Walter Isard, Yun Ho Chung
July 1, 2001
This working paper speaks of "art and science" of nuancing conflicts in an unusual manner. We use the word "art" specifically to designate non-scientific factors. But when we employ the term "art and science" we have in mind the use of non-economic factors, for example diplomatic know-how and negotiation skill, that can be added to and, even more, intertwined with that which emanates from a rigorous scientific analysis of a conflict. We use the word nuancing to signify small, gradual shifting in positions that parties to a conflict make. The senior author of this paper has had close to 60 years of work with scientific economics and regional science. In the 1940s he was one of the first readers of the monumental work of von Neumann and Morgenstern on game theory — a work that was expected to solve many significant conflicts. Unfortunately, that work and numerous other works by economists, regional scientists and others who have improved and greatly extended game and related theory has had little effective application. Why is this so? The answer lies in the fact they have given only lip-service to non-economic factors such as politics, social conditions and culture. They have in general failed to integrate effectively both the scientific and nonscientific factors. We, too, in Peace Science have failed at effective application. What do we have to say on the Arab/Israel conflict, the Kashimir conflict, the possible forthcoming China/Taiwan conflict? Hence, our thrust in this paper is to urge that we move in the direction of bringing into our studies more of the key nonscientific factors and into our fold scholars who have ability at communication to develop ways to call to the attention of decision makers, political figures, negotiators, mediators and others the findings of our advanced scientific studies modified by such non-scientific factors.