Archives

Search Archives

2010 Census: Ford Foundation supporting national movement to increase citizen particapation.
Learn More »

Recent Spotlights »

View all Archives - Governance »

New Approaches to Conflict Resolution







overlapping, about inconsistent decisions by different agencies and programs, and about inadequacies in the machinery for resolving these jurisdictional disputes fairly and efficiently.

Regulatory Disputes

While regulatory bodies resolve major policy issues, they also process large numbers of routine disputes. For example, the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB), in addition to allocating airline routes (large, complex disputes), will in a given year also handle several thousand passenger and shipper complaints, tariff applications, and referrals. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), in addition to about 100 formal hearings per year, will also rule on several thousand registration statements. During Fiscal Year 1976, the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC), received 97,674 complaints, resolved 82,537, and had a backlog of 122,000 cases.

There are differences of degree among the kinds of conflicts that arise in the normal regulatory process and the more complex disputes. The routine disputes involve fewer parties, the range of choice is narrower, the implications of alternative decisions are less dramatic, and fewer decision-making bodies are involved. Still, the high volume of such disputes presents serious management problems and consumes substantial energies and resources. At both the federal and state levels, agency dockets are clogged, resulting in inordinate delays in the processing of licenses and permits and in the administration of social programs. The sheer volume of the work that does get done means that even though each decision has limited impact, the overall effect can be great. Moreover, these disputes sometimes contain the germs of more complex issues. For