The Finnish Forum for Mediation’s magazine called Sovittelusanomat published an article on the mediation process we carried out in connection with the legislative drafting for the nature conservation area of Kvarken archipelago, written by our junior specialist Taika Tikkanen, who studied the process in her master’s thesis.

In the article, Taika describes, based on her research:

• The distinctive features of environmental mediation and Consensus Building
• The Kvarken mediation process as an example of the practices of a phased negotiation procedure
• Key lessons on the factors influencing the success of mediation processes

Editor-in-Chief Maija Gellin: “Taika Tikkanen presents the findings of her master’s thesis and identifies six factors that contributed to the success of the mediation in the Kvarken case – I’m certain that we mediators working in various fields of mediation can benefit from this information!”

Read the translated article below or here in Finnish: Merenkurkun sovitteluprosessi tarjoaa lupaavia oppeja ympäristösovitteluun Suomessa (Sovittelusanomat 2/2026) (PDF)

The Kvarken Mediation Process Offers Promising Lessons for Environmental Mediation in Finland

Environmental mediation, based on the Consensus Building approach, enabled progress in the legislative drafting process for the Kvarken nature conservation area – which had been suspended due to local opposition and a lack of trust – and enabled the identification of mutually acceptable solutions. This recent case provides an opportunity to examine the specific characteristics and practices of environmental mediation, as well as the factors influencing the success of such processes, which were explored in depth in a recent case study.

In my recently published master’s thesis (see Tikkanen 2026), I examined the mediation process associated with the legislative drafting of the decree establishing the Kvarken nature conservation area, which to date represent the most extensive environmental dispute resolution process in Finland facilitated by an external, independent actor. It is also the first time the Finnish Ministry of the Environment has commissioned environmental mediation from an independent party. In my research, I describe the stages of the process carried out between 2023 and 2025, as well as the practices and principles that were key to its success. Although the Kvarken case is unique in many ways, it serves as a good illustration of environmental mediation within the Finnish context and offers interesting insights into the practices that helped transform decades-old conflicts into constructive collaboration.

Environmental Mediation and Consensus Building

Environmental disputes are characterized by their complexity: they typically involve multiple parties; challenging conflicts of interest, information, and values; issues of the public interest; and public law perspectives. It is therefore important to recognize environmental mediation as a distinct area of mediation requiring specialized expertise and methods, since these specific characteristics mean that environmental disputes cannot be mediated as freely as, for example, disputes between two private individuals.

The application of interest-based negotiation theory to public issues has been a key factor behind environmental mediation. Based on this, the Consensus Building approach was developed in the United States in the 1990s (see Susskind, McKearnan & Thomas-Larmer 1999). The approach is based on the aim of taking the interests of all stakeholders into account as fully as possible in a phased negotiation process with the support of an independent mediator. The parties to the conflict are viewed as co-solvers of a shared problem, and the mediator’s role is built around the issues at hand, interpersonal relationships, and a process that is tailored to each individual situation. This approach was also utilized in the Kvarken mediation process.

The role of environmental mediation in Finland is still relatively unestablished, although promising experiences and knowledge have been accumulated over the years. Generally, environmental disputes are addressed through legal and administrative processes, and the roles and modes of participation associated with these processes can limit many stakeholders’ only options to either supporting or opposing a proposal, such as the establishment of a nature conservation area. Environmental mediation thus serves as one solution to these participation challenges which fuel a lack of trust and exacerbate conflicts. It offers an opportunity for a joint examination of different perspectives and for creative problem-solving. Instead of public hearings or lengthy legal proceedings – which are often perceived as a mere formality – participants can genuinely influence decision-making regarding their own living environment at various stages: from defining objectives to implementing mutually agreed-upon actions. This can result in more sustainable, effective, and legitimate solutions that combine shared interests with technically sound and feasible solutions. Since decision-making related to the environment, natural resources, and land use almost always requires reconciling conflicting interests, environmental mediation is particularly well-suited to planning and preparation processes, as well as their participation and consultation procedures.

The phased negotiation process of environmental mediation in practice: the Kvarken mediation process as an example

The legislative preparation for a nature conservation area, launched in the spring of 2020, was suspended due to local opposition and a lack of trust, and the Ministry of the Environment called upon an independent party, Akordi Oy, to investigate the tense situation. In the fall of 2023, Akordi’s mediators, Juha-Pekka Turunen and Camilla Strandberg-Panelius, conducted an assessment of the initial situation and the disputes, which included interviews with 40 key stakeholders and a workshop organized for them. The goal was to establish a shared understanding of the situation, identify potential paths forward, and assess the conditions for the mediation process. The stakeholders interviewed in my study viewed the confidential conflict assessment conducted by the mediator as a successful first step that broke the deadlock and supported the building of trust.

In the spring of 2024, the process and working methods deemed acceptable were defined jointly by key local stakeholders and representatives of the environmental administration, with the assistance of the mediators. Defining a credible and meaningful process – that was acceptable from the perspectives of all parties – and its objectives together was a crucial step that also motivated the search for mutually acceptable solutions. In addition to establishing the conservation area, the goals of the process were set to create a co-management model and to expand the shared knowledge base and capacity for collaboration, all of which were directly linked to the needs identified during the assessment.

Next, two working groups were formed, and during their work from August 2024 to March 2025, a shared knowledge base was built, common interests were identified, and solutions were formulated. Representatives selected by the municipalities located within the protected area prepared a draft regulation for establishing the nature conservation area, with support from representatives of the environmental administration. Representatives from 15 local interest groups actively participated in deliberations on the content of the regulation and drafted a proposal for the co-management model. Most of the work focused on addressing various topics, as a common understanding was built by hearing different perspectives from participants and external experts. The mediators, among other things, prepared summaries of the issues under discussion, promoted the consideration of different perspectives, helped resolve conflicts, and supported the search for alternative solutions. Participants particularly highlighted the confidential discussions that the mediators held behind the scenes with the various parties throughout the process as an excellent practice.

Final decisions on solutions were made only after every effort had been made to take the various interests into account as fully as possible and the overall package had been accepted down to the last detail. Finally, the mediation process moved on to the agreement, implementation, and monitoring phase when, on March 25, 2025, the working group of municipal representatives unanimously approved the draft regulation establishing the nature conservation area, along with its background memorandum. Statutory feedback was requested directly on the decree text drafted by the working groups. The Ministry of the Environment made a few, largely technical, amendments based on the feedback and the changes were discussed with the working groups in June 2026. Next, the regulation will be presented to the Government, which will make the final decision on its adoption.

Key Lessons from the Kvarken Process

From the perspective of the stakeholders who participated in the mediation process, the factors that most significantly contributed to the process’s success were categorized in my thematic analysis into six main themes, the lessons of which can be summarized as follows:

1) An independent, trustworthy mediator who understands the specific characteristics of environmental conflicts can play a decisive role by establishing a credible process and sustaining it through challenging situations – for example, by confidentially mediating conflicts and supporting the parties in finding solutions.

2) A shift from top-down procedures to collaborative approaches and objectives tailored to local specificities can strengthen the parties’ commitment and the perceived fairness of the process, as well as enable the identification of creative, and more broadly accepted solutions.

3) Legitimate solutions require comprehensive representation of diverse local interests as well as equitable treatment; to ensure this, all key parties must be guaranteed opportunities for meaningful and equal participation.

4) Open, respectful interaction geared toward joint problem-solving, along with working methods and participant selections that support it, strengthen trust among the parties, develop interpersonal relationships, and help break down prejudices, which in turn creates the conditions for continued constructive collaboration.

5) Jointly processing sufficient and diverse information at a practical level supports the formation of mutual understanding and prevents unnecessary concern when impacts are discussed in a way that everyone can understand.

6) Building trust and addressing difficult contentious issues requires sufficient time, which must also be set aside for going over the solutions among stakeholder groups, as this supports the legitimacy of the solutions and the stability of the situation.

As a method for conflict prevention and resolution, its significance extends beyond individual resolutions, strengthening interaction among actors and decision-making at various levels of society. Read more about my thesis!

My study shows reinforces the understanding that environmental mediation based on the Consensus Building approach and conducted with the support of an independent mediator can serve as a decisive method in multi-party environmental disputes within the Finnish context. As a method for conflict prevention and resolution, its significance extends beyond individual resolutions, strengthening interaction among actors and decision-making at various levels of society. Read more in my thesis!

 

Author:

Taika Tikkanen, HM, Junior Specialist, Akordi

taika@akordi.fi | +358451242501

 

Sources:

Tikkanen, T. (2026). Vuosikymmenten ristiriidoista kohti rakentavaa yhteistyötä: Tapaustutkimus Merenkurkun sovitteluprosessista. Master’s Thesis. Faculty of Management and Business, Tampere University. https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-202606167555 [in Finnish]

Susskind, L., McKearnan, S., & Thomas-Larmer, J. (1999). The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452231389

Read more about the process: The establishing of the Kvarken archipelago nature conservation area