O'Kane, Eammon2008-05-202008-05-202006-12-22Civil Wars, 8(3&4): 268-2841369-824910.1080/13698240601060710http://hdl.handle.net/2436/27185The idea that conflicts cannot be resolved until they are 'ripe' has been influential in conflict resolution literature in recent years. This article critiques the theoretical underpinnings of ripeness using the Northern Ireland peace process as a case study. It highlights the problems that results from the subjectiveness of both the theory itself and the information needed to apply it. By critically examining William Zartman's six 'propositions' of ripeness, the inadequacy of the approach is highlighted and claims that the theory can help predict when conflicts are ripe for resolution are shown to be unsustainable. It advocates a more dynamic approach to conflict resolution than ripeness suggests that parties and mediators adopt. (Informaworld)enPeace negotiationNorthern Ireland20th centuryPolitical historyReconciliationPolitical theoryWar studiesConflict resolutionJournal articleCivil Wars