Territorial conflict management
Introduction
Conflict resolution, also known as: conflict regulation or conflict transformation,[1][2] is the set of knowledge and skills put into practice to understand and intervene in the peaceful and non-violent resolution of confrontations between two or more people.
From a legal point of view, conflict resolution is also called: alternative conflict resolution or disputes (RAD), due to the influence of the Anglo-Saxon category, widely lavished in Common Law, known as alternative dispute resolution. Within this generic category, conflict resolution systems based on heteronomy or a third party's decision that mainly affect more people are included (arbitration "Arbitration (law)"), judicial conciliation "Conciliation (law)"), models based on opinion, binding or non-binding legal proposal) and on the other hand, on the autonomy or search for a solution by those involved or protagonists of the conflict (negotiation, facilitation "Facilitation (of meetings)"), mediation "Mediation (law)") and collaborative law")).[3].
The conflict
Conflict is a natural situation that arises from differences in the needs and interests that two or more people or groups may have and that, as one of the ways to resolve it, can generate a confrontation with the objective of harming and eliminating the rival party or taking away power of some kind, in favor of the person or group itself. Another way to address these differences is through dialogue, active listening and empathy, which seeks to know each of the needs and interests that determine the conflict, so that both parties can access what they need or are interested in, legitimizing the other and without excluding them; Only in this way can we truly understand conflict as a promoter of change.
It is currently accepted that conflicts are human in nature, distinguishing between internal conflict, which affects a single individual in reference to the choice of options, and external conflict between two or more people, generically called adversaries.
The pre-Socratic philosopher Heraclitus wrote that: conflict is the promoter of change and in turn is a consequence of it.[4] However, this position was not followed by later philosophical schools, which saw conflict as a source of individual and social disorder. Similarly, in the Judeo-Christian tradition, conflict was considered a negative element that had to be neutralized through persuasion or sanction "Sanction (right)").