A Role for Simulations in Public Policy Disputes: The Case of National Energy Policy

Abstract

Consensus-building techniques have been used successfully to resolve many public policy disputes. A major obstacle to consensus building, however, is the unwillingness of disputing parties to come to the negotiating table. A relatively new method of accomplishing this is to invite the parties to participate in a simulation of the conflict they want to resolve. Such simulations are designed to show that policy deadlocks can be overcome if the disputants change the way they negotiate. In November 1988, the MIT-Harvard Public Disputes Program, in association with the American Energy Assurance Council (AEAC), ran the National Energy Policy Simulation. This 23-hour crisis simulation brought together many of the stakeholders involved in the national energy policy debate in the United States. Partly as a result of the simulation, the parties agreed to sponsor afar reaching effort to forge a consensus on a national energy strategy for America. The energy policy experience is evidence that simulations can help bring disputing parties together to resolve their differences. The experience with this and related simulations provides key lessons for subsequent simulation design.