SDDP Economic Integration- Actions, July 2007 (3rd co-laboratory)
SDDP_Economic Integration- Actions
Twenty-one business and economics stakeholder representatives with diverse perspectives and experiences participated at the three successive bi-communal workshops on 3, 10 and 27 July 2007. During the first workshop, which was dedicated to jointly visualise and describe the desired situation, i.e. the envisioned Cyprus with respect to economic integration and free movement of goods and services within Cyprus and the EU. Economics and business experts identified 48 factors that describe the benefits / opportunities for Cyprus of free movement of goods and services. The second workshop aimed at identifying the current situation with its obstacles and perceived threats in achieving the envisioned Cyprus—economic integration and free movement of goods and services within Cyprus and the EU. The stakeholder representatives identified 62 of these obstacles and perceived threats. During the final workshop, economics and business experts proposed 27 actions to achieve economic integration in Cyprus and therefore to both overcome the obstacles and to reap the benefits in achieving free movements of goods and services within Cyprus and the EU. The stakeholder representatives were engaged in dialogue sessions that were designed and conducted employing the Structured Dialogic Design Process founded in systems sciences.
In total, three bi-communal co-laboratories took place in July 2007. For the third one, The Economic Integration co-laboratory – Actions dealt with designing an action plan , the triggering question that was tackled was:
- “With the aim of economic integration; what actions should be taken to overcome the obstacles and to reap the benefits in achieving free movement of goods and services?”
Famagustians participating in this co-laboratory identified action options to implement in projects that will help overcoming the current obstacles and achieving the envisioned future.At Fulbright Center for a session of three hours, experts in economics and business engaged in a structured dialogue focusing on the triggering question
“With the aim of economic integration; what actions should be taken to overcome the obstacles and to reap the benefits in achieving free movement of goods and services?”
In response to the TQ, the participants, a smaller group of stakeholder representatives, came up with 27 actions, that should be taken in order to overcome the identified obstacles.
Interpretation of the Results
An effective action plan needs to attempt to deal with the root causes first with the aim of reaching the idealized vision. Thus, the root cause which came up in the second session and which is the main cause preventing the two communities reaching to the idealized vision was the obstacle #31: The fact that the deep state of Turkey does not like the TC to economically integrate with the GC community and with the EU, they want TCs to be solely dependent on Turkey.
Here, within the methodology’s limits and with careful assessment, one can chose to trade off between the most yielding and the most influential factor when tackled. It is argued that obstacle #31 is a rather difficult one to solve with the available tools in hand. This is not at all surprising when considering it is the root obstacle and it is an external factor.
However, one can choose to tackle obstacle #15 (Lack of communication (telephone, mobile, fax and language)) which can prove to be more yielding in terms of results. This is simply because; solving obstacle #15 needs more practical action and organization than legal or political initiatives. Especially, when considering the level of frustration and fatigue in both communities, reaching to tangible results in a shorter time period becomes more important. On the other hand, according to the methodology, since obstacle #15 is at the top level (Level I), it will not make easier solving the obstacles in levels below.
Furthermore, two lone factors (obstacle # 46: Fear of having to deal with the burden of integration with the poorer and instable TC economy on the GC side; and obstacle #40: Some of the EU members who do not wish Turkey to proceed with the EU relations will not like economic integration on the island as this will bring about an early solution in Cyprus and lift one obstacle blocking Turkey's membership) on Level I can be dealt separately and independently of other factors as they are completely disconnected. This lack of connection, nevertheless, does not mean there are no relationships in existence, but rather existing relationships are not significant.
Likewise, obstacle #24 (Insufficient information to facilitate understanding of policies and regulations) can also be viewed as another root cause since it is not dependent upon any other factor, and can be dealt separately.
The workshop will be conducted through the methodology of "Structured Dialogic Design Process" (Structured Dialogic Design Process, SDDP) known as Structured Democratic Dialogue. The SDDP allows the team involved to discuss an issue with a structured and democratic way that allows us to achieve practical results. It is a deeply reasoned, scientific, psycho-social methodology has evolved over the past 30 years in its current form. Helps build consensus and solve complex problems.
The SDDP workshops contribute the following ways:
- To help participants reach a common understanding of the problem.
- To uncover the root causes (roots of the problem).
- Contribute to the consensual adoption of action plans.
- To create groups dedicated to the implementation of projects.
- to establish lasting ties based on respect, trust, and cooperation.
The SDDP workshops achieve these results through respecting the autonomy of all participants and the use of a toolkit consensus including discipline, technology, and graphics ideas that allow participants to control the discussion. The SDDP methodology developed to help understand and solve complex social systems (complex societal systems). It has been adopted successfully around the world in situations of uncertainty and conflict. At European level, the method has been used by four European networks of experts with participation of about 20 countries each time.
Organizers and partners