1 of 20

A Systematic Review of Theories

of “Good” and “Bad” Conflict

Jonathan Stray

Luke Thorburn

Julie Hawke

Emillie de Keulenaar

ISA 2025

2 of 20

Motivation
Method
Early findings
Coloniality

3 of 20

Motivation
Method
Early findings
Coloniality

4 of 20

Motivation

Conflict is inevitable

Society never starts from a clean slate.�Unforeseen circumstances always arise.�Sometimes people want incompatible things.

There are ways in which conflict can be better

non-violent, procedurally fair, creative tensions, …

There are ways in which conflict can be worse

based on misunderstanding, violent, intractable, …

5 of 20

The Little Book of Conflict Transformation

John Paul Lederach, 2014

A transformational approach recognizes that conflict is a normal and continuous dynamic within human relationships. Moreover, conflict brings with it the potential for constructive change. Positive change does not always happen, of course. As we all know too well, many times conflict results in long-standing cycles of hurt and destruction. But the key to transformation is a proactive bias toward seeing conflict as a potential catalyst for growth.

Conflict Transformation

6 of 20

FRAMEWORK	“BAD” CONFLICT	“GOOD” CONFLICT
Morton Deutsch	Destructive	Constructive
Game theory	Zero-sum	Non-zero-sum
Containment	Escalating conflict	Contained conflict
Perceptions	Based on misperceptions	Based on correct perceptions
Martin Luther King	Violent tension	Creative tension
Non-violent conflict	Violent	Non-violent
McCoy and Somer	Pernicious polarization	Productive (?) polarization
St. Thomas Aquinas	War crimes	Just war
Agonistic democracy	Antagonistic, between enemies	Agonistic, Between adversaries

Theories of good + bad conflict

7 of 20

Systematic Review

1.	articulate a theory of desirable and/or undesirable conflict
2.	relate to intergroup conflict, not dyadic/tryadic interpersonal conflict family conflict marital conflict conflict within organizations/institutions�(commonly discussed in literature on management)

To be included, a source must:

8 of 20

Motivation
Method
Early findings
Coloniality

9 of 20

Motivation
Method
Early findings
Coloniality

10 of 20

Process

Collect�sources

Apply�inclusion�criteria

Extract�theories

Code and�cluster

Write�paper

11 of 20

Data Collection

12 of 20

Data Collection

13 of 20

Process

Collect�sources

Apply�inclusion�criteria

Extract�theories

Code and�cluster

Write�paper

14 of 20

Method

articulate a theory of desirable and/or undesirable conflict

Distinction should be normative.

Source has to be substantially about the distinction (can’t be a footnote).

If a source strongly implies but does not explicitly articulate a theory, that is a separate category.

It’s fine of the paper is not primarily about a theory of what makes a conflict good or bad, but mentions one somewhere

If talking about good (or bad) outcomes from conflict, it’s a theory of what makes conflict good (or bad)

relate to intergroup conflict, not

dyadic/tryadic interpersonal conflict
family conflict
marital conflict
conflict within organizations/institutions (commonly discussed in literature on management)

Humans, not animals.

By “institutions” we mean businesses, schools, etc. (conflicts in institutionalized political systems are definitely included).

The source doesn’t have to name specific groups to be about intergroup conflict (e.g. “democracy” counts as intergroup).

15 of 20

Method

articulate a theory of desirable and/or undesirable conflict

Distinction should be normative.

Source has to be substantially about the distinction (can’t be a footnote).

If a source strongly implies but does not explicitly articulate a theory, that is a separate category.

It’s fine of the paper is not primarily about a theory of what makes a conflict good or bad, but mentions one somewhere

If talking about good (or bad) outcomes from conflict, it’s a theory of what makes conflict good (or bad)

relate to intergroup conflict, not

dyadic/tryadic interpersonal conflict
family conflict
marital conflict
conflict within organizations/institutions (commonly discussed in literature on management)

Humans, not animals.

By “institutions” we mean businesses, schools, etc. (conflicts in institutionalized political systems are definitely included).

The source doesn’t have to name specific groups to be about intergroup conflict (e.g. “democracy” counts as intergroup).

16 of 20

Where to from here

A human-coded subset will optimize an automated coding pipeline that will be applied to the full corpus of articles

17 of 20

Motivation
Method
Early findings
Coloniality

18 of 20

Motivations — Does the source give good/bad reasons to start or continue a conflict?

good ex. — to correct a serious injustice�bad ex. — because of a perception gap

Process — Does the source give say what makes an existing conflict better/worse in a relative sense?

good ex. — institutionalized (in democratic institutions)�bad ex. — dehumanization

Outcomes — Does the source describe better/worse outcomes from conflict?

good ex. — losing gracefully; changing of minds�bad ex. — return to an unjust status quo

Early findings

19 of 20

Motivation
Method
Early findings
Coloniality

20 of 20

Influential sources use frameworks to distinguish "good" and "bad" conflict.
Many other sources challenge coloniality in conflict typologies.
Evaluative notions of "good" and "bad" conflict are often implicit and unexamined.

Connections to coloniality

Many foundational typologies—just war theory, liberal peace frameworks, and even contemporary peace studies approaches—emerge from contexts where colonial powers sought to legitimize certain forms of violence while criminalizing resistance. Who gets to define what is "constructive" or "destructive" conflict? Historically, anti-colonial struggles, Indigenous resistance, and decolonial movements have been framed as "antagonistic" or "pernicious," even when they sought justice and peace on their own terms.

Rejecting the premise: Many decolonial scholars argue that conflict itself is not inherently good or bad but relational and contextual. nti-colonial movements and Indigenous knowledge systems have long theorized conflict as part of transformation and resistance, not just something to be prevented or resolved. Including a broader range of epistemologies challenges the idea that peace means the absence of conflict rather than the presence of justice.

Even when sources don’t explicitly reference colonial frameworks, they often carry unspoken assumptions about what makes conflict productive or harmful. We began coding for implicit normativity (underlying sense of ‘conflict is bad’). This study aims to help surface these implicit claims, providing a more critical and reflective approach to understanding conflict.