Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
Fig. 14.3
Three-
dimensional case
z
B(0,1,1)
g
A(1,0,0)
y
x
14.2.4 Extensions
The first conclusion is an analytical one: the specifications presented allow of
describing clearly the positions taken up by actual or potential negotiators (or,
equally, “good offices” people). Furthermore, some links can be laid with dynamic
negotiation processes, for instance the speed of reaction in terms of proposals and
counter-proposals (again Paelinck and van Gastel
1991
, p.84).
The second conclusion is that elements of the specification need (optimal)
modification to allow the negotiation to progress and succeed; in the cases
presented above the extension of the feasible space is the most important one,
and possibilities exist to formulate
that
optimizing problem (Paelinck
2000
).
Finally Boulware (“all or nothing”, “take it or leave it”; Paelinck and van Gastel
1991
, p.75) strategies could be investigated, using for instance a function inspired
of the
arg ch
-type:
h
i
1
=
2
ˆ
ln e
þ
ð
z
1
Þ
ð
14
:
23
Þ
which is clearly not defined for
z
<
1
.
14.3 Monitoring Conflict Resolution: A Topographical
Approach
This section takes up the representation problem again, but in a different vein, to wit
the topographical representation of different phases of the process of negotiation; a
topographical representation (or envelopment, or embedding) is proposed, an
example being worked out; mathematics are consigned in an appendix.
Next section first recalls the main ideas of hypergraph conflict analysis; it can be
shown indeed (Paelinck and van Gastel
1991
, p.73) that this approach can be
considered as a discrete version of the continuous negotiation space treated in
