Role-playing simulation as a communication tool in community dialogue: Karkonosze Mountains case study

Abstract

This article describes a process of role-playing simulation (RPS) as it was used during an educational exercise in community dialogue in the Karkonosze Mountains region of southwest Poland. Over the past decade Karkonosze National Park, a regional tourist magnet, has provided an excellent example of environmental conflict emerging from the tensions between nature protection and economic development. The project we describe herein, a course called “Dynamics of Sustainable Development,” was designed to give students the direct experience of challenges in solving difficult social-ecological problems with many linked conflicts and tensions. We focused on RPS to emphasize factors crucial to compromise. Because teaching students about conflict solving was our main objective, the second indirect but expected experience was to stimulate discussions among real stakeholders. Although RPS itself was not performed in the presence of the real stakeholders, their participation was ensured by inviting them for a final public debate where they got a chance to express their opinions about what they heard from the students. RPS offered the course participants not only a closer look at the conflict in the Karkonosze related to sustainable development, but also an insight into the general psychological background and evolution of conflicts.

Keywords

community dialogue compromise conflict resolution discussion environmental conflict the Karkonosze Mountains role-playing simulation stakeholders sustainable development

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alkin, M.C. , & Christie, A.C. (2002). The use of role-play in teaching evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 23(2), 209-218.

Babbie, E. (2001). The practice of social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Chircop, A. (2000). Teaching integrated coastal management: lessons from the learning arena. Ocean & Coastal Management, 43, 343-359.

Fonseca, J. (2004). Contemporary psychodrama: New approaches to theory and technique. London: Psychology Press.

Forte, J.A. (2002). Mead, contemporary metatheory, and twenty-first-century interdisciplinary team work. Sociological Practice: A Journal of Clinical and Applied Sociology, 4(4), 315-334.

Green, K.C. (2002). Forecasting decisions in conflict situations: A comparison of game theory, role-playing, and unaided judgment. International Journal of Forecasting, 18, 321-344.

Holsbrink-Engels, G.A. (1997). The effects of the use of a conversational model and opportunities for reflection in computer based role-playing. Computers in Human Behavior, 13(3), 409-436.

Joldersma, C. , & Roelofs, E. (2004). The impact of soft OR-methods on problem structuring. European Journal of Operational Research, 152, 696-708.

Krolikowska, K. (2004). Konflikty midzy Karkonoskim Parkiem Narodowym a samorzadami lokalnymi w opiniach mieszkańców gmin karkonoskich. In M. Furmankiewicz & J. Potocki (Eds.), Problemy ochrony przyrody w zagospodarowaniu przestrzennym Sudetów (pp. 21-32). Jelenia Gora, Poland: Natural Sciences Museum.

10.

Ladousse, G.P. (1987). Role play. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

11.

Shubik, M. (1975). Games for society, business and war. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

12.

Stoll-Kleemann, S. (2001). Barriers to nature conservation in Germany: A model explaining opposition to protected areas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 369-385.