New research project: The Productive Conflicts of Democracy

It was a high-spirited trio that gathered at Skytteanum following the news that Formas had awarded their research project, Grass-roots Participation and Democratic Deepening in the Green Transition, funding for a four-year study. Anna Jarstad, Professor, and Andreas Johansson, Researcher, both from the Department of Government at Uppsala University. Judit Malmgren is a PhD student in History at Luleå University of Technology. The project is affiliated with the institute for goal conflicts at Uppsala University Future Institutes, UUniFI.

Understanding the Mechanisms of Conflict

The subject is not new to any member of the trio, but they approach it from different angles. With their interdisciplinary perspective, they hope to identify patterns in why certain conflicts develop in a democratic and productive direction, while others contribute to polarisation, mistrust and exclusion. It is a question that undoubtedly feels pertinent.

“When people perceive that decisions lack legitimacy, they begin to distrust democratic systems. The green transition will require more fossil-free energy, new infrastructure and mines for critical minerals. We know these are processes that often lead to conflict,” says Andreas Johansson.

The application to Formas underlines that land use and natural resources are not merely matters of economics and technology. They affect people, local communities, indigenous rights, environments and the relationship between citizens and institutions.

“It is not enough to ask how the transition can be technically and economically implemented fast enough to meet various climate targets. We must ask how it can be carried out in a way that does not threaten faith in democracy,” says Andreas Johansson.

Commonly viewed in a negative light

The project takes as its starting point the fact that conflicts are often treated as something negative.

“In both research and practice, there is a tendency to view conflicts as problems to be solved, dampened or preferably avoided. Instead, our premise is that democracy is not about everyone always being in agreement. Conflicts arise when different interests, experiences, knowledge and values come to the surface, clash with one another and influence collective decisions,” says Andreas Johansson.

In this sense, they see that conflicts can be productive.

“Conflicts can highlight perspectives that are otherwise marginalised, force better justifications from decision-makers, strengthen accountability and open the way for more inclusive processes. However, conflicts can also develop in the opposite direction. They can contribute to polarisation, mistrust, deadlock and exclusion; to certain groups finding it even harder to make themselves heard, and to the participation of opponents being used to legitimise decisions that have, in practice, already been made.”

Through this study, we want to understand how to better harness the potential of conflicts, so that they become a resource for democratic development rather than a source of destructive polarisation.

A focus on grass-roots participation

“Today, we know too little about what causes conflicts to develop in a democratic and productive direction and what makes them destructive. In this project, we will attempt to find out by studying the contribution of grass-roots participation,” says Andreas Johansson.

Grass-roots participation is, in itself, elusive. It involves forms of participation created from the bottom up by local communities, civil society, indigenous peoples or other stakeholders, who share the experience of perceiving formal decision-making processes as insufficient.

“It can involve protests, local knowledge bases, legal proceedings, alternative impact assessments, indigenous peoples’ own forms of consent, media campaigns or various forms of mobilisation,” says Andreas Johansson.

Three mining conflicts to be compared

By comparing cases in Sweden and South Africa—two countries with different institutional contexts—the group will search for patterns to identify factors that influence outcomes over time. The researchers will examine everything from the organisational capacity of grass-roots movements, their independence and alliances, to legal opportunities, institutional openness, and how authorities and companies respond to criticism.

“We want to identify what factors are present when grass-roots participation succeeds in gaining traction in formal decision-making processes and contributing to better oversight and accountability, and when participation instead gets stuck outside the arenas where binding decisions are actually made,” says Andreas Johansson, adding:

“For me, a central point is that conflicts should not merely be seen as obstacles to the green transition. They can be signals that democratic processes need to be improved. If people protest or organise, it often means there are experiences, rights or knowledge that have not been taken seriously enough. Through this study, we want to understand how to better harness the potential of conflicts, so that they become a resource for democratic development rather than a source of destructive polarisation,” says Andreas Johansson.

Text: Marie-Louise Olsen