Yegon, Kibet B.Muna, WilsonKipchumba, Heather2025-10-152025-10-152025-04DOI: 10.32898/ihssj.02/7.3article02https://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/handle/123456789/31737ArticleKerio Valley is an area rich in cultural diversity and economic activities, notably pastoralism and agriculture. Despite its potential, the region has been severely impacted by recurring conflicts, particularly cattle rustling, competition over resources, and inter-ethnic violence. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the integrative negotiation approach in resolving inter-community conflicts within the Kerio Valley. By focusing on inclusive dialogue facilitated by experienced mediators, the study aimed to understand how diverse perspectives, mutual benefits, and structured mediation contribute to addressing security challenges. It sought to highlight the strengths and limitations of this approach, emphasizing the importance of adaptability and collaboration in fostering sustainable conflict resolution and improved security outcomes. A mixed-methods approach combining qualitative and quantitative techniques was utilized to explore the relationship between the deliberative policy framework (independent variable) and security management (dependent variable). Data collection targeted conflict-prone areas in the Kerio Valley, focusing on counties such as Baringo, Turkana, Elgeyo Marakwet, and West Pokot, with a total target population of 59,908 stakeholders, including government officials, community leaders, and household heads. Systematic and random sampling methods were used to select a representative sample of 455 respondents, with data collected through semi-structured questionnaires and interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS (v.25) through descriptive and inferential analyses, while qualitative data were thematically examined with NVivo software. Ethical standards, including informed consent and data confidentiality, were rigorously upheld, and data security was ensured throughout the research process. The study found that the integrative negotiation approach promoted inclusivity, allowing diverse community perspectives to be heard and considered. The presence of central mediators and alternative elites facilitated consensus-building and cooperation among conflicting parties. The process encouraged the exchange of transparent and fair information, which contributed to mutual understanding. However, challenges were noted, including an overreliance on counterarguments, which sometimes disrupted collaborative dynamics, and a lack of consistently offered alternative options, limiting flexibility in reaching mutually agreeable solutions. These findings underscore the strengths and areas for improvement in the approach. The study’s findings have significant implications for theory, practice, and policy in conflict resolution and security management. Theoretically, it underscores the importance of integrative negotiation frameworks that prioritize inclusivity and mutual benefits in conflict resolution. Practically, the study highlights the critical role of mediators and the inclusion of diverse perspectives in fostering sustainable agreements. For policymakers, the results emphasize the need to invest in mediator training and develop policies that encourage flexible negotiation strategies, ensuring that all stakeholders are adequately represented and engaged. These insights can guide the design of more effective conflict resolution mechanisms in similar contexts.enArticle