Premium
Unofficial international conflict resolution: Is there a Track 1½? Are there best practices?
Author(s) -
Nan Susan Allen,
Druckman Daniel,
Horr Jana El
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
conflict resolution quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.323
H-Index - 21
eISSN - 1541-1508
pISSN - 1536-5581
DOI - 10.1002/crq.248
Subject(s) - track (disk drive) , diplomacy , context (archaeology) , conflict resolution , process (computing) , best practice , political science , variety (cybernetics) , set (abstract data type) , public relations , computer science , geography , law , artificial intelligence , programming language , archaeology , politics , operating system
Analysis of twenty‐four cases of unofficial international conflict resolution initiatives, done according to similarities across seven variables, shows that the practice of “Track 1½” diplomacy is distinct from Track 2 diplomacy. Furthermore, these initiatives are distinguished by their focus on process or diverse goals. Multidimensional scaling organized the cases into four groupings of similar initiatives: Track 1½ process‐focused, Track 1½ diversified, Track 2 process‐focused, and Track 2 diversified. The variety of approaches used in these twenty‐four cases of high‐quality international conflict resolution initiatives suggests best practices. These practices should be considered sensitive to context rather than a standard set of procedures used regardless of conflict environment.