A general description of Auroville’s situation in terms of five dimensions in conflict resolution theory: structural, instrumental, interest, value(s), and personal elements. At the same time highlighting specific examples.
Published July 2026
Understanding the Dimensions of the Auroville Crisis: AVC invitation to AVFO [Auroville Foundation Office] and FO-WGs [Foundation Working Groups]
The challenges Auroville has faced since 2021 are often discussed through specific events: the felling of trees, the construction of roads, changes in governance, legal disputes, restrictions on participation, and the growing divisions within the community. Yet these events are only the visible manifestations of a much deeper conflict.
Conflict-resolution theory identifies five dimensions through which complex conflicts can be understood. The situation in Auroville contains elements of all five.
A structural conflict exists when there is disagreement about systems, authority, and decision-making processes. Many residents have expressed concern over the increasing centralisation of power and the erosion of long-established participatory mechanisms. The question is not only what decisions are being made, but who is making them and through what process.
An instrumental conflict concerns the methods used to achieve shared goals. While many stakeholders agree that Auroville must continue to develop and evolve, there are profound disagreements regarding how this development should take place. Infrastructure projects, road construction, environmental interventions, and planning decisions have become flashpoints because people hold fundamentally different views on the means by which Auroville’s future should be built.
An interest conflict emerges when groups compete over resources, influence, access, or control. Questions surrounding land, finances, information, governance, and the ability to shape Auroville’s future have created tensions between different actors. These conflicts are intensified when people feel excluded from decisions that directly affect their lives and work.
A value conflict touches the deepest layer of the crisis. For many, the present situation is not simply about roads, trees, or administrative procedures. It is about the meaning of Auroville itself. Different interpretations of stewardship, participation, human unity, environmental responsibility, and fidelity to the founding vision have led to profound disagreements about what Auroville should become.
Finally, personal conflict has also developed over years of unresolved tensions. Relationships have been strained. Trust has been damaged. Communication has deteriorated. Disagreements that began over policies and procedures have become intertwined with feelings of hurt, frustration, fear, and betrayal.
Recognising these different dimensions does not solve the conflict. It does, however, help us understand its complexity. The crisis in Auroville is not a single disagreement that can be resolved through a single action. It is a multi-layered conflict involving structures, methods, interests, values, and relationships. Any lasting resolution will need to address all of these dimensions with honesty, openness, and a genuine willingness to listen to one another.
Auroville was conceived not as a place where one side prevails over another, but as a place where humanity learns to transcend conflict itself. That aspiration remains possible only if the causes of conflict are no longer reinforced, and if every effort is directed towards rebuilding trust, restoring participation, and rediscovering the spirit of human unity that gave birth to this experiment.
In community,
The Auroville Council
Divya, Dyuman, Isabelle, Martin, Muni, Ramesh, & Sathiya
Previously published in Mass Bulletin and a community WhatsApp channel, July 2026