The institutionalization of mediation
Reflections from an expert panel
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1093Palavras-chave:
Mediation, institutionalization, collaborative methods, participation, structured discussion format, plurilogue, SWOT workshopResumo
On 27 and 28 April 2017, the International Institute for the Sociology of Law held a workshop under the theme The Institutionalization of Mediation: Potentialities and Risks. The scientific coordinators of this initiative promoted a structured discussion to identify the risks and potentialities of institutionalization to further develop mediation in the region. This article intends to review some literature supporting the subject of discussions, and to report the intense final discussion within the group of 27 mediation experts (from Germany, Belgium, France, Spain and Portugal). In these final reflections, we do not want to provide definitive answers to burning questions, but we hope to shed a light on the crucial dilemmas as they were discussed in a world-café-like workshop at the end of the meeting. Some limitations and future directions are discussed in light of participatory methods and governance innovation.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads:
PDF (English) 780
Referências
Abelson, J., et al., 2003. Deliberations about deliberative methods: Issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Social Science and Medicine [online], 57(2), pp. 239–251. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12765705 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00343-X
Alberts, J.K., Heisterkamp, B.L., and McPhee, R.M., 2005. Disputant perceptions of and satisfaction with a community mediation program. International Journal of Conflict Management [online], 16(3), pp. 218–244. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022930 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022930
American Arbitration Association and American Bar Association and Association for Conflict Resolution, 2005. The Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators [online]. September. Available from: https://www.adr.org/sites/default/files/document_repository/AAA%20Mediators%20Model%20Standards%20of%20Conduct%2010.14.2010.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Bailey, P., 2014. Neutrality in mediation: an ambiguous ethical value. Journal of Mediation & Applied Conflict Analysis [online], 1(1), pp. 53-56. Available from: http://kennedyinstitute.nuim.ie/journal-of-mediation-and-applied-conflict-analysis [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33232/jmaca.1.1.4675
Beck, C.J.A., and Sales, B.D., 2001. Future mediation research. In: The Law and Public Policy. Family Mediation: Facts, Myths, and Future Prospects [online]. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 125-166. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1037/10401-009 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/10401-009
Benjamin, M., and Irving, H.H., 1995. Research in family mediation: Review and implications. Mediation Quarterly [online], 13(1), pp. 53–82. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900130107 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900130107
Bingham, L.B., 2012. Transformative Mediation at the United States Postal Service. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research [online], 5(4), pp. 354–366. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1750-4716.2012.00112.x [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-4716.2012.00112.x
Bishop, T.A., 1984. Mediation standards: an ethical safety net. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 1984(4), pp. 5–17. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/crq [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.39019840403
Boulle, L., and Nesic, M., 2010. Mediator Skills and Techniques : Triangle of Influence. Haywards Heath: Bloomsbury Professional. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781526502926
Brett, J.M., Barsness, Z.L., and Goldberg, S.B., 1996. The Effectiveness of Mediation: An Independent Analysis of Cases Handled by Four Major Service Providers. Negotiation Journal [online], 12(3), pp. 259–269. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.1996.tb00099.x [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.1996.tb00099.x
Burrell, N.A., Zirbel, C.S., and Allen, M., 2003. Evaluating peer mediation outcomes in educational settings: A meta-analytic review. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 21(1), pp. 7–26. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/crq.46 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.46
Charkoudian, L., 2005. A Quantitative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Community Mediation in Decreasing Repeat Police Calls for Service. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 23(1), pp. 87-98. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.126 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.126
Charkoudian, L., 2010. Giving Police and Courts a Break: The Effect of Community Mediation on Decreasing the Use of Police and Court Resources. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 28(2), pp. 141-155. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.20017 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.20017
Charkoudian, L., 2016a. Impact of Alternative Dispute Resolution on Responsibility, Empowerment, Resolution, and Satisfaction with the Judiciary: Comparison of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes in District Court Civil Cases [online]. Report. Prepared for the State Justice Institute and Maryland Judiciary. Annapolis: Maryland Administrative Office of the Courts, February. Available from: http://mdmediation.org/sites/default/files/Impact of District Court DOT ADR.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Charkoudian, L., 2016b. What Works in District Court Day of Trial Mediation: Effectiveness of Various Mediation Strategies on Short-and Long-Term Outcomes [online]. Report. Prepared for the State Justice Institute and Maryland Judiciary. Annapolis: Maryland Administrative Office of the Courts, January. Available from: http://mdmediation.org/sites/default/files/What Works in District Court DOT Mediation.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Charkoudian, L., and Bilick, M., 2015. State of Knowledge: Community Mediation at a Crossroads. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 32(3), pp. 233–276. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/crq.21112 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21112
Cohen, O., Dattner, N., and Luxenburg, A., 1999. The limits of the mediator’s neutrality. Mediation Quarterly [online], 16(4), pp. 341–348. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/crq.3900160404 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900160404
Cook, J.Y., and Boes, S.R., 2013. Mediation Works: An Action Research Study Evaluating the Peer Mediation Program from the Eyes of Mediators and Faculty [online]. Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED547782.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Cooks, L.M., and Hale, C.L., 1994. The construction of ethics in mediation. Mediation Quarterly [online], 12(1), pp. 55–76. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900120106 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900120106
De Palo, G., et al., 2014. “Rebooting” the mediation directive: Assessing the limited impact of its implementation and proposing measures to increase the number of mediations in the EU, Brussels [online]. Study. Brussels: European Parliament, January. Available from: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2014/493042/IPOL-JURI_ET(2014)493042_EN.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Della Noce, D.J., Bush, R.A.B., and Folger, J.P., 2002. Clarifying the Theoretical Underpinnings of Mediation : Implications for Practice and Policy. Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal [online], 3(1), pp. 39–65. Available from: https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship/163 [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters. Official Journal of the European Union [online], L 163/3, of 24 May 2008. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32008L0052 [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Dukes, E.F., 2004. What we know about environmental conflict resolution: An analysis based on research. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 22(1–2), pp. 191–220. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.98 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.98
Dyck, D., 2010. The mediator as nonviolent advocate: Revisiting the question of mediator neutrality. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 18(2), pp. 129–149. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3890180204 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3890180204
Emerson, K., O’Leary, R., and Bingham, L.B., 2004. Commentary: Comment on Frank Dukes’s “what we know about environmental conflict resolution”. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 22(1–2), pp. 221–231. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.99 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.99
Emery, R.E., et al., 2001. Child custody mediation and litigation: Custody, contact, and coparenting 12 years after initial dispute resolution. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology [online], 69(2), 323-332. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.69.2.323 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006X.69.2.323
Esplugues, C., and Marquis, L., eds., 2015. New Developments in Civil and Commercial Mediation Global Comparative Perspectives. Heidelberg: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18135-6
European Commission, 2004. European code of conduct for mediators [online]. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/adr/adr_ec_code_conduct_en.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Faget, J., 2010. Médiations : Les ateliers silencieux de la démocratie. Toulouse: Érès. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/eres.faget.2010.01
Federação Nacional de Mediação de Conflitos, 2016. Código de deontologia e boas práticas do mediador de conflitos da Federação Nacional de Mediação de Conflitos [online]. Available from: http://www.fnmc.pt/docs/codigo-deontologia-fnmc.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Field, R., 2000. Neutrality and power: myths and reality. ADR Bulletin [online], 3(1). Available from: https://epublications.bond.edu.au/adr/vol3/iss1/4 [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Gale, J., et al., 2002. Considering effective divorce mediation: three potential factors. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 19(4), pp. 389–420. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3890190403 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.2
Garcia, A.C., Vise, K., and Whitaker, S.P., 2003. Disputing neutrality: A case study of a bias complaint during mediation. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 20(2), pp. 205–230. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.20 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3890200206
Gazley, B., Chang, W.K., and Bingham, L.B., 2010. Board diversity, stakeholder representation, and collaborative performance in community mediation centers. Public Administration Review [online], 70(4), pp. 610–620. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02182.x [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02182.x
Gibson, K., 1999. Mediator attitudes toward outcomes: A philosophical view. Mediation Quarterly [online], 17(2), pp. 197–211. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3890170209 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3890170209
Gibson, K., Thompson, L., and Bazerman, M.H., 1996. Shortcomings of Neutrality in Mediation: Solutions Based on Rationality. Negotiation Journal [online], 12(1), pp. 69–80. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1571-9979.1996.tb00079.x [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.1996.tb00079.x
Grisham, T., 2009. The Delphi technique: a method for testing complex and multifaceted topics. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business [online], 2(1), pp. 112–130. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1108/17538370910930545 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/17538370910930545
Hasson, F., Keeney, S., and McKenna, H., 2000. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing [online], 32(4), pp. 1008–1015. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.t01-1-01567.x [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.t01-1-01567.x
Hsu, C., and Sandford, B.A., 2007. The Delphi Technique : Practical assessment, research and evaluation [online], 12(10). Available from: https://pareonline.net/pdf/v12n10.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2018].
International Mediation Institute, n.d. Code of Professional Conduct [online]. The Hague: International Mediation Institute. Available from: https://imimediation.org/imi-code-of-professional-conduct [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Izumi, C., 2010. Implicit Bias and the Illusion of Mediator Neutrality. Washington University Journal of Law and Policy [online], 34(71), pp. 71–156. Available from: http://repository.uchastings.edu/faculty_scholarship/282 [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Kelly, J.B., 2004. Family mediation research: Is there empirical support for the field? Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 22(1–2. Special Issue: Conflict Resolution in the Field: Assessing the Past, Charting the Future), pp. 3–35. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.90 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.90
Kovach, K.K., 1997. Costs of Mediation: Whose Responsibility? Mediation Quarterly [online], 15(1), pp. 13–27. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900150104 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900150104
Kressel, K., 2006. Mediation revisited. In: M. Deutsch, P.T. Coleman and E.C. Marcus, eds., The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice. 2nd revised ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, pp. 726–756.
Kressel, K., 2014. The mediation of conflict: context, cognition, and practice. In: M. Deutsch, P.T. Coleman and E.C. Marcus, eds., The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, pp. 817–848.
Lande, J., 2000. Toward More Sophisticated Mediation Theory. Journal of Dispute Resolution [online], 2000, p. 321. Available from: https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/jdisres2000&div=28&id=&page= [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Lande, J., 2004. Commentary: Focusing on Program Design Issues in Future Research on Court-Connected Mediation. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 22(1), pp. 89–101. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.93 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.93
Linstone, H.A., and Turoff, M., 2002. The Delphi Method: Techniques and applications [online], pp. 1-616. Available from: https://web.njit.edu/~turoff/pubs/delphibook/delphibook.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Mayer, B.S., 2004. Beyond Neutrality : Confronting the Crisis in Conflict Resolution. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
McWilliam, N., 2010. A school peer mediation program as a context for exploring therapeutic jurisprudence (TJ): Can a peer mediation program inform the law? International journal of law and psychiatry [online], 33(5–6), pp. 293–305. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2010.09.002 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2010.09.002
Menkel-Meadow, C., 2014. Alternative and Appropriate Dispute Resolution in Context Formal, Informal, and Semiformal Legal Processes. In: M. Deutsch, P.T. Coleman and E.C. Marcus, eds., The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Menkel-Meadow, C., 2016. The Future of Mediation Worldwide: Legal and Cultural Variations in the Uptake of or Resistance to Mediation. In: I. Macduff, ed., Essays on Mediation Dealing with Disputes in the 21st Century. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer Law International, pp. 29–46.
Menkel-Meadow, C., Love, L.P., and Schneider, A.K., 2013. Mediation: Practice, Policy, and Ethics. 2nd ed. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Milieu Ltd., 2014. Study for an evaluation and implementation of Directive 2008/52/EC – the “Mediation Directive” [online]. Final report, October. Prepared for the European Commission. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available from: https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/bba3871d-223b-11e6-86d0-01aa75ed71a1/ [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Milieu Ltd., 2016. Study for an evaluation and implementation of Directive 2008/52/EC – the “Mediation Directive” [online]. Final report, updated 16 March. Prepared for the European Commission. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available from: https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/bba3871d-223b-11e6-86d0-01aa75ed71a1/language-en [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Moore, C.W., 2014. The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict. 4th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mullen, P.M., 2003. Delphi: myths and reality. Journal of Health Organization and Management [online], 17(1), pp. 37–52. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1108/14777260310469319 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14777260310469319
Neves, T., 2009. Practice Note: Community Mediation as Social Intervention. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 26(4), pp. 481–496. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.244 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.244
Okoli, C., and Pawlowski, S.D., 2004. The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Information & Management [online], 42(1), pp. 15–29. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002
Parkinson, L., 2014. Family Mediation. 3rd ed. Bristol: Family Law.
Poitras, J., and Le Tareau, A., 2009. Quantifying the Quality of Mediation Agreements. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research [online], 2(4), pp. 363–380. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-4716.2009.00045.x [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-4716.2009.00045.x
Poitras, J., et al., 2015. Managerial mediation competency: A mixed-method study. Negotiation Journal [online], 31(2), pp. 105–129. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12085 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12085
Pruitt, D.G., et al., 1993. Long-term success in mediation. Law and Human Behavior [online], 17(3), pp. 313–330. Available from: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1007/BF01044511 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01044511
Raines, S.S., Pokhrel, S.K., and Poitras, J., 2013. Mediation as a Profession: Challenges That Professional Mediators Face. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 31(3), pp. 79–97. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21080 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21080
Ramos, N., and Moleiro, C., 2017. Intercultural Challenges in Conflict Mediation. In: A. Thomas, ed., Cultural and Ethnic Diversity: How European Psychologists can Meet the Challenges. Göttingen: Hogrefe, pp. 87-92.
Red Empúries, 2014. Aspectos pertinentes de la conceptualización de la mediación: perspectivas anglo-sajona y latina. La Trama [online], 42. Retrieved from http://www.revistalatrama.com.ar/contenidos/larevista_articulo.php?id=290&ed=42 [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Report From The Commission To The European Parliament, The Council And The European Economic And Social Committee on the application of Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters (COM(2016) 542 final) [online]. Brussels, 26 August. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2016%3A542%3AFIN [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Rifkin, J., Millen, J., and Cobb, S., 1991. Toward a new discourse for mediation: A critique of neutrality. Mediation Quarterly [online], 9(2), pp. 151–164. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900090206 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900090206
Rowe, G., and Frewer, L.J., 2000. Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation. Science, Technology, & Human Values [online], 25(1), pp. 3–29. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F016224390002500101 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/016224390002500101
Saposnek, D.T., 2004. Commentary: The future of the history of family mediation research. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 22(1–2), pp. 37–53. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.91 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.91
Shapira, O., 2016. A Theory of Mediators’ Ethics [online]. Cambridge University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316534205 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316534205
Shaw, L.A., 2010. Divorce Mediation Outcome Research: A Meta-Analysis. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 27(4), pp. 447-467. Available from: http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1002/crq.20006 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.20006
Silbey, S.S., 1993. Mediation Mythology. Negotiation Journal [online], 9(4), pp. 349–353. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.1993.tb00722.x [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.1993.tb00722.x
Silbey, S.S., 2002. Emperor’s New Clothes: Mediation Mythology and Markets. Journal of Dispute Resolution [online], 1(11), pp. 171–177. Available from: http://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol2002/iss1/11 [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., and Macnaghten, P., 2013. Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy [online], 42(9), pp. 1568–1580. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008
Taylor, A., 1997. Concepts of neutrality in family mediation: Contexts, ethics, influence, and transformative process. Mediation Quarterly [online], 14(3), pp. 215–236. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900140306 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3900140306
Umbreit, M.S., 2001. The Handbook of Victim Offender Mediation: An Essential Guide for Practice and Research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Umbreit, M.S., Coates, R.B., and Vos, B., 2004. Victim-Offender Mediation: Three Decades of Practice and Research. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 22(1–2), pp. 279–303. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.102 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.102
Waldman, E., 2011. Mediation Ethics : Cases and Commentaries. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wall, J., and Kressel, K., 2012. Research on Mediator Style: A Summary and Some Research Suggestions. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research [online], 5(4), pp. 403–421. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-4716.2012.00117.x [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-4716.2012.00117.x
Wall, J.A., and Dunne, T.C., 2012. Mediation Research : A Current Review. Negotiation Journal [online], 28(2), pp. 217–244. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.2012.00336.x [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.2012.00336.x
Wall, J.A., Stark, J.B., and Standifer, R.L., 2001. Mediation a current review and theory development. Journal of Conflict Resolution [online], 45(3), pp. 370–391. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022002701045003006 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002701045003006
Wilson, B., 2010. Mediation Ethics : an Exploration of Four Seminal Texts. Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution [online], 12(1), pp. 119–142. Available from: https://cardozojcr.com/vol12no1/119-142.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Wing, L., 2009. Mediation and Inequality Reconsidered: Bringing the Discussion to the Table. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 26(4-Special Issue: Colloquy Edition: Challenging the Dominant Paradigms in Alternative Dispute Resolution), pp. 383–404. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.240 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.240
Wiseman, V., and Poitras, J., 2002. Mediation Within a Hierarchical Structure: How Can It Be Done Successfully? Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 20(1). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.10 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3890200105
Wissler, R.L., 2002. Court-Connected Mediation in General Civil Cases: What We Know from Empirical Research. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution [online], vol. 17, pp. 641-703. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1723292 [Accessed 28 September 2018].
Wissler, R.L., 2004. The effectiveness of court-connected dispute resolution in civil cases. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 22(1–2. Special Issue: Conflict Resolution in the Field: Assessing the Past, Charting the Future), pp. 55–88. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.92 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.92
Zariski, A., 2010. A Theory Matrix for Mediators. Negotiation Journal [online], 26(2), pp. 203–235. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.2010.00269.x [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.2010.00269.x
Zehr, H., 2004. Commentary: Restorative Justice: Beyond Victim-Offender Mediation. Conflict Resolution Quarterly [online], 22(1-2. Special Issue: Conflict Resolution in the Field: Assessing the Past, Charting the Future), pp. 305-315. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.103 [Accessed 28 September 2018]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.103
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2019 Ursula Sabine Caser, Nuno Ramos
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
