Academic literature on the topic 'Conciliary behaviour'

<p>La teoría del sujeto de Bajoit es una teoría que intenta explorar las conductas individuales, a partir de la capacidad de la persona para constituirse en un individuo-sujeto-actor mediante la conciliación de las expectativas relacionales que ha construido a lo largo del proceso de socialización. En este proceso el individuo va configurando su identidad personal que se constituye por las identidades asignada, deseada y comprometida. El malestar, en este marco teórico, surge de las tensiones existenciales que se provocan ante la imposibilidad del individuo para conciliar lo que cree que lo otros esperan de él y lo que él mismo desearía ser y hacer, impidiéndole convertirse en un sujeto y en un actor de su propia existencia.</p><p><strong>Palabras clave:</strong> sujeto, tensión existencial, malestar</p><p> </p><p class="Ttulo21"><strong>Abstract</strong></p><p>The Bajoit’s theory of the subject is a theory that attempts to explore individual behaviors, starting from the person’s capacity to become an individual-subject-actor through the reconciliation of the relational expectations that has built throughout the socialization process. In this process, the individual shapes his personal identity, constituted by the assigned, desired, and committed identities. In this theoretical framework, the malaise arises from the existential tensions that are provoked by the person’s impossibility to conciliate what he believes others expect from him, and what he himself would like to be and do, which in turn does not allow him to become subject and actor of his own existence.</p><p><strong>Keywords:</strong><em> </em>subject, existential tension, malaise</p>

PurposeWhile the process of negotiation has been studied extensively, little research has been done on the factors that lead parties to the negotiation table. In light of this, the purpose of this paper is to examine effects of unilateral conciliatory initiatives (UCIs) (actions) on the willingness and preparedness of parties to negotiate.Design/methodology/approachThe study used a separate-sample posttest, 2 × 3 factorial design. Subjects were placed into simulated intractable resource- and identity-based conflicts. Groups then received UCIs (in the form of economic aid and apology) intended to benefit the other and contribute to a high commitment to de-escalation (ripeness). Ripeness was measured by increased empathy; and decreased distrust, escalatory behaviors (operationalized as aggression and autistic hostility), anger, win-lose/competitive orientation and negative attributions.FindingsUCIs were shown to impact both the state and the process of ripeness. Apology facilitated ripeness in an identity conflict and positively impacted five of the six resistance areas in a resource conflict. Economic aid likewise affected ripeness in an identity conflict but did not impact a resource conflict better than an apology. The offer of an apology affected empathy in both conflict types but economic aid did not do so in a resource conflict. It was also observed that an identity-based conflict produced less trust and increased negative attributions than did a resource conflict.Originality/valueThis suggests that identity and resource conflicts activate some resistance areas differently. It also reveals that similar interventions may be effective in both conflicts but that each UCI affects particular resistance areas differently. The findings suggest that there should be an increased emphasis on apology by conflict resolution practitioners. The practical and theoretical implications of apologies and resource sharing in de-escalation are discussed, to facilitate their appropriate use in resolution strategies that reduce tensions within conflict.

Rational choice approaches to reducing terrorist violence would suggest raising the costs of terrorism through punishment, thereby reducing the overall expected utility of terrorism. In this article, we argue that states should also consider raising the expected utility of abstaining from terrorism through rewards. We test effects of repressive (or punishing) and conciliatory (or rewarding) actions on terrorist behavior using the newly developed GATE-Israel dataset, which identifies events by Israeli state actors toward Palestinian targets on a full range of counterterrorism tactics and policies from 1987 to 2004. Results show that repressive actions are either unrelated to terror or related to subsequent increases in terror, and conciliatory actions are generally related to decreases in terror, depending on the tactical period. Findings also reveal the importance of understanding the role of terrorists’ constituencies for reducing violence.

The renowned water expert, John Briscoe, predicted a bleak future for India-Pakistan water relations across the Indus attributing it to Pakistan’s downstream anxieties vis-à-vis upstream regional hegemon-India. Do the other co-riparian states of India share the same bleak future across the South Asian rivers of the Ganges, Brahmaputra, and Meghna or are the water relations across these rivers peaceful as compared to the Indus? To answer this question, this study first explores India-Pakistan water disputes on the Indus and then analyses India-Bangladesh water disputes on the Ganges and Brahmaputra, India-Nepal, India-Bhutan, and Pakistan-Afghanistan water relations. The methodology adopted for this study is descriptive, historical, and analytical in its nature. The study concludes that India has not only failed to adopt a conciliatory approach towards Pakistan on the Indus but has generated mistrust amongst other neighbouring countries over water sharing due to its hegemonic hydro-behaviour. It recommends that India should adopt a conciliatory approach to have peaceful relations across the rivers of South Asia.