Electronically-Mediated Dispute Resolution and E-Commerce

Although the volume of internet commerce continues to increase, some consumers hesitate to conduct business transactions on the internet because of concerns about the trustworthiness of on-line merchants. The presence of readily available, on-line dispute resolution services can send a reassuring signal to consumers that allays their fears and encourages them to do business on-line. However, on-line dispute resolution systems designed to address disputes arising from e-commerce transactions rely on a communication medium that is impoverished, which can lead to lower trust in the process, and to the escalation of negative emotion and negative attributions about the other participants in the dispute resolution process, making successful resolution of the dispute more difficult. A mediator or arbitrator in an on-line setting who is aware of these potential problems can try to avert them by engaging in simple rapport-building procedures. However, facilitating acceptance of on-line dispute resolution decisions may be more difficult than in a traditional face-to-face environment because of the absence of cues that communicate the trustworthiness and neutrality of the third party, as well as acknowledgment of the societal standing of the disputant.     

Dispute Resolution and the Politics of Cultural Generalization

This essay argues that generalizations about cultural identities and values should play a key role in designing procedures to resolve disputes. Generalizations about cultures are risky given the complexity of memberships and group boundaries, not to mention the power dynamics within and between social groups. But it is important to take the risk: attempts to avoid or transcend culture in resolving disputes pose and even greater, or reiterating the understandings of dominant cultural groups under the guise of neutrality. The author explores the "politics of cultural generalization" in theoretical terms, then considers its implications for concrete elements of dispute resolution training and process design.     

Broadening the Evaluation of Dispute Resolution: Context and Relationships Over Time

Evaluation of negotiation outcomes tends to focus on measurable, dyadic,short-term resolutions of conflict. We review current challenges to this traditionalmodel of the evaluation of dispute resolution outcomes, and we offerfour perspectives that can help address them. First, we advocate the needfor longitudinal studies of negotiations that incorporate disputant relationshipsbefore and after a particular negotiation. Second, we highlight theincreasing importance of third parties in resolving conflict. Third, we suggesta more comprehensive conception of parties, relationships andoutcomes in negotiations research. Finally, we advance an explicit incorporationof context and culture into dispute resolution research models.     

Integrating the Undergraduate Experience: A Course on Environmental Dispute Resolution

This paper describes a rigorous undergraduate course on environmental dispute resolution. Students get hands-on experience in negotiation cases, developing skills and building theoretical understanding through a series of exercises. With this foundation, the students advance to an extended role-playing case study on oil exploration in the Ecuadorian rain forest. The course provides an integration function both in terms of understanding environmental issues, but also in modeling reality, encouraging action, and building process tools that are essential in addressing environmental and social challenges facing the planet.     

东盟管理争端规范及其作用

东盟的产生源于减弱地区安全不确定性,缓解各国之间的安全困境与领土争端。东盟发表了一系列文件,并制定了相应的行为规范,建立了管理和解决成员国间冲突的机制。东盟在克服诸多挑战的过程中,在制定冲突管理规范方面取得了一些进展。东盟在建立安全共同体的过程中强调应对和管理冲突的东盟模式,虽然其贡献和作用受到质疑,但在管理东南亚地区冲突方面却得到了普遍认可。     

No Sheriff in Town: Governance for Online Dispute Resolution

Online dispute resolution (ODR), the practice of resolving disputes via the Internet or digital applications, has been developing since the mid‐1990s. As the field has grown and gained traction, it has increasingly received attention from professional associations and industry leaders in the world of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). More recently, it has begun to receive recognition from sources outside of this field — in both the public and private sectors. As the field develops and individual initiatives become widely adopted, the attention it receives from external sources will undoubtedly focus on questions of quality, ethics, practitioner training, service provider qualifications, and monitoring. These questions — already beginning to be heard from within the field — derive, in essence, from one shared overall question, that of appropriate governance for the ODR field. In this article, we will explain what we mean when we discuss a field's governance and suggest that the field itself should investigate issues of its own governance. We explore and explain the current “low‐to‐no” state of governance in ODR — and the developments that are likely, should the field fail to actively address this issue. We discuss the costs of no governance, and the potential costs and disadvantages of employing a higher‐governance model. We ask whether ODR can, indeed, be governed at all, and illustrate why addressing ODR governance is a very complex venture, in terms of the web of factors to be addressed, no matter how beneficial internal governance may be. We do not, in this article, intend to decide any of these questions — but, rather, to pose them to the ODR field and to the wider fields of ADR and conflict management. We point out why the ODR field is at a developmental point that is highly suitable for discussing and deciding these questions — and why these decisions might have far‐reaching implications for a wide range of conflict‐related fields.     

Delegating Differences: Bilateral Investment Treaties and Bargaining Over Dispute Resolution Provisions

Bilateral investment treaties (BITs) have become the dominant source of rules on foreign direct investment (FDI), yet these treaties vary significantly in at least one important respect: whether they allow investment disputes to be settled through the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). Through the compilation and careful coding of the text of nearly 1,500 treaties, we identify systematic variation in "legal delegation" to ICSID across BITs and explain this important variation by drawing upon a bargaining framework. Home governments prefer and typically obtain ICSID clauses in their BITs, particularly when internal forces push strongly for such provisions and when they have significantly greater bargaining power than the other signatory. Yet some home governments are less likely to insist upon ICSID clauses if they have historical or military ties with the other government. On the other hand, although host governments are often hostile toward ICSID clauses, particularly when sovereignty costs are high, they are more likely to consent to such clauses when they are heavily constrained by their dependence on the global economy. Our findings have significant implications for those interested in FDI, legalization, international institutions, and interstate bargaining.     

Defining Success in Negotiation and Other Dispute Resolution Training

This article describes three types of negotiation courses and asks what range of goals is usually achieved in such courses from the overlapping perspectives of organizers, teachers, and participants. It then translates Benjamin Bloom's categories of educational goals into aspirational goals for any negotiation course.     

Designing Ethical Online Dispute Resolution Systems: The Rise of the Fourth Party

As the pandemic forces public and private institutions to move online, many court and business leaders are looking to the field of online dispute resolution (ODR) for best practices and lessons learned. Developed over the last twenty years, largely in response to the growth of e‐commerce, the ODR field has generated a deep well of theory and practice while also identifying potential ethical dilemmas and risks. The application of technology, the “fourth party,” plays an increasingly integral role in how we negotiate resolutions to our disputes, with or without a third party. A brief overview of the history of ODR’s development will set the context for the exploration of the range of tools and techniques encompassed by online dispute resolution. Consideration of the ethical challenges raised by ODR practice will illuminate key questions and choices that need to be made in designing ODR systems and in governing their use.     

Teaching Negotiation and Dispute Resolution in Colleges of Business: The State of the Practice

Tracing the history of how the study of dispute resolution came into the mainstream of behavioral science courses in business schools, the author gives a positive assessment of the appropriateness of the content and pedagogy of negotiation courses currently taught in business schools for the challenges of the next decade. He proceeds to make recommendations for improving the definition and acquisition of negotiation skills.     

Online Dispute Resolution: Do You Know Where Your Children Are?

Negotiation Journal - Will we ever see the day when the Internet serves as the primary venue for problem solving and dispute resolution? Social science research suggests that our online...     

Twenty-Five Years Ago and Twenty-Five Years from Now: The Future of Public Dispute Resolution

Over the past twenty-five years, public dispute resolution has emerged as an important area of practice — linked, in part, to ongoing efforts to promote deliberative democracy. As the field has evolved, however, the market for public dispute mediators has shifted. It is already possible to glimpse the further shifts and the new intellectual challenges likely to face the public dispute resolution field over the next twenty-five years.