Concepts and Fields of Relational Justice

  • Pompeu Casanovas
  • Marta Poblet
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4884)

Abstract

This paper intends to introduce and explore the broad conceptual background of relational justice according to the current state of the art. Relational Justice (RJ) is defined as the justice produced through cooperative behavior, agreement, negotiation, or dialogue among actors in a post-conflict situation. We found concepts stemming from at least thirty different fields, going from behavioral sciences (neurology, brain sciences, primatology, social psychology, etc.) to criminology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. One of these contributing fields is Artificial Intelligence (AI), which uses several techniques to grasp the practical knowledge of negotiators and mediators and builds tools to support both negotiation and mediation processes. However, contrary to the legal ontologies field, there are no developed ontologies of Relational Justice yet representing the conceptual richness of the domain.

Keywords

legal concepts legal ontologies legal systems dialogue relational justice restorative justice ADR ODR 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    McCold, P.: Primary Restorative Justice Practices. In: Morris, A., Maxwell, G. (eds.) Restorative Justice for Juveniles Conferencing, Mediation and Circles, pp. 41–58. Hart Publishing, Oxford-Portalnd (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mestitz, A., Ghetti, S. (eds.): Victim-offender Mediation with Youth Offenders in Europe. An overview and comparison of 15 countries. Springer, Dordrecht (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Singer, J., Makie, K., Hardy, T, Massie, G. (Eds.): The EU Mediation Atlas: Practice and Regulation. CEDR (2004); Aertsen, I., Daems, T., Robert, L. (Eds.): Institutionalizing Restorative Justice, Devon. Willan Publishing (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dignan, J., Marsh, P.: Restorative Justice and Family Group Conferences in England: Current State and Future Prospects. In: Morris, A., Maxwell, G. (eds.) Restorative Justice for Juveniles Conferencing, Mediation and Circles, pp. 85–101. Hart Publishing, Oxford-Portland (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Casanovas, P., Poblet, M.: Micro-foundations of restorative justice: a general framework. In: Mackay, R., Bošnjak, D.J., Pelikan, C., Stokkom, B., Wright, M. (eds.) Images of Restorative Justice Theory, p. 258. Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft, Frankfurt am Main (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Bruijn, J., Ehring, M., Feier, C., Martín-Recuerda, F., Scharffe, F., Weiten, M.: Ontology Mediation, merging, and Aligning. In: Davies, J., Studer, R., Warren, P. (eds.) Semantic Web Technologies. Trends and Research in Ontology-based Systems, pp. 95–113. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aschoff, F.R., Schmalhofer, F., van Elst, L.: Knowledge Mediation: A Procedure for the Cooperative Construction of Domain Ontologies. In: Proceedings of the ECAI-2004 Workshop on Agent-mediated Knowledge Management (AMKM 2004), pp. 29–38 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vrandečić, D., Pinto, S., Tempich, C., Sure, Y.: The DILIGENT knowledge process. Journal of Knowledge Management 9(5), 85–96 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Casanovas, P., Casellas, N., Tempich, C., Vrandečič, D., Benjamins, V.R.: OPJK and DILIGENT: ontology modelling in a distributed environment. Artificial Intelligence and Law 15, 171–186 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bailin, S.C., Truszowski, W.: Ontology Negotiation: How Agents Can Really Get to Know Each Other. In: Truszkowski, W., Hinchey, M., Rouff, C.A. (eds.) WRAC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2564, pp. 320–334. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fehr, E., Camerer, C.F.: Social neuroeconomics: the neural circuitry of social preferences. TRENDS in cognitive science 11(10), 227–419 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bainbridge, W.S., Roco, M.C.: Manging Nano-Bio-Info-Cogno Innovations. Converging Technologies in Society. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Castelfranchi, C., Giardini, F., Marzo, M.: Relationships between rationality, human motives, and emotions. Mind & Society 5, 173–197 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aureli, F., de Waal, F.M.B. (eds.): Natural Conflict Resolution. University of California Press (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Waal, F.M.B.: Primates – A Natural Heritage of Conflict Resolution. Science 289, 586–590 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Preston, S., de Waal, F.M.B.: Empathy: Its ultimate and proximal bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25, 1–72 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Damasio, A.R.: The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 351 1346, 1420–1513 (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Singer, T., Frith, C.: The painful side of empathy. Nature Neuroscience 8(7), 845–846 (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U., Gätcher, S.: Strong Reciprocity, Human Cooperation and the Enforcement of Social Norms. Human Nature 13, 1–25 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Murray, R.J.: Forgiveness as a Therapeutic Option. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families 10(3), 315–321 (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    McCullough, M.E., Rachal, K.C., Worthington Jr., E., Brown, S.W., Hight, T.L.: Interpersonal Forgiving in Close Relationships: II, Theoretical Elaboration and Measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75(6), 1586–1603 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ekman, P.: Emotions Revealed. Understanding Faces and Feelings. Widenfield & Nicholson, London (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nerlich, B., Clarke, D.D.: Semantic fields and frames: Historical explorations of the interface between language, action, and cognition. Journal of Pragmatics 32, 125–150 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Levinson, S.: Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1983)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Foley, W.A.: Anthropological Linguistics. An Introduction. Blackwell Publ., Oxford (1997)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Saville-Troike, M.: The Ethnography of Communication. An Introduction. Blackwell Publ., Oxford (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., Kasper, G.: Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, Ablex, Norwood, NJ (1989)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rumelhart, D.E., McClelland, J.L., the PDP Research Group: Parallel Distributed Processing. Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. vol. 1. Foundations. vol. 2. Psychological and Biological Models. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1986)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Clancey, W.J., Sachs, P., Sierhus, M., Hoof, R.V.: Brahms: simulating practice for work systems design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 49, 831–865 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Deutschmann, M.: Apologising in British English, Doctoral Dissertation. Skrifter från moderna språk 10. Institutionen för moderna språk, Umeå Universitet (2003)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nader, L. (ed.): Law in Culture and Society. Aldine Publ., Chicago (1969)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lederach, P.: Building Peace. Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. United States Institute of Peace Press, Washington (1997)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Theidon, K.: Justice in Transition. The Micro-politics of Reconciliation in Postwar Peru, Journal of Conflict Resolution 50(3), 433–457 (2006)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Raiffa, H.: The Art and Science of Negotiation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1982)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Garfinkel, M.R., Skarpedas, S.: Economics of Conflict: An Overview. University of California (Irvine) (2006), http://ideas.repec.org/p/irv/wpaper/050623.html
  36. 36.
    Yiu, K.T.W., Cheng, C.O.: A Study of Construction Mediator Tactics. Part II: The Contiongent Use of Tactics, Building and Environment 42(I2), 752–761 (2007)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chebat, J.C., Slusarczyk, W.: How emotions mediate the effects of perceived justice on loyalty in service recovery situations. Journal of Business Research 58, 664–673 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Aquino, K., Tripp, T., Bies, R.J.: Getting Even or Moving On? Power, procedural Justice, and Types of Offenses as Predictors of Revenge, Forgiveness, Reconciliation, and Avoid-ance in Organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology 91(3), 653–668 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Simon, H.A.: Making Management Decisions:The Role of Intuition and Emotion, Academy of Management Executive, February, pp. 57–64 (1987)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kahnemann, Daniel: Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics. The American Economic Review 5, 1449–1475 (2003)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Braithwaite, J.: Meta-regulation for Access to Justice: Presentation to General Aspects of Law (GALA). Seminar series, University of California, Berkeley, November 13 (2003), http://www.law.berkeley.edu/centers/kadish/gala03/Braithwaite%20Kent.pdf
  42. 42.
    Jameson, J.K., Bodtker, A.M., Jone, T.: Like Talking in a Brick Wall: Implications of Emotion Metaphors for Mediation Practice. Negotiation Journal 22(2), 199–207 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Cobb, S., Rifkin, J.: Practice and Paradox: Deconstructing neutrality in Mediation. Law and Social Inquiry 16(1), 36–62 (1991)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Fisher, R., Ury, W.: Getting to Yes. Negotiating Agreement Without Giving. Houghton Mifflin Company (1981)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Fisher, R., Shapiro, D.: Beyond Reason. Using Emotions as You Negotiate. Random House Business Books (2006)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hoffman, D.: Paradoxes of Mediation, American Association Dispute Resolution Magazine, Fall/Winter (2002) (2005), http://bostonlawcollaborative.com/documents/2005-07-paradoxes-of-mediation.pdf
  47. 47.
    Olson, S.M., Dzur, A.W.: Revisiting Informal Justice: Restorative Justice and Democratic Professionalism. Law & Society Review 38(1), 139–176 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Uijjttenbroek, E.M.: The influence of motives and styles in mediation online dispute resolution. In: Lodder, A., Rule, C., Zeleznikow, J. (eds.) Proceedings of 4th International Workshop on ODR, Palo Alto, June 8, pp. 31–35 (2007)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Raines, S.S.: Can Online Mediation Be Transformative? Tales From the Front. Conflict Resolution Quarterly 22(4), 437–451 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    De Dreu, C.K.W., Carnevale, P.J.: Disparate Methods and Common Findings in the Study of Negotiation. International negotiation 10, 193–203 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ben-Ze’ev, A.: Privacy, emotional closeness, and openness in cyberspace. Computers in Human Behavior 19, 451–467 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Walton, D., Lodder, A.: What Role can Rational Argument Play in ADR and Online Dispute Resolution. In: Zeleznikow, J., Lodder, A. (eds.) Second International ODR Workshop. Wolf Legal Publishers, Tilburg (2005)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Putnam, L.: Transformations and Critical Moments in Negotiations. Negotiation Journal 20(2), 275–295 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Lodder, A.R., Zeleznikow, J.: Developing an Online Dispute Resolution Environment: Dialogue Tools and Negotiation Support Systems in a Three-Step Model. Harvard Negotiation Law Review 10, 237–288 (2005)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Cohen, R.: Negotiating Across Cultures, 2nd edn. Institute for Peace, Washington (1997)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Aakhus, M.: Neither Naïve nor Critical Reconstruction: Dispute Mediators, Impasse, and the Design of Argumentation. Argumentation 17, 265–290 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Gordon, T., Märker, O.: Mediation Systems, Online mediation. In: Märker, O., Trénel (eds.) Neue Medien in Der Konfliktvermittung-Mit Bespielen Aus Politik Und Wirtschaft, Sigma edn., Berlin, pp. 61–84 (2002); Thiessen, E., Zeleznikow, J.: Technical Aspects of Online Dispute Resolution—Challenges and Opportunities, http://www.odr.info/unforum2004/thiessen_zeleznikow.htm
  58. 58.
    Katsh, E.: Online Dispute Resolution: Some Implications for the Emergence of Law in Cyberspace. International Review of Law Computers & Technology 21(2), 97–107 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Gordon, T., Märker, O.: Mediation Systems, Online mediation. In: Märker, O., Trénel (eds.) Neue Medien in Der Konfliktvermittung-Mit Bespielen Aus Politik Und Wirtschaft, Sigma edn., Berlin, pp. 61–84 (2002); Thiessen, E., Zeleznikow, J.: Technical Aspects of Online Dispute Resolution—Challenges and Opportunities, http://www.odr.info/unforum2004/thiessen_zeleznikow.htm MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Walton, D., Godden, D.M.: Persuasion dialogue in online dispute resolution. AI and Law 13, 273–295 (2005)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Tamma, V., Phelps, S., Dickinson, I., Wooldridge, M.: Ontologies for supporting negotiation in e-commerce. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 18, 223–236 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ermolayev, V., Keberle, N., Tolok, V.: OIL Ontologies for Collaborative Task Performance in Coalitions of Self-Interested Actors. In: Arisawa, H., Kambayashi, Y., Kumar, V., Mayr, H.C., Hunt, I. (eds.) ER Workshops 2001. LNCS, vol. 2465, pp. 390–402. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Anumba, C.J., Ren, Z., Thorpe, A., Ugwu, O.O., Newnham, L.: Negotiation within a multiagent system for the collaborative design of light industrial buildings. Advances in Engineering Software 34, 389–401 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Bailin, S.C., Truszkowski, W.: Ontology Negotiation Between Intelligent Information Systems. The Knowledge Engineering Review 17(1), 7–19 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pompeu Casanovas
    • 1
  • Marta Poblet
    • 2
  1. 1.UAB Institute of Law and Technology (IDT), Faculty of LawAutonomous University of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.ICREA Researcher at the UAB Institute of Law and Technology 

Personalised recommendations