Experiences and lessons learned in using electronic mail conferencing to discuss conflict management with a global audience.
A. Sherwood
Anna Sherwood is a consultant with the Community Forestry Unit, Policy and Planning Division, FAO Forestry Department.
From January to May 1996 an electronic conference (e-conference), entitled Addressing Natural Resource Conflicts through Community Forestry, was organized by the Community Forestry Unit of FAO's Forestry Policy and Planning Division, in the framework of its Forests, Trees and People Programme (FTPP).
This article first presents the background and context in which the e-conference was organized, relating the objectives of the e-conference to the programme's ongoing activities related to conflict management. It then outlines some of the activities undertaken to prepare for the e-conference and discusses the main operational and logistical features involved in running it. The article identifies some of the specific lessons learned from the e-conferencing approach used and assesses some of the strengths and weaknesses of the medium in general. The impact of the e-conference in relation to the field of conflict management is not the primary scope of this article. However, an accompanying box briefly refers to some of the ways in which the e-conference has helped to advance the conflict management programme of the Community Forestry Unit.
FAO's Community Forestry Unit is now conducting Phase II of FTPP. The aim of the programme is to improve the livelihoods of rural communities through the sustainable management of tree and forest resources. In recent years, the institutions working in partnership with the FTPP have identified conflict management (also known as dispute resolution) as a priority activity at both the global and regional levels. In 1991, in response to requests from various countries, a research project was conducted to examine the relevance of conflict resolution literature to community forestry. In October 1992 the Community Forestry Unit formally launched a programme on Conflict Management and Community Forestry as part of the FTPP and has since carried out a number of national activities in Latin America, Africa and Asia.
Recently, the development of the topic reached a stage where it was necessary to:
· assess the current understanding of the topic and identify gaps in the knowledge; gather information at the global level for the development of a conceptual document;· strengthen the institutional capacity in the regions; and
· work at both the global and regional levels to define the role and objectives of both the unit and the programme in conflict management, incorporating the specific needs and strategies in the regions.
Choosing the e-conference medium
E-conferencing was selected as a means for achieving the objectives in conflict management set out above because it was felt that it would be an excellent opportunity to:
· reach a wide cross-section of individuals and institutions in the different regions, particularly those involved in conflict management and natural resource management;· develop global knowledge based on comprehensive and widespread regional inputs;
· propose regional activities based on a global understanding;
· advance the institutionalization of the topic (by opening direct communications with numerous individuals within an organization or institution); and
· generate outputs on the topic more quickly than through other media.
|
What is an electronic conference? An electronic conference (e-conference) is a process which allows a group of individuals to discuss a given topic through the medium of electronic mail An e-conference uses listserver software to create a list of e-maid addresses with one collective address for the whole list. Conferees follow a subscription process to add their e-mail address to the list. Once subscribed to the list, conferees can send messages to the collective e-mail address from where the messages are relayed to all the other addresses on the list. An e-conference differs from electronic mailing lists, newsletters and news groups (which often use the same listserver software) in that discussions follow a set agenda for a defined period of time, discussing specific issues or sending out papers and asking conferees for comments. In addition to proceedings, e-conferences can be geared towards developing specific outputs such as bibliographies, conceptual documents, collections of case-studies, position papers and action plans. One of the key distinctions between an e-conference and other kinds of lists is that an e-conference is usually moderated by a subject matter expert and/or facilitator who lead(s) the discussions while other kinds of lists may not be moderated. |
E-conferencing is a relatively new medium, and the e-conference on conflict management was one of the first such events undertaken at FAO. When, in March 1995, initial research and planning for this event was undertaken, information on e-conferencing was not widely available, particularly with respect to possible models for structuring and operating such conferences.
E-conferences vary tremendously in scale, complexity and organization, desired outputs and, therefore, in their preparation time and staffing requirements. It is important to bear in mind that the e-conference on conflict management represented only one approach to e-conferencing.
This particular e-conference was organized by a central team or secretariat working from the Community Forestry Unit at FAO headquarters in Rome. It used a total of eight electronic conference rooms (listservers), provided by FAO/UNDPO's SARD-FORUM conferencing facilities. SARD-FORUM is an electronic, venue for the global exchange of information among people involved in sustainable agriculture and rural development (SARD).
It is a cooperative initiative of FAO's Sustainable Development Department (SDD); the Sustainable Energy and Environment Division (SEED) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); and IN FORUM, an international non-governmental organization. (A training manual on how to organize and operate different types e-conference is currently in preparation by INFORUM in conjunction with FAO's Staff Development Group of the Human Resources Planning Service.)
|
E-mail connectivity To help overcome limited e-mail connectivity in some regions (particularly in Asia and West and East Africa), the regional focal points were encouraged to identify individuals and institutions with access to email in the different regions, and to set up working groups to participate collectively through these connections in the e-conference discussions. Alternatively, national and regional working groups without e-mail access could fax or mail comments and outputs from their meetings to the regional focal point, which served as a liaison with the e-conference secretariat in Rome. The focal points would then distribute material from the e-conference in printed format for discussion in face-to-face working group meetings. |
|
Conference discussants and participants To oversee the relevance and quantity of contributions circulated in the e-conference, the secretariat decided to create two categories of conferees, discussants and participants, and to assign each group to separate e-conference rooms (listservers). Discussants were actively recruited by the e-conference secretariat: more than 100 invitations were sent to individuals and institutions working in community forestry, conflict management and related areas several months prior to the start of the e-conference. Discussants were requested to follow the proceedings closely and to provide comments and insights related to their particular area of expertise. The aim was to create a core group that could be relied on to provide regular and informed participation throughout the three months of discussions. Participants learned about the e-conference through the promotional campaign, or by contacting the FTPP national and regional facilitators, regional e-conference focal points or secretariat for more information. |
During the initial planning and preparation phase (June-August 1995), the secretariat consisted of a coordinator and a logistical assistant working part-time. For the intensive preparatory phase (September-December 1995), a community forestry intern assisted the secretariat, with all three members working full-time on the e-conference. The main tasks of organizing the conflict management e-conference are presented in the next Table.
Once the eight e-conference rooms (listservers) had been set up by the technical staff at SARD-FORUM, the operation of the rooms was largely overseen by the logistical assistants at FAO headquarters in Rome. Occasional technical support was required from SARD and FAO e-mail administration staff to resolve software problems.
In total, 95 discussants and 368 participants (463 conferees altogether) from 55 countries subscribed to the e-conference, with another three countries represented by non-electronic working groups. Included were practitioners, researchers and students from a range of disciplines (including the social and technical sciences) and institutions. From the field of conflict management there were mediators and trainers in conflict resolution (both from the field and from academic institutions), while natural resource management was covered by people working at the policy level, in the legal system and on project planning as well as by field project personnel.
Of the 55 countries which directly subscribed to the e-conference, 31 were developing countries (with non-electronic working groups in a further three developing countries participating through the regional e-conference focal points). While there were fewer e-mail addresses subscribed from the regions, in many instances there were several people participating through one e-mail connection. Approximately 20 percent of the conferees sent in at least one e-mail message. Contributions were less frequent than originally anticipated, but the discussions did generate a large volume of material (more than 1.5 Mb). Contributions sometimes consisted of well-researched and referenced pieces of up to three pages in length.
Timeline of preparatory activities for the FAO Community Forestry Unit's e-conference, March 1995 to January 1996
|
March-May 1995: Research |
June-August 1995: Planning and initial preparation |
September-October 1995: Preparation |
November 1995-January 1996: Final preparation |
|
· Gathering information about e-conferencing |
· Preparing initial work plan and budget |
· Meeting with e-conference advisory group in Washington, DC |
· Continuing promotional campaign and distributing information materials |
|
· Initial meetings with SARD-FORUM representatives |
· Preparing information packages to brief FTPP facilitators and partners in Africa Asia, Europe Latin America and North America |
· Identifying topics and authors for the issue paper and eight discussion papers to serve as starting points for the e-conference sessions |
· Developing the agenda and schedule |
In addition to the discussions taking place in the e-conference rooms, a number of parallel meetings and events were held in the regions. The e-conference focal points coordinated the activities of 17 national and regional working groups in Asia (Nepal), East Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya and the United Republic of Tanzania), West Africa (Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Mali, the Niger and Senegal) and Latin America (Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela). Each of the groups developed their own strategies for participating in the e-conference discussions. Some of the working groups circulated material from the e-conference to their own electronic networks. Others, without access to e-mail, held satellite meetings where printed material from the e-conference was distributed for discussion. Some of the working groups developed practical methodologies for analysing and managing conflicts, while others prepared case-studies and collected bibliographical material.
Costs
The costs involved in e-conferencing can vary tremendously depending on the duration of the event, the number of conferees involved, the objectives and desired outputs of the organizers and staffing requirements. E-conferences can cost as little as US$ 5000 (when, for example, the event is run from an organizer's computer as an "extra" or part-time activity involving no staffing costs and a limited number of conferees). A more average cost (based on e-conferences held through INFORUM and SARD-FORUM, involving a moderator, subject matter expert/facilitator, information manager and conference coordinator) would be between US$ 40000 and $ 50000. The cost of organizing and operating the Community Forestry Unit's e-conference, which was particularly large and complex, was almost US$ 250000, of which the main budget of some US$ 173000 was supplemented by donations in equipment and staff time valued at an additional US$ 66000.
This section addresses some of the lessons learned from the e-conference, based on reflections of the organizers and feedback received from conferees.
The logistical aspects of the e-conference were not complicated. Initial technical support was required to set up the eight e-conference rooms (listservers) for the e-conference on conflict management, but the operational tasks (e.g. overseeing subscriptions, loading electronic files in the SARD-Library, managing the circulation of messages) were quickly picked up by the two logistical assistants, neither of whom had been involved in e-conferencing before.
The number of conferees was manageable. It would have made little difference, in terms of workload, if an even larger number of conferees had subscribed to the e-conference. Thus, depending on the objectives of the organizers, and the administrative resources available, it is not necessary to set a limit on the number of conferees.
It was extremely helpful to have a mechanism for monitoring the circulation of messages. Contributions sent to the participant e-conference room were first channelled to the secretariat for review, which allowed "junk mail" to be filtered out and lengthy contributions to be edited or summarized. Also, in all eight e-conference rooms, messages longer than 40000 bytes or containing attachments were automatically diverted to the secretariat. It was important to control both the volume and quality of the contributions circulated to conferees. People quickly lose interest if they are "flooded" with messages. Also, costs for participating in an e-conference can otherwise be prohibitive for many people (who have to pay per page/transmission to receive e-mail), while others have accounts that can only receive a set amount of e-mail.
The e-conference focal points were an effective means for stimulating participation and disseminating information in the regions. A large number of people in the developing regions, who would otherwise have been excluded because they did not have e-mail access, were able to participate in the discussions through national and regional working groups coordinated by the e-conference focal points. As the global e-conference discussions were held in English, the regional working groups also provided people with the opportunity to work together in their own languages.
Preprepared materials were helpful for focusing the discussions and were widely appreciated by the conferees. Of the participants who responded to the final evaluation, two-thirds indicated that they had circulated material (the discussion papers in particular) to colleagues in their institutions, government officials, officers in forestry and natural resource departments and directors and field coordinators in NGOs. Some of the respondents also indicated that they were using discussion papers and virtual conflict cases from the e-mail conference in working groups, student seminars, for project planning and implementation or to develop research projects. Whether discussion papers, opening statements, case-studies and/or virtual cases are used, it is helpful to develop some sort of input for an e-conference, both to help focus the discussions and as an incentive ("carrot") for people to subscribe and contribute to the e-conference.
The schedule for the e-conference was (overly) intensive. The e-conference ran for a total of 15 weeks and was divided into several one- or two-week sessions, including five main two-week sessions in which two topics or papers were discussed simultaneously.
The final conferee evaluation indicated that many people had difficulty in keeping up with the discussions and reading all of the material that was circulated. In the developing regions, the two-week sessions did not allow enough time for people to download and read the material from the e-conference, translate and/or circulate this material in printed format to the working groups as well as organize working group meetings to formulate responses.
With hindsight, it might have been better to have included fewer items on the agenda, or to circulate shorter or fewer discussion papers. Alternatively, the e-conference could have been run over a longer period (most e-conferences run for six months or longer); however, this might have posed the problem of maintaining the conferees' interest over an extended time.
The logistical aspects of the e-conference were time-consuming. The logistical assistants processed thousands of "service messages" from the software supporting the e-conference rooms (such failed mail notices) and replied to more than 500 administrative or technical inquiries from conferees. In addition, more than half the conferees joined the e-conference once it was already underway and needed to be updated.
The "open subscription" process for the participant room was problematic. Undoubtedly, circulating the subscription instructions (for the participant room) in promotional material meant that a large number of people quickly learned about the e-conference and subscribed to it. However, apart from a list of e-mail addresses, it was difficult to collect information about the 463 individuals and institutions that had subscribed to the e-conference.
There was a period for introductions at the beginning of the e-conference, but only one-third of conferees sent in an introduction. Consequently, it would have been better to use a registration system whereby conferee data (name, address, institutional affiliation, nationality, etc.) were collected prior to giving people subscription instructions.
It was not necessary to have two different categories of conferees, nor separate e-conference rooms for the two groups. By directly inviting principal discussants to participate in the e-conference, the secretariat had hoped to create a core group committed to following the discussions closely and offering comments and insights related to their area of expertise. However, it was not possible to "guarantee" a certain level of participation in advance. Owing to time constraints and other commitments (e.g. travel), discussants did not participate as actively as anticipated. In fact, it was the participant group who proved to be the most "talkative". In retrospect, all conferees could have been assigned to the same e-conference room for the plenary discussions.
In addition to lessons-learned from the organizational and operational aspects of the e-conference on conflict management, several insights have also been gamed into the strengths and weaknesses of the e-conference medium in general.
Strengths of the e-conference medium
The first obvious strength of an e-conference is that it can include and reach far more people from more places for less financial cost than can any conference attended in person. A second obvious strength is that organizers and conferees can immediately and easily "network" with a large number of people, and quickly disseminate and share a large amount of information.
|
Substantive gains from the e-conference From the point of view of substance, the e-conference actively contributed to the integration of the fields of community forestry and conflict management and helped define the interface between the two fields. It accelerated the conceptualization of natural resource conflict management as an important issue and helped to increase the visibility of institutions working on the topic. The e-conference significantly advanced the Community Forestry Unit's own development of the topic: a concept note, annotated bibliography and collection of case-studies are planned for publication in 1997. The topic has been included on the proposed Draft Agenda for the 11th World Forestry Congress (Antalya, Turkey, 13-22 October 1997) which will be preceded by a Technical Meeting for Policy-makers and Decision-makers (Antalya, Turkey, 1013 October 1997). Published proceedings (including a two-volume compilation of the contributions from conferees, the nine discussion papers and a conferee directory) are available on request from FAO's Community Forestry Unit. Further information on community forestry and conflict management can be accessed at the FAO Community Forestry Unit site on the World Wide Web: http://www.fao.org/waicent/faoinfo/forestry/ftpp/conflict/conflict_01.htm |
Another strength is that the electronic medium works entirely in the written word, generating a verbatim transcript/permanent record. This had the effect of eliciting very thoughtful and organized discussion pieces or responses to others' messages. A further advantage is that people who join the e-conference late or miss part of the discussion are in a position to "catch up" in the reading and feel comfortable contributing to the discussion, secure in the knowledge that they are not repeating what others have said or speaking out of context.
As to the issue of cost-effectiveness, e-conferencing is not as expensive as one might imagine: the money saved by not holding a "real" conference (e.g. no travel or accommodation costs), is spent in other ways, including creating capacity at local and regional levels and building "info-structure".
An e-conference could also be valuable when used in conjunction with other communication or conferencing forms. For example, e-conferencing could be used prior to or as a follow-up to a face-to-face conference, workshop or consultation in developing an agenda or position paper, writing the proceedings, etc.
Weaknesses of the e-conference medium
Even if e-mail access is now available throughout the world, and even as its use expands, the cost of computers and the medium's technology does exclude large numbers of people, especially those removed from national and regional capitals in the developing world and people outside academic institutions or development organizations. An unfortunate irony of the medium is that people from universities in North America and Europe are typically provided free access to e-mail, while many who were participating in this e-conference from developing regions had to pay to send or receive messages.
There are tradeoffs in how people spend their time in an e-conference compared with a face-to-face conference. E-conferences often last months, while face-to-face conferences typically last a week or less. Attendees of real conferences, if they are held in a place other than where they are working, are usually in a position, if they wish, to devote full time to the discussions. Conferees in an e-conference participate at their regular workstation, they do not get "release time" from their normal work activities and are expected to participate as an "extra activity" with neither compensation nor professional recognition for having participated. Finally, people involved in an e-conference feel that "virtual relationships" are no substitute for the in-person networking that occurs in other conferences.
Some of the medium's strengths are also its weaknesses. People contributing to an e-conference might find the process both inhibiting and intimidating, knowing that their written statement is part of a permanent record. The time and care that people take, writing and rewriting their messages, make the exchanges less spontaneous. A related weakness has to do with the "ownership" of ideas: even if conferees are given a recommended citation format for referencing others' papers and contributions, conferees might feel reluctant to discuss their original research, fearing that others might "steal" their material. Finally, when ideas are written down, not only are they more tangible but they also can be seen as quite voluminous; without careful facilitation, readers can feel overwhelmed with the volume of e-mail messages.
E-conferencing has several other weaknesses as a means of communication and interaction. First, however quickly email messages are transmitted, face-to-face (or telephone) exchanges are much faster and less time-consuming e-conferencing does not appear to be as effective as face-to-face communication as a means of building a dialogue or coming to a consensus (apparently the silence represented by an empty "in box" is less uncomfortable in "cyberspace" than silence in a real conference or meeting).
In conclusion, e-conferencing proved an efficient and cost-effective means of networking and disseminating large amounts of information quickly. It provided the Community Forestry Unit [through FTPP) with the opportunity to involve both a large number and a diverse range of conferees in its discussions e-conferencing would appear to be particularly effective when used in combination with other communication or conferencing forms (e.g. as a preliminary or follow-on activity for face-to-face workshops, conferences and consultations). However, e-conferencing also has several limitations. It can be time-consuming both for organizers and conferees. It can be difficult to encourage regular and widespread participation in an e-conference and to involve some categories of actors (e.g. policy-makers and grassroots organizations), either owing to time constraints or limited e-mail connectivity in many parts of the world (particularly in developing countries).
