논문

The purpose of this study is to search for a conflict resolution alternative by
means of cooperative rule and strategy. In this paper, the concept of ‘cooperative
rule’ is defined as a statement or principle designed to lead troubled parties to
settle a dispute between the two organizations, and ‘strategy’ is understood to
mean a technology to increase the acceptability of cooperative rules. This study
seeks two objectives: The one is to recognize theoretically the concept of rule on
the public administration sphere, the other is to suggest practically the alternative
of conflict resolution in intergovernmental relations (IGR).

To this end, we analysed the exemplary case of conflict resolutions between the
two local governments in the face of the problem to construct environmental
waste facilities. As a result of the case analysis, we found four rules and two
strategies that were provided to convert the dispute phase into the cooperative
one. The findings are as follows: First, Articles of Local Autonomy Administration
Law was used as a formal rule in the starting point of negotiations; Second, two
side negotiators resolved the complicated issues into cooperative and conflictive
ones, and treated the concerned issue independently at each level(Dissolution
rule). Third, they shared every information needed by each side and widened the
belt of consensus (Information-sharing rule); Fourth, they set the limit to the
scope and number of cooperation agendas and regulated their actions by
themselves (Decision rule); Finally, in order to increase the acceptability of these
rules, they used the payoff and resource exchange strategy based on systematic
modes.