print/download PDF version

Towards the development of generic Computer Assisted Dispute Resolution, Based on Conflict Theory

Berry Zondag, New Zealand

Arno R. Lodder, the Netherlands

Abstract

ODR can be described as an attempt to use the internet to mainstream ADR.  The question how conflict resolution and information technology interact at a fundamental level has received little attention.  Improving information exchange about substantive issues in conflict prevents escalation of conflict and assists in resolution.  Dispute resolution always involves a level of separation of the substantive and emotional issues.  This is achieved by means of the process and/or by the involvement of the neutral.  Creating ODR systems includes the question how this “separation” function can be provided or supported by an automated system.  This paper reports on a project of which the ultimate goal is to create a generic Computer Assisted Dispute Resolution (CADR) system.  The CADR is developed by analysing the structure of conflict and the role of information exchange in it.

1          Introduction

At the basis of ODR lie ADR and the Internet.  These share that they mainly stand outside government regulation, but attract the keen interest of governments: the internet primarily for its contribution to the economy and its role in the dissemination of information, ADR for the reduction of the caseloads for the courts, while delivering more satisfying results for disputants.

One could satisfactorily describe ODR as an attempt to use the internet to mainstream ADR.  The question how conflict resolution and information technology interact fundamentally is apposite.  This paper describes an attempt to answer that question, and to do it in a practical way, hopefully eventually leading to a generic description for a Computer Assisted Dispute Resolution (CADR) system.

This paper reports on the first phase (Zondag, 2005) of a larger project, of which the ultimate goal is an implemented CADR system.  The difference of this approach with other research on ODR such as (Katsh & Rifkin, 2001; Lodder & Vreeswijk, 2004; Lodder & Zeleznikow, 2005; Rule, 2002), is the theoretical basis.  Katsh, Rifkin and Rule are exponents of researchers with an ADR/legal background and IT expertise, Lodder, Vreeswijk and Zeleznikow apply results from AI in general and AI & Law to dispute resolution.  The current project (Zondag, 2005) aims to create an automated dispute resolution environment grounded on research in conflict theory.

It is a well known battle cry in the ADR world to “Separate the People from the Problem ” (Fisher, Ury, & Patton, 1991). (Fisher, Ury, & Patton, 1991).  This is of course not to be taken literally, but stands for the notion that human emotion drives conflict, and that resolution is more likely when the focus is shifted to objective criteria to assess the substantive matters in dispute.  The role of these emotional factors must be understood and it is proposed to achieve that by modeling conflict communication.  Communication is a process of information exchange, ultimately aimed at achieving some action, a change in the relationship, or a change in the communication setting itself.  The objectives of that information exchange form the basic components of the models used to develop the CADR concept.  The word “objectives” is used in a very wide sense, which will be discussed later.  This paper considers the role of information exchange in conflict and the impact of information technology on that role.  A brief overview of relevant conflict theory is provided, from which modeling requirements are extracted.  Finally an overview of the CADR concept is provided.

[1]  Berry Zondag is a fellow of the Arbitrator’s and Mediator’s Institute of New Zealand, and a postgraduate student at the Centre for Dispute Resolution, Massey University, New Zealand.

[2]  Arno Lodder heads the IT Law Department at the Computer Law Institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam and is director of the Centre for Electronic Dispute Resolution. (CEDIRE.ORG)

[3] Although that is exactly what happens in most Court procedures.