Thursday, 5th March 2009
9.00 - 10.30
Session II (continued)
Case / Exercise I – OIE
Eric Blanchot
|
 |
Thursday began with a film that Mr. Blanchot screened on the Cuban and SADF war in Angola. The film highlighted the need for knowledge, understanding the role of agents, posturing for people back home, trust, innovative solutions, options etc, The film raised issues about the different players. Intermediaries, people outside the arena. The problem of positional posturing when there is a microphone, the need to appear to take a stand for people back home. The film pointed out that sometimes a real discussion is usually possible when people are not posturing, perhaps over a drink or an informal chat, that creates a much needed break from the heat of the negotiation. Some of the participants pointed out that the film missed out one crucial issue, not all stakeholders e.g. SWAPO were included, and this led to other problems later even though there was an agreement reached between Cuba and South Africa.
10.30 - 10.45
Tea/coffee break
10.45 - 12.30
Exercise (continued)
Debriefing and discussion
Mr. Blanchot then presented the participants with a CASE STUDY ON SMALL SCALE FISHERIES.
|
95 kB |
|
|
54 kB |
|
 |
Participants were broken up into groups, and each group had a representative from the different parties in the case study. In each group one participant was asked to be the chairperson. All parties were given were given half an hour to brief themselves on the facts and have bilateral discussions with other parties. They were then asked to sit in negotiating groups and given an hour to engage in a multilateral negotiation. Participants were asked to bear in mind the lessons learnt in the previous session during their negotiations.
|
84 kB |
|
|
25 kB |
|
|
79 kB |
|
|
80 kB |
|
|
81 kB |
|
|
78 kB |
Mr. Blanchot then analysed the negotiation process with the participants. He showed the participants a film where the Fisheries Case Study was simulated by another group of participants. Mr. Blanchot spoke about the importance of moving beyond rigid positions and exploring innovative options. He referred to ZOPA (Zone of possible agreement) versus Traditional Positional Bargaining and emphasized the need to look at interests behind positions. Ultimately people may want different things, but when they present it as rigid positions we tend to assume that their position conflicts with ours. The way to resolve it is by asking questions in the first round of negotiations- tolook at motivations, create variables and create mechanisms to support the variables at the table. Mr. Blanchot finally provided an analysis of the Fisheries Case Study.
12.30 - 13.30
Lunch
13.30 - 14.30
Session II (continued)
Managing Difficult Negotiations
Brook Boyer
Mr Boyer introduced the participants to the inevitable possibility of difficult negotiations and difficult negotiators. He discussed negotiations relating to the third session of the Conference of the Parties of the UNFCC in Kyoto on the 5th of December 1997. He screened a short film on New Zealand’s during the final negotiations under the Berlin Mandate to finalise the Kyoto Protocol. New Zealand on the afternoon of the last day of the negotiation sprung a surprise asking for a double conditionality where developed countries could agree to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions in exchange for a commitment by developing countries to limit their emissions from 2005 onwards. This created an uproar since it was contrary to the Berlin mandate where no new agenda would be introduced in Kyoto. Mr. Boyer asked the participants to divide themselves into 4 groups and each group was asked to imagine that it was Tanzania speaking on behalf of the G77 in to respond to New Zealand’s statement. The groups were asked to discuss within themselves what would be the best way to respond to New Zealand based on their learning from the earlier sessions. How could they save the meeting from collapsing into disarray?
14.30 - 15.30
Case / Exercise II – Conference of the Parties of the CBD
Brook Boyer
|
 |
The representative of each group was given the mic and asked to imagine s/he was the delegate from Tanzania and respond to New Zealand’s statement. Mr. Boyer then helped the participants to analyse their response and to think through whether their responses were constructive and saved the negotiations or destructive and reduced the discussion into further disarray. Mr. Boyer discussed ways in which one could disagree and yet acknowledge the importance of the other party’s views. He referred to the skill of active listening, engaging and developing innovative options rather than repeating one’s own position.
15.30 - 15.45
Tea/coffee break
16.00 - 17.30
Session III
Preparing for the Seventh Meeting of the Open-ended Working Group on Access and Benefit-sharing
Presentation and Four Quadrant Analysis
|
 |
Mr. Boyer concluded the day’s session with discussing responses to competitive behaviour. He spoke of the need to avoid destructive strategies, reflecting and analyzing the situation and reviewing one’s own behaviour, moving the discussion to more informal settings, using conciliatory language, turning positions into problems by asking clarificatory questions and active listening before active speaking.
17.30
End of the day
