Ombuds* and the green economy.

A reflection by Wayne Marriott from the panel discussion at the AMINZ conference 2024. [Titled: ADR* and the Green Economy].

The panellists explored how ADR contributes to environmental sustainability and resilient communities in the Green Economy. They gave concrete examples of how ADR unlocks remedies to disputes with climate change as its genesis.

So, how does ADR appear in society's infrastructure?

Corrosive environments, a direct result of climate change, have become more prevalent, underscoring the urgent need for action. The introduction of fast-track legislation in New Zealand, both existing and new, that accelerates infrastructure development is limiting the opportunities for the ADR process.

The process of bringing people to the mediation table can take time. During this period, relationships can change and, indeed, worsen. This can have dire effects on the quality of the mediation process and its intended peaceful remedy. Especially where public interests are at stake, the usual value of confidentiality of the process and outcome means that carefully scripted outcomes can be published. As practitioners, we should not underestimate the time required to craft a permissible disclosure.

How could the Organisational Ombuds contribute to improved outcomes in climate conflict?

One challenge of the design of an ADR process is that the outcome of the process results in no-winners. The tensions created by climate change are difficult to navigate for the parties and the environment affected by climate adaptations. The scale of change is so huge that the funding of ADR in this context is extremely limited. We know that when people are not adequately heard, they find additional and increasingly disruptive methods to articulate their feelings, beliefs, and needs. A mechanism to allow the early disclosure of positions, issues and interests is needed to facilitate meaningful engagement that resolves conflict at its earliest point. Even through the litigious process, these processes have merit, whereby some disputes are settled on the court's steps by parties motivated by people with unheard interests.

The Organisational Ombuds [OO] work can expose parties to carefully crafted what-ifs by applying the naïve-enquirer. As a form of conflict coaching, the OO can assist people to be more creative in their deliberations and decision-making in formulating resolutions to disputes from environmental issues. Then, applying facilitative communication models, such as mediation, the OO illuminates the pathway for the parties to talk together. By creating opportunities for collaboration, the OO, as an independent, enables people to co-create tangible and sustainable forms of communication that lead to resolutions in an ever-changing environment.

The place for these OOs is embedded within the communities affected by climate change. How these services are funded is contestable and controversial. As independent luminaries, the funding of the work of the OO is fraught with confusion. The very formulation of these resources calls into question the independence of the people tasked with enabling peace. There seems to be no end to what might appear to be an ethical conundrum. To question ethics leads to promoting ethical practice, which is eventually called into question. It’s a cycle. With this in mind, we are reminded that conflict is complicated. Humans are complicated. We are in dire need of expert navigators – like Organisational Ombuds.

Do you want to know more about Organisational OImbuds? check this out!