Consensus Arbitration: A Negotiation‐Based Decision‐Making Process for Arbitrators

In reaching their decisions, arbitrators are currently expected to act like judges by listening fully to both sides and then withdrawing to write the final and complete decision. But because of some key differences between their roles, I argue, arbitrators and judges should exercise completely different styles of decision making. Unlike judges, who make decisive rulings in order to enforce the law, arbitrators are empowered and chosen by the parties themselves to handle specific disputes or govern continuing relationships. Instead of shifting a negotiated process into an authoritative one, arbitrators have the capacity to solicit input from parties as they craft the award. Under a new model of arbitration that I call “consensus arbitration,” arbitrators would facilitate negotiation between the parties but retain the power to break impasses with partial, incomplete decisions, behaving more like facilitators than judges.     

Seeking Sustainable Solutions: Using an Attractor Simulation Platform for Teaching Multistakeholder Negotiation in Complex Cases

We live and work in an increasingly complex and dynamic world. The demands of working in such environments require that negotiators understand situations of conflict and work with these situations in correspondingly complex and dynamic ways. Dynamical systems theory offers important insights and tools to enhance the understanding of difficult social conflicts, including the conceptualization of ongoing destructive conflicts as strong attractors: a particular form of self-organization of multiple elements comprising the mental and social systems associated with conflict. This article describes the pedagogical use of a computer simulation of conflict attractors (the attractor software) that allows participants to visualize and work interactively with the dynamics of conflict as they unfold over time. It further describes a negotiation workshop that employs the simulation to enhance participants' understanding of complex long-term dynamics in conflict and presents the findings of two outcome studiescomparing the effectiveness of a workshop that employed the simulation with one that employed a traditional integrative problem-solving method. While not definitive, these studies suggest that an understanding of the dynamical approach to conflict, supported by use of the attractor software, can promote the generation of more sustainable solutions for long-term conflicts.     

FAMILY DISPUTE RESOLUTION: CHARTING A COURSE FOR THE FUTURE

This article summarizes ideas for future directions in the field of family dispute resolution, as discussed by legal experts, social scientists, and other participants at the Indiana University–Bloomington conference on family dispute resolution. Five major categories of future directions were discussed: (1) clarifying differing goals for work in this field; (2) recognizing, understanding, and assessing for heterogeneity among couples and families facing divorces, break ups in adult relationships, and reconfigurations of adult relationships with the children ("relationship dissolution"); (3) testing our assumptions and commonly held beliefs about relationship dissolution; (4) empirically testing the efficacy of interventions for families experiencing relationship dissolution; and (5) disseminating research findings to those on the frontline.     

论公司决议瑕疵司法救济制度的完善

新《公司法》规定了股东可以就公司决议瑕疵提出请求确认无效或撤销的司法救济制度,这对中小股东权益保障和公司正常运行有着重要作用。但股东要将上述请求权应用于司法实践中,仍存诸多障碍,需要从扩大可诉范围、明确具体案由、规范当事人资格、完善诉讼担保制度、赋予法官合理裁量权、寻求多种救济方式等方面将这一制度完善,使之更有效地发挥出应有作用。     

略论监狱亚文化——从考察罪犯群体的角度

在目前的刑罚执行过程中.监狱亚文化对行刑工作产生了一定的负面影响,监狱亚文化有其产生的原因、特有的表现形式及特点.遏制、消解监狱亚文化从监狱管理体制、行刑机制、文化建设等方面进行改革,方能有效.     

回归“马锡五”的思考

马锡五审判方式是特定历史时期的产物。现今,重提马锡五审判方式也有其特定的原因,本文对其原因进行较为全面的分析。笔者坚持认为,作为一种审判方式,囿于自身的特点和理念,马锡五审判方式已不具有普遍的现实意义,已经疏离了中国社会的发展趋势。重提这种方式虽然对我们建构和完善多元化、替代性纠纷解决方式具有警示性,但在中国法治建设的初级阶段,民事诉讼建构的基本方向依然应当是强调诉讼裁判的主导性、强调裁判程序的正当性,以顺应和推动中国社会的转型。     

论网络犯罪的国际刑事管辖

由于网络犯罪的跨国性,网络在各国的普及与发展水平的差异,以及各国的法律制度、风俗习惯的不同,导致针对网络犯罪的刑事管辖权存在争议,成为困惑理论界和实务界的一大难题。本文首先界定了网络犯罪的概念,描述了其特征,并指出传统刑事管辖理论适用于网络犯罪国际管辖的不足和新的刑事管辖理论应用于网络犯罪管辖的现状,在此基础上,经过分析和论证,提出自己对解决网络犯罪国际刑事管辖权冲突问题的一孔之见。     

Psychological Barriers to Resolving Intergroup Conflict: An Extensive Review and Consolidation of the Literature

This article reviews over sixty years of research on psychological barriers to intergroup conflict resolution and finds that scholars have identified eighty nominally different barriers that create or exacerbate intergroup conflict. In order to create a tractable list that would be more helpful to future scholars and practitioners, we consolidate this vast literature (e.g., by eliminating substantive and conceptual redundancies) to produce a list of twenty‐six “unique” psychological barriers. We further organize this inventory of barriers with a framework that distinguishes between “cognitive,” “affective,” and “motivated” psychological barriers. To better understand the literature ecosystem of research on psychological barriers, we employ a data visualization tool to illustrate the extent to which each of the twenty‐six unique barriers has been studied conjointly with every other barrier in the articles we reviewed. We then shift our attention to the work of scholars who have attempted, experimentally, to attenuate psychological barriers in negotiation and conflict settings, and identify five primary methods for doing so. Finally, we discuss the implications of our review for future work in this field.     

We do negotiate with terrorists: navigating liberal and illiberal norms in peace mediation

The normative framework in mediation processes is growing. Mediators are increasingly expected by their mandate-givers to incorporate liberal norms such as inclusivity into their overall strategy. However, in the wake of the terrorist attacks that took place on 11 September 2001, and the policy shifts that accompanied the “Global War on Terror”, mediators find themselves simultaneously pressured to design mediation processes actively excluding armed groups proscribed as terrorists and consequently incorporating this illiberal norm of “exclusivity”, barring proscribed groups’ access to negotiations. This article asks what consequences this development has on the normative agency of mediators, based on if and how they incorporate proscribed armed groups into their mediation strategies. It argues that the dichotomy between liberal and illiberal norms has important consequences on a mediator’s normative agency. First, the dichotomy constrains mediators to a single normative standard, rendering only liberal and illiberal views possible. Second, the assumption that liberal norms are “good” and illiberal norms are “bad” engenders a double dichotomy that greatly constrains a mediator’s normative agency. Third, these constraints on a mediator engender new mediation practices such as outsourcing and risk-sharing in an attempt to salvage normative agency. The article contributes to scholarship on norms, terrorism and mediation through providing a more nuanced view of normative parameters in mediation practice.     

Context and Content toward Consensus in Public Mediation

The mediation of public conflicts is a complex interactive, social‐psychological, and often politicized process. Because of their complexity, the literature on how to effectively mediate these conflicts remains imprecise. In this study, I have focused on the sequencing of the overall mediation process and the interplay between initial conditions, mediation styles, and process dynamics to explore predictable patterns from early stage to deadline negotiations. By undertaking a two‐step qualitative comparison of twenty‐three public mediation cases, I have attempted to identify “equifinal” pathways — that is, a variety of different ways in which the same outcome can be achieved — that can lead to mediation success (or failure). My analysis reveals that both inclusivity (i.e., including all relevant participants in the process) and mediation institutionalization (i.e., the mediation process is sufficiently embedded in the political and administrative system) correlate to greater mediation effectiveness. Furthermore, this study also suggests that such key elements of deliberative negotiations as recognition and argumentation are essential for reaching a consensual agreement.