The impact of decision-making on conflict: Rethinking the roles of technocrats and residents during Tidal River Management in coastal Bangladesh

Abstract

Tidal river management (TRM) is a building-with-nature practise which was locally developed to tackle the problems of polderization in the south-western delta of Bangladesh. This practise was subsequently adapted by public agencies. However, all TRM sites are associated with violent conflict. While law-enforcement agencies have often struggled to bring such conflict under control, there is variation in the extent to which conflict associated with TRM has been resolved at different study-sites. However, different decision-making approaches have characterized different implementations of TRM. Different implementations of TRM are also characterized by differences in the role of civil society organizations (CSOs). Therefore, this article hypothesizes that variation in conflict resolution is associated with variation in decision-making approaches and role of CSOs. Accordingly, the research question that this article seeks to answer is: How can conflict be resolved for the effective planning and implementation of TRM? This question is answered by analysing 5 case-studies on TRM using a typology of three different decision-making approaches: technocratic, participatory and sociocratic. Using data collected via 2 focus-group discussions, 66 semi-structured interviews and secondary research, this article analyses issues associated with power differentials, dysfunctional consensus, differences between local & scientific knowledge and the role of CSOs in resolving conflict. This research reveals that conflict during TRM implementation can be successfully resolved by the development of conflict resolution mechanisms which are locally-respected and are also considered trust-worthy by the elite. The elite will become more receptive to engaging with the public if TRM implementation is characterized by sociocratic decision-making.