|
Davis & Lewicki (2003)
|
Bryan (2003)
|
Environmental Framing
Consortium (2005)
|
|
Identity – focuses
on how individuals answer the question “who am I?” (Davis & Lewicki 2003)
|
Cultural - the predominant values, attitudes, beliefs, and social customs of a culture (Bryan 2003)
|
Identity – addresses
the question “who am I?” (Environmental Framing Consortium 2005)
|
|
|
Demographic – characteristics of the
population such as age, gender, race, religion and ethnic categories,
also includes characteristics of populations caused by migrations that
may alter social and political
dimensions, as well as public preferences and attitudes (Bryan 2003)
|
|
|
Characterization
– how individuals understand someone else to be (Davis & Lewicki 2003) (“Who are they?”)
|
|
Characterization
– addresses the question “who are they?” (Environmental Framing Consortium 2005)
|
|
Risk –
assessments of potential benefits and costs, gains or losses, or advantages
and disadvantages associated with disputed environmental actions (Davis & Lewicki 2003)
|
Economic - levels of prosperity, inflation, interest rates, tax rates, labor, capital, economic markets, general prosperity of a community or region (Bryan 2003)
|
Gain/Loss –
addresses how individuals asses potential loss and gain regarding key
decisions in policy situations (Environmental Framing Consortium 2005)
|
|
|
|
Risk –
addresses the perceived risk associated with environmental policies and
options (Environmental Framing Consortium 2005)
|
|
|
Ecological - encompasses
the entire biotic, geologic, and climatologic system in which humans live
their daily lives (Bryan 2003)
|
Views of
Nature – addresses how individuals perceive the effect of human interaction
on the environment (Environmental Framing Consortium 2005)
|
|
Fact-finding
- how technical experts see and approach their roles
in environmental disputes, how non-expert stakeholders frame the use and value of
technical information, how that framing influences what information they
will seek and accept, how the communication of technical information
affects the relationships between information producers and users (Davis & Lewicki 2003)
|
|
Fact –
addresses how individuals relate to and process facts in the policy dispute
and address the extent to which people trust factual information (Environmental Framing Consortium 2005)
|
|
Conflict
Management – focuses on disputants’ preferences for how the conflict
management process should be managed (Davis & Lewicki 2003)
|
Legal – laws, regulations, legal procedures, court decisions, characteristics of legal institutions and values, as well as the general institutionalization of stability and legal processes (Bryan 2003)
|
Conflict
Management – addresses how individuals relate to various policy or conflict
resolution alternatives (Environmental Framing Consortium 2005)
|
|
Social
Control - individual views about how decisions regarding social issues should
be made (Davis & Lewicki 2003)
|
|
|
|
Power – explores
ways individuals can gain power or leverage over the other parties in the
dispute (Davis & Lewicki 2003)
|
Political - consists
of characteristics of the political processes and institutions in a society (Bryan 2003)
|
|
|
|
Technological
- characterized by the general level of knowledge and capability of science,
engineering, medicine, and other substantive areas, general
capacities for communication, transportation, information processing, medical
services, military weaponry, environmental
analysis, production, manufacturing processes, and agricultural production (Bryan 2003)
|
|
Identity
The identity frame addresses how individuals answer the question "Who am I?" This includes what they identify as and who they identify themselves with. The decisions of these individuals are influenced by their beliefs and values that derive from various groups they identify with.
Characterization
The characterization frame addresses how an individual may view others. In conflict situations, an individual's view of the opposing side influences their thoughts and opinions. How one characterizes another, good or bad, will be included in decision making.
Risk
The risk assessment frame addresses how risk is balanced. People will analyze situations based on gains, losses, costs, benefits, advantages, and disadvantages. The weight of these risks factor into decision making.
Fact
The fact frame addresses how individuals view factual information. This includes how much people seek out information, how they process that information, and how willing they are to trust it.
Conflict Management
The conflict management frame addresses how involved parties prefer conflict to be handled. This can include legal and social lenses influencing disputants' perceptions of how conflict should be managed and resolved.
I began my framework with identity. Individual identities include how an individual may identify themselves and what groups they identify with. When an individual identifies themselves with a particular group or identity, they take on certain beliefs and values based on those identities. Identity is arguably the most important piece of framework. An individual's identity has some sort of effect on every other frame in this framework. These identities play a major role in decision making.
The second frame in my framework is characterization. Characterization addresses the view individuals have of other groups or identities. This frame is largely influenced by past experiences as well as cultural attitudes. Characterization is primarily addressing stereotypes and biases. Identities are closely related to this frame. Individuals may feel personally threatened if they feel one of their identities or groups are under attack. Good or bad, the perception one has of others has a big influence on their decision making.
My third frame is risk. How people weigh out and respond to risk factors will affect conflict. Most conflicts a person may come across will involve some sort of give and take. There is always an assessment of possible gains and losses in a variety of fields including economic, social, or moral. An individual's risk assessment often varies from person to person. The perceived net risk has a big influence on decision making.
My fourth frame is facts. The fact frame is included to address how people view factual information. Whether or not an individual seeks out facts, how they interpret those facts, an how willing they are to trust them will factor into their decision making. This frame also addresses how an individual may choose which facts are important and which are not. The value people place on factual information will factor into their interpretation of a conflict.
The fifth frame in my framework is conflict management. This addresses how people believe conflict should be handled and thus will influence how a decision is made. This can involve legal or political action, protests, negotiations, and more. Environmental conflicts heavily involve political and legal aspects.
References
Bryan, T. (2003). Context in environmental conflicts: Where you stand depends on where you sit.
Environmental Practice, 5(3), 256-264.
Davis, C. B., & Lewicki, R. J. (2003). Environmental conflict resolution: Framing and intractability--an introduction. Environmental Practice, 5(3), 200-206.
Environmental Framing Consortium. (2005).
Framing choices. Understanding Environmental Problems. http://www.intractableconflict.org/environmentalframing/framing_choices.shtml
Comments
Post a Comment