1. INTERNATIONAL POLICY CONFERENCE “COMPETITIVENESS & DIVERSIFICATION: STRATEGIC CHALLENGES IN A PETROLEUM- RICH ECONOMY” Strategic Dispute Dynamics and Resolution: Government, Business and Non-state Actor Interfaces Peter Jenkins 14 – 15 march 2011, Accra, Ghana

2. Strategic Dispute Dynamics and Resolution: Government, Business and Non-state Actor Interfaces Peter Jenkins www.adrgambassadors.com 14 March 2011 www.adrgambassadors.com

3. Inter-state disputes only one of four categories of possible resource-related disputes: -inter- state -government/provincial or local entities -government/business -government/non-state actors -

4. Border delimitation only one of several causes of inter- state disputes since 1960: -inter-factional strife -ethnic rivalries -religious differences -Cold War manoeuvring -climate-induced migration -trafficking and other organised crime

5. Some border disputes more resource-related than others: -Ethiopia/Eritrea -Libya/Chad -Western Sahara -Botswana/Namibia -Nigeria/Cameroon -(1967 Nigerian Civil War) -(Katanga Crisis)

6. Some examples of resource-related disputes between governments and provincial entities: -Nigeria: Delta region -Angola -Sierra Leone -North and South Sudan

7. Disputes between governments and businesses can involve local enterprises or transnational affiliates, and can be either direct or indirect: -direct: usually contract-related -indirect: disputes can stem from the corruption of host officials, or from abuse of the rights of local inhabitants

8. Inter-state disputes can be avoided or resolved peacefully by recourse to: -the International Court of Justice -the UN Security Council (Chapter VI of the UN Charter) -other arbitration or mediation mechanisms -the UN Law of the Sea Convention

9. The risk of intra-state disputes can be minimised by: - strong central government institutions (UN Convention against Corruption) - the rule of law (UNCAC) - sovereign wealth funds: - the pacing and spacing of disbursements - developing economic potential (education and health) - developing export potential - strengthening institutions - transparency of accruals and disbursements - making embezzlement difficult - inclusive decision-making and accountability

10. The interface with local communities presents challenges for central government if disputes are to be avoided: -equitable sharing of revenues from resource extraction -negotiating with legitimate representatives of local communities -encouraging transparency at the local level -avoiding local eruptions of “the Dutch Disease” -social protection -avoiding damage to the environment

11. Minimising the risk of government/business disputes: - keeping equity considerations in mind - boosting bargaining power through knowledge acquisition and by drawing on the experience of others - local procurement, local content, local employment, and technology transfer requirements - compliance with social and environmental norms (UN Global Compact) - the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) - requiring advance consultation - the physical protection of extractive installations - dispute resolution provisions - combating anti-competitive business practices

12. The interface between government and non-state actors: -NGOs can form a useful early warning system -the threat from organised crime networks can be countered by avoiding resource booms and implementing the UN Transnational Organised Crime Convention -engagement with insurgents can be preferable to the use of force (but see also “Negotiating Skills for Conflict Resolution”)

13. The case for recourse to mediation: -quicker, cheaper and more flexible than arbitration or litigation -shared benefits vs. “winner takes all” -principled bargaining vs. positional bargaining -giving expression to common interests -the human factor