[Previous Category] [Catalog] [Order Info]
Community residents often face a variety of different types of disagreement as they go through changes. In the last 10 years, Nebraska communities have dealt with problems such as school consolidation, hospital closure or loss of a physician, business closures, the farm crisis and, currently, what must be done to handle solid waste generated in their communities. All these changes produce stress on community residents, often resulting in disagreements over what should be done to solve these problems. This often leads to open conflict within the community.
We often identify conflict based on the visible manifestation of what seems to cause it. It is common to look at a school closure as a problem associated with the school. Or, we look at a landfill that is being forced to close and see a solid waste problem. When local businesses close and new owners fail to develop, the problem is viewed as a business problem.
While on the surface these situations appear singular, the conflict that develops around the solutions is usually much deeper than just an economic or environmental or demographic problem. When community residents begin the dialogue of "what to do now?", the answers may not be forthcoming by simply focusing on the school, hospital, local businesses or failure of community residents to support local businesses. The discussion generally is couched in terms of values and resources. These two differences of conflict often hold the key to solving local community disagreements.
Values are those psychological beliefs we, as individuals and community residents, view as important. They are difficult to measure but, when challenged, may lead to disagreements that create scars for generations.
An example of a value conflict often is associated with school consolidation or changes in school administrators. New school administrators often perceive their roles differently than do community residents.
It is not uncommon in rural school districts to find local values that reflect the saying, "spare the rod and spoil the child." This reflects a value of how the school should teach, and an often unmentioned community-held belief that discipline leads to strong, productive adults.
Administrators often have been trained in more experiential learning techniques that lead to community residents perceiving the school as unruly and not fulfilling the role of the school. When a discipline problem occurs at the school, conflict may develop between groups of residents within the community and the school administrators. What often develops is a personal attack on school personnel or administrators, and reciprocal attacks on community residents by school personnel and school supporters.
The outcomes of value conflict can manifest themselves into lawsuits where local residents attempt to bring suit against other residents over what they identify as "public slander," or heated public debates where personal attacks create scars that, if left unattended, may maintain a conflict in a community for a long time.
Resources and the conflict that develops from negotiation over them can best be viewed as material or social resources. It may be the actual school building, the doctor who has an option to relocate to a community down the road, or the resources of a new manufacturing plant that has the potential to create new jobs in a community. Residents often view the negotiation over these resources as a win or lose situation. If they get it, we won't. It is viewed as a zero sum game.
An example of a resource disagreement is a hospital closure or consolidation. It has been estimated by the Nebraska Department of Health, Office of Rural Health, that up to 20 percent of Nebraska hospitals may close in the next 10 years, with the outcome being hospital closures and consolidations.
A hospital and its attending physicians are resources--material and social. Conflict develops between communities over who should "own" the hospital. This resource conflict often escalates to the point of legal action against hospital personnel or residents of adjacent communities. The conflict over this particular resource is viewed as a zero sum game where if one community gains the hospital, the other loses.
There are basically three stages of community conflict that can be identified: 1) the build-up stage; 2) a high-conflict stage; and, 3) the post or "new" build-up stage.
It is important to remember community conflict can erupt in a short period of time, such as a few weeks, or it can smolder and not erupt for years. Strategies for managing the conflict differ by each stage of the conflict.
The build-up stage of a conflict is identified by observing groups within the community spending more time discussing a particular issue than historically has been the case. This stage often is precipitated by some stressor in the community, or a rumor of a change.
During the build-up stage of community conflict, "them" and "us" are beginning to be identified by different groups within the community. Those that support one side of the issue and those that support the other are identified. Small, informal groups develop that focus their conversation on one issue rather than the traditional focus of many issues facing the community. At this stage of a community conflict, rumors and unconfirmed evidence are passed around the community supporting one side of the issue or the other.
A key to identifying the build-up stage is the identification of new coalitions within the rural community. Left unresolved, the conflict will develop into the high conflict stage.
The high conflict stage is marked by the identification of well-defined coalitions within the community. Local meetings become heated, and personal attacks are not limited to informal gatherings, but may escalate to letters to the editor and even to legal action aimed at members of the disagreeing group. Residents often will not shop at a local business if members of the other group are there, and may withhold their children from participating in social events as a symbol of their open hostility towards the actions of the members of the differing coalition.
During this stage of the conflict, the social risks become evident to many members of the community. Traditional interaction such as waving to one another while driving down roads, conversation on the street and telephone conversations deteriorate until the members of the two or three differing factions no longer communicate except at public meetings, through lawyers, or through the local newspaper. Neutral members of the community find it difficult to remain neutral as the coalition members view all residents in the community as being on one side or the other of the conflict.
The post or new build-up stage of community conflict can be identified as a lull in the storm. A quiet settles over the community as members of the different factions withdraw to their homes and families. Interaction among members of the community is subdued.
A great deal of energy is expended by community members during the high-conflict stage, resulting in a solution to the disagreement. One side gives up and the other perceives that they have won the conflict, or all sides withdraw and retrench for another community battle.
If an acceptable solution to the problem was not reached, this stage may take on similar characteristics of the build-up stage, with coalitions again developing. A new movement toward a high conflict situation begins.
Resolving community conflict is a time-consuming action, but may prevent the cycle of community conflict from lasting for generations. The first strategy in resolving a community conflict is to identify the type of conflict. If a conflict has as its base value differences, then a reliable strategy is open discussion and identification of the value differences. Local ministers or social service workers often are trained in facilitating the discussion of values, and may be called upon to facilitate a discussion that goes beyond the simple perceived problem. In a discussion of values, it is necessary to identify representatives of the newly developing coalitions and ask that they participate in a discussion of what solutions they see as needed to solve the problem.
If the disagreement is over a resource, it is important to gather representatives from the different coalitions to discuss options available to the community. It also is important to identify the stage of the conflict.
During the build-up stage of conflict rumors, especially in small rural communities, accelerate the movement toward the high-conflict stage. Local officials involved in the decision-making process that focuses on the identified problem should provide accurate information through formal and informal channels within the community. This allows all members of the community to make informed decisions. Information can be disseminated through school administrators, church leaders, other local clubs, etc. Accurate information is a key to resolving conflict at the build-up stage.
Rural communities traditionally have relied heavily upon informal face-to-face interaction to pass on information. Local leaders can take it upon themselves to make personal telephone calls or home visits to members of the newly developed coalitions. This provides the coalition members with a sense of being important and part of the overall discussion.
Public meetings that focus on specific problem areas provide a forum for citizens to participate in solving local problems. Personal invitations to representatives from all different groups within the community may encourage attendance at these meetings.
If the conflict between groups within the community or between communities escalates, it often is necessary to ask for assistance from outside the community. Trained mediators are available with skills in facilitating community disagreements or in actual mediation. These mediators or facilitators can be contacted at any of the Nebraska State Mediation Centers located around the state, or by contacting your Cooperative Extension office.
Once a solution has been reached in the community, it is necessary to continue to: 1) provide accurate information about the solutions; 2) maintain contact with members from all the disagreeing groups; and 3) hold public meetings to discuss the progress toward implementing the solutions.
Community conflict can have positive effects on rural communities. Residents who have not participated in community affairs develop as leaders and often bring new ideas and solutions for new or evolving problems. Solving difficult problems develops new leadership skills in a community.
Left unattended, community conflict can last for years and create social and psychological scars that may take generations to heal. For more information on managing community conflict, call or write the Extension Rural Sociologist in the Department of Agricultural Economics, P.O. Box 830922, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583-0922, telephone (402) 472-8012.
Electronic version issued March 1997
mailto:pubs@unl.edu?subject=Comments
from G1122
Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of
May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Kenneth R. Bolen, Director of Cooperative Extension, University of Nebraska,
Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources.
University of Nebraska Cooperative Extension educational
programs abide with the non-discrimination policies of the University of
Nebraska-Lincoln and the United States Department of Agriculture.