have provided the context to resort to violence to settle electoral disputes, calling into question the viability of negotiation and mediation as
a lasting tool for con lict prevention and peacebuilding mechanism. Furthermore, the
non-resolution of the issues of porous borders, former ighters and refugees among
the four countries are problems that can put a lie to negotiation and mediation efforts.
On the other hand, other issues that are potential security threats in the Mano River
Region that can result in con licts and violence include narcotics traf icking, illegal
mining, human traf icking, intra and inter communal feuds, local wars, rebel activities
and terrorism (National Security Strategy of the Republic of Liberia [NSSL], 2008). As
earlier noted, while negotiation and mediation mechanisms have reduced the occurrence of con licts in the Mano River Region, especially in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Cote
d’Ivoire, the intermittent occurrence of these con licts have raised ethical, moral and
historical dimensions of the problem of negotiation and mediation in Africa. This is
against the often-neglected role of traditional institutions and civil society agencies as
critical components in negotiation, mediation and con lict resolution in Africa. Thus,
given the above explanations, there is need for research to examine the theory and
practice of negotiation and mediation within the context of violence and con licts as
a way of addressing those aspects of negotiation and mediation technique de icits as
a basis for suggesting options that will likely reduce recourse to con licts, encourage
dialogue and inclusive participation, as well as increase the chances for peace in the
region and Africa.
Issue 25, October 2018
To tackle the identi ied lacuna, the study is structured as follows: the irst section is
the introduction which explains the issues and problematic of negotiation and mediation, the focus of why the research is undertaken, while the second section unpacks
the concepts of negotiation and mediation. Section three examines the histography of
Mano River Basin so as to give the political geography and history of the region. This
dovetails into the section four which speci ically situate peace, negotiation and mediation within the Mano River region. The section focussed on diverse actors’ negotiation
and mediation techniques to achieve peace. Section ive analysed the problems of negotiation and mediation, including the limitations and lessons learned. This is central
to understanding the limits of the effectiveness of negotiation and mediation. Following
from this, section six looked at re-designing negotiation and mediation, going forward
by exploring possibilities that can be adopted and used in intractable and intermittent
incidences of violence and con licts like has been witnessed in MRB region. The paper,
in section seven, thereafter concluded with an interrogation of the extent of the chances
for peace in MRB using orthodox negotiation and mediation techniques.
Conceptualising Negotiation and Mediation
The concept of negotiation has received attention from different scholars. Negotiation
connotes a peaceful method/technique through which con licting parties or disputants
resolve their differences. For Kissinger (1969), negotiation has to do with the process of
bringing con licting parties together to take a common position unanimously. Elsewhere,
Fells (2012) de ines negotiation as “a process where two parties with differences which
they need to resolve are trying to reach agreement through exploring for options and
exchanging offers-and an agreement” (p. 3). For him, negotiation is a process (involving sequence of activities). It involves two or more parties, with clear differences to
be addressed for a negotiation to take place. Negotiation aims to make the con licting
parties arrive at a compromise, usually with a win-win situation for all parties involved.
Negotiation agreements are usually reached in a “non-judicial or non-arbitral setting”
(Jack, 2014: 42). Given these varied notions of negotiation, Alfredson and Cungu (2008)
are of the opinion that scholars, however, agree on one basic tenet of negotiation. This
tenet is the assumption that parties who negotiate agree in at least one fundamental
respect; that is, “they share a belief that their respective purpose will be better served
by entering into negotiation with the other party” (Alfredson & Cungu, 2008: 6).
However, mediation differs from negotiation because it often involves a third party
believed to be neutral. It is the process of coming to terms or compromise by con licting
parties and this is achieved by the help of a third neutral party- the mediator. In a mediation, the mediator creates the appropriate environment which makes it possible for the
con licting parties to enter into dialogue (Sandu, 2013b). The mediator, sometimes called
the third party, is usually required in mediatory efforts because of the mistrust between/
Conϔlict Studies Quarterly
among con licting parties (Chereji & Pop, 2014; Govender & Ngandu, 2010). Mediation
has, thus, been referred to as “a process of dialogue and negotiation in which a third
party assists two or more disputant parties, with their consent, to prevent, manage or
resolve a con lict without resort to force” (Nathan, 2009: 2). For Herrberg, Gunduz and
Davis (2009), mediation describes the involvement of both inter- and intra-state actors,
such as the United Nations (UN), African Union (AU), Economic Community of West
African States (ECOWAS) and Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), in con lict resolution
among disputant parties. Furthermore, they assert that what differentiates mediation
from other forms of third-party interventions in the peace process is that mediation
does not involve the use of force and disputant parties have a say in the outcome of the
peace-making process (Herrberg, et al., 2009). Mediation is, therefore, a relevant tool
in con lict prevention, stultifying violence eruption, management of ongoing con lict,
con lict resolution and peace building efforts in post-con lict environment.
The quality of mediation in a con lict goes a long way in determining the success or
otherwise of any mediation (Sandu, 2013a). This may have informed the submission
of Govender and Ngandu (2010) that “ceteris peribus, depending on their pro iciency,
experience and team, mediators can either heighten or reduce the likelihood of achieving a positive outcome” (p. 14). Also, Marsh (as cited in Smith, 1998: 3) identi ied ive
elements of a successful mediation that include: an impartial third party; the protection
of the integrity of proceedings; good faith from disputant parties; attendance of proceedings by those with full authority to make decisions; and an appropriate neutral location.
According to Nathan (2009: 25-26), mediation involves the following activities:
• Analysing the con lict, diagnosing its causes and identifying the parties’ positions
• Pursuing shuttle diplomacy when the adversaries refuse to talk directly to each other.
• Employing methods to build the parties’ con idence in negotiations.
• Designing and convening mediation processes and preparing agendas in consultation with the parties.
• Facilitating dialogue, negotiations and cooperative problem solving by the parties.
• Identifying common ground between the parties and generating options for overcoming deadlocks.
• Helping the parties to forge agreements.
• Creating opportunities for civil society to contribute to peace talks.
• Co-ordinating external actors’ that have an interest in the con lict but are not participants in the negotiations (e.g. International bodies, donors and neighbouring states).
• Providing information about the peace process to relevant actors, the public at large
and communities in con lict in the country.
Issue 25, October 2018
Historiography of Mano River Basin
The Mano River Region, as earlier mentioned, is made of four West-African countriesSierra Leone, Guinea, Liberia, and Cote d’Ivoire. It is renowned for its decades of violence
and con licts facilitated by porous borders, low of weapons, cross-border movement
of former combatants, and the transnational exploitation of resources (Afolabi, 2017).
The shared open borders, the struggle for power, electoral democracy and unresolved
long standing inter- and intra-state disputes have made the region highly volatile and
unstable. The large in low of Small Arms and Light Weapons in this region, coupled with
several democratic setbacks, has made the Mano River Basin one of the most unstable
areas on the planet (Small Arms Survey, 2004; UNDP, 2006). The high and continuing
incidence of violence and con licts, though now on a smaller scale and occurring intermittently, has raised a lot of concern and questions about the viability of life, peace,
social structure and the state in these countries. Furthermore, and critically for these
study, it raised questions on the viability of negotiation and mediation as peace-building
technique to achieve lasting peace in the region and in countries where decades of
ighting, violence and con licts has become endemic and perennial with global security
threat implications (Garuba, 2013).
Mano River Basin have witnessed a long period of armed con lict and political strife,
including civil wars in Sierra Leone and Liberia, several unrests in Cote d’Ivoire and
have caused huge damage to human security. The high level of migration, internally
displaced persons (IDPs) and refuges in the MRB are pointers to the interplay of negotiation and mediation techniques failure (Afolabi, 2017). Lack of effective supervision
and management of internally displaced persons and refugees has had a multiplier
effect on violence and con licts in the region which is further exacerbated by zero-sum
game, winner takes all nature of electoral politics in the region and Africa. The level
of violence and con licts in Mano River Basin, while it has dropped signi icantly, has
remained intermittent and posed questions about the effectiveness and viability of
negotiation and mediation techniques in a region where might is right and violence
is the perceived acceptable medium of dispute resolution with country and regional
implications (Afolabi, 2017).
Peace, Negotiation and Mediation Techniques in Mano River Basin
The cessation of hostilities in the Mano River Basin was achieved through many agencies, particularly using varieties of negotiation and mediation techniques to achieve
peace in the region. To achieve this peace, various actors, ranging from governments,
regional, international, religious and traditional, to civil society, adopted varying peace
negotiations and mediation techniques. In order to understand how peace was achieved
in the Mano River region, there is the need to discuss in this section, the actors involved
in the negotiation and mediation as well as the techniques used.
Conϔlict Studies Quarterly
1. Techniques Adopted by Governments/Governmental Actors
Various governments of the Mano River countries adopted many techniques for negotiation towards peacebuilding in their respective countries towards ensuring peaceful
co-existence in the region. For instance, to strengthen peace and security in Sierra
Leone, the government embarked on security sector reform aimed at strengthening
civil decision-making bodies. This technique, according to Bearne, Oliker, O’Brien and
Rathmell (2005), helped to constrain the power of armed forces and assisted peace
talks and peacebuilding in Sierra Leone. In Liberia, the government had embarked on
the ‘Poverty Reduction Strategy’ (PRS), as a technique for effective negotiation and
peacebuilding. This was to ensure a more inclusive society and to appease those who
had felt marginalized in the country (Petra, 2014). Inclusive of this technique, Kurz
(2010) posits, was the preposition by the Liberian government to create a ‘Reparations
Trust Fund’ in order to compensate victims of civil wars in the country. By doing so,
negotiation and mediation talks were made easier and largely receptive. Also adopted and implemented by the Liberian government was the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission (TRC) of Liberia. This Commission investigated cases of human rights
abuses during the civil wars and set the tone for reconciliation. To achieve this, the TRC
adopted the collection of testimonies/narratives of past abuses from private individuals. Petra (2014) avers that the TRC since inception in 2010 had collected an estimate
of 16,800 testimonies/statements in Liberia, which had helped in peace negotiations
and mediation in the country.
The technique adopted by the Guinean government in negotiation and mediation has
been mostly via the use of basic guiding principles in mediation and con lict resolution. Such principles include: “impartiality of the mediator, profound knowledge of the
con lict context, capacity to listen, and capacity to ind compromise” (Petra, 2014: 33).
For Cote d’Ivoire, the Commission on Dialogue, Truth and Reconciliation (CDVR) was
created to enhance negotiation and mediation, promote reconciliation and prevent
future crisis in the country. The techniques often adopted by the CDVR included the
analysis of the social problems and challenges confronting the people as well as the
conduct of public survey to analyse the triggers of wars and its impacts on the people
(CDVR, 2013). This helped to bring both victims and perpetrators to talk to each other,
thus, sowing the seed of forgiveness among the citizens. The CDVR also adopted the
reparation technique which consists of material, moral and psychological support to
victims of war and reintegrate perpetrators into the society (Petra, 2014; CDVR, 2013).
2. Techniques Adopted by Regional Actors
Regional bodies, such as the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS),
African Union (AU) and the Mano River Union (MRU), among others, have also adopted various techniques in peace negotiations and mediation in the Mano River Basin.
Issue 25, October 2018
For ECOWAS, peacebuilding among member states within the Mano River was mostly
achieved via three different techniques, viz: Political Declarations; the Protocol Relating
to the Mechanism for Con lict Prevention, Management, Resolution, Peacekeeping
and Security; and the use of ‘hard security’ (ECOWAS, 2015; Petra, 2014; Jack, 2014).
ECOWAS political declarations consists of the protocol of non-aggression adopted in
1978 and the protocol on democracy and good governance which lays out conditions and
the need for a free, fair and transparent elections as a means of preventing and resolving con licts. Also, the protocol on the mechanism for con lict prevention, management
and resolution, peacekeeping and security adopts guidelines for peace consolidation,
security and stability among its members in the Mano River region (Jack, 2014).
ECOWAS also adopts economic and trade techniques towards peace negotiation and
mediation among members in the Mano Basin (ECOWAS, 2015; Jack, 2014). The ECOWAS
‘hard security’ technique adopts military and civilian interventions in contributing to
peacebuilding among Mano River member states. This usually involves the use of the
ECOWAS Standby Force (ESF) (Agbambu, 2010). The ESF consists the Main Force and the
Task Force. While the Main Force comprises 2,772 personnel, the Task Force comprises
about 1,000 troops and both could be deployed to achieving peace through negotiation
and mediation (Agbambu, 2010). Conteh, Ta linski and Hislaire (2014) aver that the
ECOWAS has deployed these various techniques over crises in Liberia, Sierra Leone,
Cote d’Ivoire and Guinea over the years.
The Mano River Union (MRU) has also adopted techniques and initiatives to establish
and enhance the structures and tools for con lict resolution, including enhancing border
security. Furthermore, the AU has adopted series of techniques for con lict negotiation,
prevention, resolution and management in Africa, generally, and in the Mano River
region, speci ically. Petra (2014) posits tha …
Purchase answer to see full