Sport Mediation: Mediating High‐Performance Sports Disputes

Conflicts in high‐performance sports (HPS) are typically tense and emotionally charged experiences for the athletes, coaches, and sports organizations involved. Such disputes raise intriguing challenges for the mediators handling them. These disputes typically involve multiple parties who often have intensely competitive personalities negotiating a volatile mix of high‐stakes win/lose issues. Mediators typically confront numerous process challenges and must operate within the rigid policy parameters of the various governing organizations involved. Mediation can successfully manage and resolve these challenging disputes, often in creative ways that repair and preserve the parties’ relationships. To be successful in this environment, however, mediators must adapt to and confront the unique dynamics of sports disputes described here. In this article, I examine multiple case studies of mediations conducted through the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC) with the goal of identifying successful mediation strategies for HPS disputes. The centre, which has made mediation mandatory for almost all cases, had an overall settlement rate over a twelve‐year period of 46 percent, with rates as high as 94 percent for mediations voluntarily requested by the parties. Mediation has been used only sparingly elsewhere in the world for resolving HPS disputes to date, although, I argue, it is a successful tool that should be increasingly used both nationally and internationally. In recognition of mediation's potential role, the Court of Arbitration for Sport introduced updated mediation rules in 2016 and is moving to increase the use of mediation in international sports disputes.     

Central coercion or local autonomy? A comparative analysis of policy instrument choice in refugee settlement policies

Although existing literature on central–local governance includes comprehensive studies on how constitutional and financial frameworks regulate local government autonomy, this study seeks explanations for the introduction or absence of central coercion within these frameworks. The analysis studies six processes of policy instrument choice with different outcomes in Norway, Denmark and Sweden in the field of refugee settlement. It finds that a uniform perception of crisis and political compromises make political parties abandon their political–ideological standpoints relating to central–local governance. Additionally, the success and failure of political strategies of obfuscation and of dividing the opposition help to explain the different outcomes. The study reveals differences in the political salience of central–local governance in three countries that have systematically been categorised in the same groups in central–local studies. Consequently, more studies on how and why local autonomy is regulated within national frameworks are necessary to understand the actual autonomy that local governments enjoy.     

群体劳动争议的隐患与预防实证研究

企业群体劳动争议数量逐年上升,而我国对群体劳动争议的名称、法律规定、行为结果乃至预防制度大都模糊不清。针对劳动关系市场化进程中日益激烈的劳资矛盾,集体协商机制的健全愈发显得有效而重要。观察我国几项典型群体劳动争议的前因后果,研究企业、劳动者、社会共存共亡的发展规律,重新构建集体协商谈判机制、完善工会权责制度、用法律手段处理群体劳动争议,以降低其负面影响的长效机制显得尤为必要。     

Discursive Construction of territorial disputes: foreign newspaper reporting on the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands dispute

Most studies of the news discourse surrounding territorial disputes focus on the domestic newspapers of the conflicting countries from the perspective of “us” and “them”. This study examines how the newspapers of foreign countries discursively construct a territorial dispute within the framework of an intergroup conflict schema. A qualitative and quantitative analysis of articles on the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands dispute published online in five newspapers of record (the New York Times, the Guardian, the Sydney Morning Herald, Le Monde, and the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung) reveals two main points: First, the articles published by these newspapers share a similar intergroup conflict schema that is based on competition and the pursuit of national interests as interpreted in conformance with the national interests of the respective countries (USA, UK, Australia, France, and Germany). Second, in terms of how news discourse is framed, there are noticeable differences between the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and the other four which may reflect the influence of Germany’s socio-historical context on domestic public opinion.     

私力救济的性质

私力救济作为一种重要的纠纷解决机制日益受到学界关注.私力救济的研究首先有必要厘清其性质.私力救济,既可定位于一种私人自行处理冲突的纠纷解决机制,当事人通过私人力量维权的权利救济机制,也是一种私人以威慑和制约为核心、高度分散、私人执法的社会控制机制.     

劳动争议调解制度设计的本土资源和国际视野

劳动争议调解制度是我国解决劳动争议的一项重要制度,它是我国长期处理劳动争议实践经验的总结。适应协调劳动关系,发展和谐劳动关系的需要,应当立足于我国劳动争议调解制度的实践经验和本土资源,比较借鉴国外调解制度,改革和完善劳动争议调解制度,构筑多元化多层次的劳动争议调解格局,推进劳动争议调解制度的现代化。     

国际民用航空组织争端解决机制司法化改革论析

1944年《芝加哥公约》第18章赋予国际民用航空组织理事会裁判与公约的解释与适用有关的国际争端的权能。但过往裁判实践表明,国际民用航空组织争端解决机制的结构性缺陷导致理事会司法功能未有效发挥。一方面,《芝加哥公约》第54条与第84条存在适用冲突,使得理事会在实践中更愿意以政治角色介入争端解决,导致《解决分歧规则》的司法效能被弱化。另一方面,理事会成员国代表司法能力不足且缺乏司法中立性,使得理事会对争端的解决难以提供高效的法律产出。国际民用航空组织应在2018年所启动《解决分歧规则》修订进程中对争端解决机制进行司法化改革,避免国际民用航空业沦为国际政治对抗的工具。     

Sino-Japanese Energy Security and Regional Stability: The Case of the East China Sea Gas Exploration

The Sino-Japanese dispute over the East China Sea maritime resources was triggered by the unsettled maritime boundary and the territorial dispute over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands. The dispute has been ascribed by many to intensified competition between China and Japan over energy supply. However this article attributes the fundamental cause of the conflict to power politics and political distrust, which are deemed to have the key role in preventing the two governments from finding a solution. The article analyses the origin and the causes responsible for the Sino-Japanese dispute over the East China Sea gas exploration, and then proceeds to investigate the diplomatic dialogues to reveal the key obstacles in the process.

中韩环境纠纷解决机制比较研究

随着经济的迅猛发展,环境问题日益显著,环境纠纷也越来越多,日益增多的环境纠纷得不到很好的解决,既损害了受害人的环境权益又不利于经济的增长与和谐社会的建设.通过对比研究我国与韩国在环境纠纷解决机制方面的异同,可以借鉴韩国的有益经验,以促进我国的环境法制建设.首先,可以参照韩国的做法,制定专门的环境纠纷调解法,以明确环境行政机关解决环境纠纷的法定义务;其次,应完善我国环境纠纷的诉讼外解决机制;再次,应建立激励公众参与的机制.     

德法和解历史对中日建立战略互惠关系的借鉴与思考

中国和日本是东亚地区两个重要国家,处理好中日关系符合两国人民的共同利益,对于东亚地区的和平与繁荣具有十分重要的意义。在中日建立战略互惠关系初显曙光的时候,通过比较研究汲取德法和解的经验,将使我们获得有益的启迪。人们期待中日关系能借鉴法德在欧洲和解的智慧、创造出东亚地区中日和平与合作的奇迹。在战后以来六十多年的时间里,中日和平友好与法德和解在亚欧不同地缘政治环境中也出现了明显的发展差异。法德关系经历并超越了相互憎恨的历史,走向了真正和解。法德和解奠定了欧洲合作的基石,两者伙伴关系的进一步深化则开创了从欧共体到欧盟的欧洲合作新局面。与德法和解带动欧洲国家整合的硕果相比,中日和平友好表现出了明显的滞后性和局限性。中日关系超越"战争历史"问题、国家地位身份认同问题、共同战略利益基础和政治互信问题等方面也都落后于法德和解的发展,法德和解取得了创建欧盟的硕果,中日则刚刚取得建立战略互惠关系的共识。中日矛盾的深层症结就在于没有战略合作的共识和目标,从而导致双方缺乏政治互信和在战略上相互猜疑。法德和解的经验告诉我们,推动中日战略互惠关系的发展必须构建中日战略合作的共识,在中日关系中制定并推行"和平、合作与共赢"的外交政策新理念。中日走出历史问题争论和民间对立情绪困境的出路在于中日政治家们是否有智慧搭建两国战略合作和战略互惠的目标与框架。中日需要开展面向未来的共同事业,推动地区共同体形成的过程中实现并深化两国关系的和解与合作。