Statement_of_Work_Attach_A_0001.docx

Statement of Work

Project Title:

Transforming Social Conflict over Red Wolves

Background/Purpose:

The conflict over and around red wolves is influenced and compounded by local, regional and national conflict dynamics; by conflicting interests, identities, needs, concerns, perspectives and goals among diverse sectors, groups and individuals; by varying cultural, political, geographic, social components; by different scales of governance and varying receptivity and interest/engagement across governments and other groups; by larger historical and systemic dynamics; as well as by other intra-group (same side or “us vs us”) and inter-group (between groups or “us vs them”) dynamics. Some of these dynamics are local or specific, while many are national and general; but either way, these dynamics have had and will continue to have a profound influence on red wolf recovery efforts underway.

Similarly, how the conflict over red wolves in North Carolina is addressed - regardless of the outcome - will have significant ripple effects not only for red wolf recovery elsewhere, but also for other species recovery and conservation priorities across the nation. This ripple effect could be positive or negative, depending on the process and approach used to determine the outcome. The reason for this is that while people may not like any one specific decision made, they can live with that decision if they feel the process is fair, legitimate, inclusive. But what will move groups of people to strong resistance and retaliation (“revenge anger”) is if they are angry about the process used to make that decision.

Relatedly, wolves have a recent historical connection to organized protests and threats of violent extremism in the US – and the conflict surrounding wolves is increasingly being harnessed as a symbolic means to give voice to deeper societal divisions in this country. This was occurring even before recent, nationally significant events created the space and energetic capacity for even greater articulation of and action around “revenge anger” and extremism.

The above realities argue for a relationship-centered conservation conflict transformation (CCT) approach that serves to engage processes that address the tangible, presenting issues around red wolves, while also reconcile and transform the deeper-rooted conflicts that currently enable, and often inflame, destructive conflict conditions. The contract recipient should possess experience in implementing CCT through designing and facilitating multi-stakeholder, multi-jurisdictional and nested processes to transform deep-rooted conflict over controversial wildlife issues (preferably with human-wolf conflicts).

Overall goals and outcomes of a multi-year CCT intervention around red wolves:

1. Improved trust, transparency, communication and operational functioning within USFWS and among USFWS, state(s), NGOs, local partners and stakeholders.

2. Improved perceptions of and relationships among groups across and within various group affiliations. This may include federal-state(s), federal headquarters-regional-field, government-citizen, interest groups-federal/state/local, citizen-citizen. Improved relationships are characterized by increased trust and communication, improved and demonstrated capacity to repeatedly and productively engage in shared dialogue and decision-making, more broadly supported decisions, improved morale, and increased collective capacity to engage in and transform the natural ebbs and flows of conflict.

3. Improved intra-group alignment and functioning, as well as inter-group functioning and proven capacity for shared problem-solving.

4. Structural and process improvements to relevant dialogue and decision-making processes that will lead to improved accountability, decision-making, morale, reduced “noise” in the system, reduced potential for retaliation, and better clarity around and progress toward shared goals, both in intra-group and inter-group contexts.

5. Improved receptivity toward and cohesion around relevant goals at social and political levels.

6. CCT-process derived decisions, policies, programs and solutions that benefit from broader and more durable support.

7. Positive ‘ripple effect’ of increased shared problem-solving capacity and motivation to address other relevant, impacting and important social, political, cultural and natural resource and environmental issues.

8. Relevant individuals and entities, including in USFWS and elsewhere, possess demonstrated capacity to continually anticipate and prevent destructive conflict, as well as constructively and productively address emerging challenges and transform conflict as it arises.

Scope of Effort:

This funding will be used to support three key tasks – assess conflict, build capacity, and integrate CCT into existing and new processes – detailed below:

Task 1: Conduct a comprehensive assessment of the social conflict around red wolves. Individuals, institutions, communities and societal events and forces will impact and are impacted by the efforts to recover and live with red wolves. This comprehensive conflict assessment will be drawn from and vetted by individual confidential conversations across a broad swath of society. An assessment report will be written and disseminated at a single point in time, at the end of the first year, to all participants of the assessment where no individual or entity is given preferential treatment in the review or receipt of the report. This assessment report will provide a robust characterization of the system, including key stakeholders, how they individually and collectively contribute to unmet needs resulting in conflict in the system, the additional components that externally contribute to conflict, potential mechanisms to transform conflict sustainably and/or independently both near and long-term, and a strategy for initiating and implementing conflict transformation.

Purpose:

· To develop a direct relationship between contracted third party neutral (TPN) and individuals actively and potentially involved in or impacted by the conflict

· To establish a comprehensive understanding of the complexity and depth of the conflict as well as potential opportunities and obstacles to progress

· To build momentum and receptivity for constructive engagement

· To help ensure that those involved in dialogue and decision-making processes are well supported by their broader communities and constituents (and to help identify where gaps exist between group representative/leader and their constituents/members)

· To provide the TPN with deeper and broader contextual, systemic, historical information that helps the TPN design processes that are more efficient, effective, and culturally and context sensitive. This further helps the TPNs prevent and minimize unintended negative consequences of their or others’ actions.

· To inform the design of multi-layered processes to reconcile conflict and engage society in constructive, shared problem-solving and planning

· To improve receptivity and other necessary conditions for group dialogue and decision-making processes

Task 2: Capacity Building and Group Alignment. Building CCT capacity within USFWS and other groups, as appropriate, across diverse spheres of influence and decision-making will support the transformation of internal and external conflict around red wolves and improve agency internal alignment and government-government alignment, cooperation and productivity. Building CCT capacity and alignment within and among key individuals and groups operating within the current (and potentially future) spheres of red wolf-related activity will further support a networked system that can function more effectively and cooperatively, while minimizing and preventing retaliatory actions and unintended negative consequences. This task will be measured through evaluation of the assessment report provided in Task 1 and the completion of one, or possibly up to five, training workshops or other formal or informal capacity building or strategic alignment events (at least 80 people will participate).

Purpose:

· Capacity building in CCT aims to build individual and group’s knowledge and efficacy regarding the theory, skills, processes, principles and strategies of CCT. As a result, those who are involved in the issues are better able to understand their own role in conflict and work better with others to transform current and future conflicts.

· Sufficient and diverse individual capacity within and across a group and a system often results in more constructive conflict engagement generally, less “heat” in the conflict context, and over time, notable culture changes that support longer term improved relationships, improved structures and processes for dialogue, communication and decision-making, and more efficient and effective problem-solving capability.

· Breadth, depth and methodology of capacity building efforts will be tailored to individuals and groups based on need, culture, time constraints and other preferences. For instance, some groups/institutions may engage in one or more five-day workshops whereas other communities, individuals and groups may be more receptive to significantly shorter and/or more informal engagements.

Task 3: Engage multiple dialogue and decision-making processes to reconcile relationships, align individuals and groups toward shared goals and begin shared problem solving and decision-making at multiple levels of engagement and influence. Both the assessment and capacity building and alignment components of the intervention (above) will support the conditions of constructive receptivity and capacity for improved dialogue and decision-making in multiple spheres. This task will be measured through evaluation of the assessment report provided in Task 1 and proven by actions on the ground as follows:

· Demonstrable increase in trust and social cohesion among members of diverse groups, via quantitative and qualitative methods. Data will demonstrate positive change from the baseline which will occur during the assessment and at regular intervals throughout the intervention.

· Diverse groups and subgroups will reach agreement on specific problems of targeted concern (3-7 complex problems/areas of concern).

Purpose:

· Because there are multiple scales and degrees of dialogue, decision-making, engagement and conflict ongoing, the assessment will guide the TPN in determining where immediate needs and logical “next steps” are required.

· Ideally, the architecture of an intervention starts with individual engagement, then moves to same side or intragroup engagement, then to multi-party or inter-group engagement. Individual and same side engagement typically continue in some capacity throughout the duration of the intervention, such that multi-party engagements are interspersed among targeted individual and same side engagements to ensure that multi-party processes are supported by and aligned to meet the needs of the larger society – the institutions, communities and interest groups involved in and impacted by the multi-party process. This is the practical “how to” of what it means to engage a systems approach in complex, deep-rooted conflicts.

· Scale and scope of engagement will evolve in time and clarify through and after the assessment. Some institutions or groups are constants, regardless of scale and scope. This includes, among others, the role USFWS, states, legislative bodies, and national level NGOs play in red wolf recovery and conflict, regardless of location. Targeted localities may include the current 5-county boundary for the North Carolina Nonessential Experimental Population and/or other local or state level efforts.

Period of Performance:

The period of performance of this agreement is 36 months, April 2022 – March 2025.