Community Conflict

The disruption of social relationships within a selfidentified group of people located in a specific location.

Community Conflict Defined

Kenneth Wilkins presents an argument that “community” is an “interactional field” providing for “both turbulent and cohesive order and disarray, of self-seeking and community-oriented interaction” (Wilkinson, 1991). Community conflict is the disruption of these social relationships and interaction processes within a community (Allen, 1995). A variety of stressors often leading to rural community conflict are provided and then an overview of methods for resolving these conflicts will be summarized.

Causes of Community Conflict

Community conflict in rural locations has many causes. Societal conflicts and threats to traditional ways of being are often resolved at the community level. These communities usually have their own culture and ways of developing leadership and resolving conflict. Recent history illustrates many causes of conflict at the community level. They include new migrants to the community, changes in agriculture resulting in larger animal confinement operations, school and hospital consolidation, use of public lands, and environmental disputes (Thu and Durrenberger, 1998; Martin, 2003; Daniels and Walker, 2001; Nie, 2003).

What causes rural community conflict? Community conflict can be seen as a struggle between opponents over values and/or claims to scarce resources such as status, power or control over finite resources including money and natural resources within a rural place (Coser, 1956). Every specific conflict is based on a balance of consensus and dissensus, of agreement and disagreement, of interests and values. Social theorists have identified several dimensions of social conflict that are useful in understanding local conflict. There are those theorists that see conflict as driven by class differences within a community. From this perspective, conflict is driven by the interests of the power elite who control the local decision-making process and other citizens who disagree with the interests of those who control the decision-making process (Deutsch, 1973). This view of community conflict is outside the individual. Others view consciousness as necessary for conflict to be exhibited within a community (Wilmot and Hocker, 2001). Members of a community may be in competition for resources, or they may be in potential conflict with one another, but according to this perspective a community is not in conflict if the members are unaware of the disagreement. Therefore, conflict has both a structural dimension—those in control or power—and an individual dimension—the belief that one is in conflict with others within the community. Imbedded in each of these conceptual models of conflict is the notion that social relationships within the community setting are disrupted. Traditional interaction patterns among residents are not changed as residents no longer communicate in a positive manner with others, and this can go as far as residents no longer attending social functions such as religious meetings, school gatherings and town functions if the opponents are present at these activities.

What causes conflict within rural communities? Generally there are two basic reasons for local conflict. A difference in values over what is valued within the community is often a cause of conflict. The other is competition over scarce resources. Value-driven conflict can be viewed as conflict over deeply held values among citizens in the community. We can identify community conflict through the lens of the following criteria. Two parties are engaged in a dispute; mutually exclusive goals or values exist; interaction is characterized by behavior designed to defeat, reduce or suppress the opponent; and the parties have an imbalance or relative favored position of power vis-a`-vis one another.

Forms of Community Conflict

The two primary forms of conflict—value conflict and resource conflict—can be identified by several criteria. Value conflict is a situation in which all sides in an issue do not agree as to what is valued in the community. Disagreement exists as to what should be done next in the community, and the dissensus that exists is based on differing values, which impacts the next steps the community believes it should take. Resource conflict can be identified because all sides in the community or several communities agree on what is valued. They see the resource as valued and limited; therefore, whoever “wins” the dispute will take all of the resource, and it is perceived as a win-lose contest. Neither side sees an alternative to winning all or losing all of the resource (Pruitt and Rubin, 1986).

To understand rural community conflict it is also important to understand the attributes of a rural community. One way to do this is to think of a continuum from rural to urban (Allen and Dillman, 1994). The first dimension can be thought of as community interaction patterns when conflict does not exist. In a rural community, interpersonal interaction is required. When a rural citizen engages another rural citizen, it is mandatory that they communicate with one another about the daily activities within a community. This can often be seen by urbanites as over-communication, where rural citizens talk about issues that are outside the realm of the activities in which they are engaged. An example might be buying a loaf of bread within a rural community. When buying the bread, the citizens talk about who is moving from town, who is getting married or divorced or whose cattle broke out on the highway the night before. In an urban environment, interaction is voluntary; therefore, residents generally only talk about the particular action or activity they are engaged in. It is not necessary for urbanites to place their activity within the context of the rest of the community. Understanding rural community dynamics is important in understanding conflict, because in a rural setting conflict often disrupts this traditional way of doing business. So the consequences of local conflict can be seen throughout the institutions within the community. It is possible that rural community conflict may have more impact on social relationships and local economics because of these traditional ways of interacting.

Stages of Community Conflict

Rural community conflict moves through stages as sides line up to oppose each other. The first stage is the build-up stage. During this stage community residents begin focusing on a specific issue in the community. Given that rural residents generally talk about a large number of community issues, often the build-up stage can be seen as residents begin spending a large amount of time talking and gathering information about a specific topic or issue. It is during this stage that residents begin identifying others who have similar values as they do or believe a resource is in jeopardy in their community. It is possible to see citizens starting to line up on one side or the other of an issue, and they begin to see those who are opposed to them as the opponents in the dispute. Coalitions develop and are organized during the build-up stage of community conflict.

The second stage of community conflict is the high conflict stage. In the high conflict stage, residents have identified who is for or against a particular issue. The residents begin to state their opposition formally in letters to the editor, at public meetings, by not buying from businesses that are owned by opponents. We also see normal social interaction seriously disrupted. It is not uncommon in the high conflict stage to see residents no longer speaking to one another if they are on opposing sides of a dispute or not allowing their children to socialize with children of opponents. It is during this stage that opponents are seen as villains. Residents state their positions in terms of those who are for their side having a higher value system. Those who are on the other side are perceived as being not only wrong but often immoral. During this stage of conflict the positions are hardened and carved in stone through the letters, public statements and often lawsuits. Charges and counter-charges develop as the conflict escalates within the community. During this stage social relationships are seriously disrupted and a great deal of energy is expended by residents highly engaged in the conflict.

The third stage of community conflict is the postor new build-up stage. During this stage of the local conflict, a quiet atmosphere develops in the community. Where in the high conflict stage the conflict takes center stage in a majority of discussions in the community, during the post- or new build-up stage residents withdraw from the dispute. If a resolution was reached following the high conflict stage, the post-stage can be identified by residents attempting to slowly rebuild social relationships that were disrupted during the dispute. If no resolution was reached where a consensus exists as to what will be done to resolve the conflict, the third stage becomes a new build-up stage. It is important to note that often after a serious conflict within a community, the leaders of the opposing sides often withdraw from public roles and generally do not return to leadership roles. This reduces the overall social capital within a community and reduces a community’s capacity to manage conflict in the future.

As for where within the stages of conflict intervention has a high probability of success, research has shown that during the build-up stage of conflict and during the post- or new build-up stage are where intervention into the conflict has the highest probability of success. During the high conflict stage where individuals have publicly identified the enemy, those in opposition, and have identified them as immoral and lacking character, it is very difficult to intervene and find resolution. During this stage, those interested in resolving the conflict are most likely to spend their time organizing and preparing for a resolution process after the conflict moves to the post- or new build-up stage.

Resolving Rural Community Conflict

Resolving value conflict is often believed to be a very difficult if not impossible task. Yet, research has shown that value conflicts can often be resolved and can actually have a positive impact on the future of the community. Some basic steps can be taken to resolve valuebased conflict. The first step is to identify the stage of the conflict. Identifying a conflict in the build-up stage provides a window of opportunity for local residents to use traditional rural community interaction patterns, such as face-to-face discussions with both sides, before the coalitions develop and formal positions are taken. After identifying the stage of the conflict, it is important to identify the key players in the dispute. These may often be informal leaders (those who do not have official leadership roles) and formal leaders (those individuals who hold elected positions). In value conflicts, it is important to bring the dispute into the open. Often a public meeting is useful as a platform to have the community clearly articulate its values. Then, by bringing the key leaders together to discuss the differences, it may be possible to focus on the areas of agreement. It is important to create an environment where all disputed values are represented by a local citizen. For serious disputes where threats or actions have been taken toward property or individuals, it is wise to bring in a professional mediator.

Resolving resource conflict is a different process than the process for resolving value conflict. The first step is the same; identifying the stage of the conflict is important. The second step is also similar in that it is important to identify the key players. It is at the third stage where the resolution process differs. Given that resource conflict is often about institutions such as schools, churches or hospitals, the resolution process needs to be thought of as a community building process. The reason for this is that there is a very real possibility that a community may lose its institution, and this may mean building a community across several towns. Given that a community is a social system, it is important to rebuild social relationships. To do this, it is possible to use existing or to create new social functions where the opponents are brought together to learn about one another at a personal level. These functions can be something as simple as a community picnic. During this period of time, the representatives of the differing sides of the dispute can be formed into a team to identify new ways to develop an image of who is a member of the community. The concept here is that if a school is consolidated and a resource conflict develops, it is possible to identify several towns as part of a “community,” which means that the resource is not actually lost; it is now shared in the form of a consolidated school. Resolving resource conflict is much like building the social relationships of a community from scratch. Therefore, it is a slow and time-consuming process.

Community Conflict: Using It for Progress

Conflict can be a positive process for a community if social processes are used to resolve the disputes. As an example, value conflict brings new perspectives to the community and can be the impetus to try new development strategies in the community. Value conflict provides a platform for minority views in the community, and its resolution can be a way of identifying similar values among all community residents. Resource conflict identifies areas for new positive coalitions to be developed in the community, adding to the community’s capacity to manage stress. Resource conflict provides very specific areas where development can occur in the community. Often the social activities developed to resolve the conflict result in a new marketing option for the development of the community.

Community conflict in rural areas is a normal phenomenon that can have positive or very negative impacts on the long-term quality of life of a community. When conflict is managed at the community level, it can have long-lasting positive impacts on the community.

— John C. Allen

See also

Community; Community Capitals; Development, Community and Economic

References

Allen, John C. and Don A. Dillman. Against All Odds: Rural Community in the Information Age. Boulder, Colorado, Westview Press. 1994.
Allen, John C. “Training Environmental Mediators: A Community-Based Approach.” Chapter 5, pages 49-59 in Mediating Environmental Conflicts: Theory and Practice. Edited by J. Walton Blackburn and Willa Marie Bruce. Westport, CT: Quorum Books, 1995.
Coser, Lewis. The Functions of Social Conflict. New York: The Free Press, 1956
Daniels, Steven E. and Greg B. Walker. Working Through Environmental Conflict: The Collaborative Learning Approach. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2001.
Deutsch, Michael. The Resolution of Conflict. New Haven: CT: Yale University Press, 1973.
Nie, Martin. “Drivers of Natural Resource Based Conflict.” Policy Sciences. 36 (2003): 307-341.
Pruitt, Dean. G. and Rubin, Jeffrey Z. Social Conflict. New York: Random House, 1986.
Thu, Kendell M. and E. Paul Durrenbgerger (eds.). Pigs, Profits and Rural Communities. New York: State University of New York Press, 1998.
Wilkinson, Kenneth. The Community in Rural America. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1991.
Wilmot, William W. and John L. Hocker. Interpersonal Conflict, 6th ed. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2001.