Encyclopedia of Law and Economics

Living Edition
| Editors: Alain Marciano, Giovanni Battista Ramello

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Living reference work entry
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7883-6_65-1
How to cite

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) refers to any mode of dispute resolution that does not utilize the court system, such as arbitration, neutral assessment, conciliation, and mediation. Methods of ADR are different from one another, but share common points, notably the feature that a third party is involved and a less formal and complex framework than courts. The third party offers an opinion about the dispute to the disputants or chose a binding decision. In recent decades, many countries have adopted rules requiring parties to go through some form of ADR before resorting to trial. ADR programs currently operate in a wide variety of contexts: union-management negotiations, commercial contract disputes, divorce negotiations, etc. The utilization of ADR mechanisms is championed by parties and lawyers, as well as by politicians or judges. Parties and lawyers hope to withdraw from ADR a benefit in terms of time and costs. Politicians and judges seek to relieve congestion in the courts...

Keywords

Dispute Resolution Alternative Dispute Resolution Mutual Advantage Arbitration Clause Arbitration Procedure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Armstrong MJ, Hurley W (2002) Arbitration using the closest offer principle of arbitrator behavior. Math Soc Sci 43(1):19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arrow K. et al. (1995) Barriers to conflict resolution. W. W. Norton & Company, 1st ed, p. 368Google Scholar
  3. Ashenfelter O (1987) Arbitrator behavior. Am Econ Rev 77(2):342–346Google Scholar
  4. Ayres I, Brown JG (1994) Economic rationales for mediation. Va Law Rev 80:323–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bazerman M, Farber H (1985) Arbitrator decision making: when are final offers important? Ind Lab Relat Rev 39(1):76–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bloom D, Cavanagh C (1986) An analysis of the selection of arbitrators. Am Econ Rev 76:408–421Google Scholar
  7. Brams SJ, Merill S (1986) Binding versus final-offer arbitration: a combination is best. Manag Sci 32(10):1346–1355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chappe N (2002) The informational role of the arbitration clause. Eur J Law Econ 13(1):27–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chappe N, Gabuthy Y (2013) The impact of lawyers and fee arrangements on arbitration. J Inst Theor Econ 139:720–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chatterjee K (1981) Comparison of arbitration procedures: models with complete and incomplete information. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 11(2):101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dickinson D, Hunnicutt L (2010) Nonbinding recommendations: the relative effects of focal points versus uncertainty reduction on bargaining outcomes. Theory Decis 69:615–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Doornik K (2014) A rationale for mediation and its optimal use. Int Rev Law Econ 38:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Farber H (1980) An analysis of final-offer arbitration. J Confl Resolut 24(4):683–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Farber H (1981) Splitting-the-difference in interest arbitration. Ind Lab Relat Rev 35:70–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Farber H, Bazerman, (1986) The general basis of arbitrator behavior: an empirical analysis of conventional and final-offer arbitration. Econometrica 54(6):1503–1528Google Scholar
  16. Farber H, Katz H (1979) Interest arbitration, outcomes, and the incentive to bargain. Ind Labor Relat Rev 33(1):55–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Holler MJ, Lindner I (2004) Mediation as signal. Eur J Law Econ 17:165–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Shavell S (1995) Alternative dispute resolution: an economic analysis. J Legal Stud 24:1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zeng DZ (2003) An amendment to final-offer arbitration. Math Soc Sci 46(1):9–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zeng D-Z, Nakamura S, Ibaraki T (1996) Double-offer arbitration. Math Soc Sci 31(3):147–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Franche Comté CRESEBesançonFrance