A review of the environmental negotiation literature shows scant attention to whether negotiation has equal applicability to all types of environmental controversies. The most relevant work is that by Sorenson, Soderstrom, and Carnes (1984), which classifies resources according to noxious and obnoxious characteristics, but this work is limited because of its focus on locational conflicts. A review of general natural resource typologies found three typologies which warrant further study: Ciriacy-Wantrup's (1968) typology of stock and flow resources; Ciriacy-Wantrup and Bishop's (1975) classification of ubiquitous and fugitive resources; and the followup work by Godwin and Shepard (1980), who developed a four-cell typology based on whether a resource is stationary or fugitive. Many typologies were found in conflict classifications. The study of political conflict is the subset of social conflict into which environmental negotiation best fits. Amy's three models of environmental conflict provide a basis for developing a conflict typology useful for predictive purposes in a preassessment stage of environmental mediation. 6 notes and 76 references.