Foreword: ADR for the Masses
Jennifer W. Reynolds
Abstract
Jennifer W. Reynolds
Abstract
This Foreword introduces the Oregon Law Review's 2012 Scholarship Series, “ADR for the Masses. The Series examines the proliferation of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes in large-scale contexts – such as mass torts, environmental and public policy decisionmaking, collaborative governance, consumer disputes, and organizational dispute systems design – and encompasses both post-dispute processes (designed to accompany or replace traditional legal approaches to dispute resolution in mass contexts) and pre-dispute processes (designed to manage widespread or large-scale conflict and disputes earlier and more effectively). Sometimes ADR serves as a response or fix to the shortcomings of the legal system in situations involving multiple disputants or decisionmakers; sometimes ADR is an upstream strategy for managing disputes that, among other things, may render formal legal intervention unnecessary; sometimes ADR is a companion piece to traditional legal processes, pre- or post-dispute, when managing a mass disaster or large-scale dispute or conflict. The Series is an opportunity to identify not only the creative possibilities of these innovations and hybrids, but also to explore the logistical difficulties or ideological tensions that these new developments may present.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This Foreword introduces the Oregon Law Review's 2012 Scholarship Series, “ADR for the Masses. The Series examines the proliferation of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes in large-scale contexts – such as mass torts, environmental and public policy decisionmaking, collaborative governance, consumer disputes, and organizational dispute systems design – and encompasses both post-dispute processes (designed to accompany or replace traditional legal approaches to dispute resolution in mass contexts) and pre-dispute processes (designed to manage widespread or large-scale conflict and disputes earlier and more effectively). Sometimes ADR serves as a response or fix to the shortcomings of the legal system in situations involving multiple disputants or decisionmakers; sometimes ADR is an upstream strategy for managing disputes that, among other things, may render formal legal intervention unnecessary; sometimes ADR is a companion piece to traditional legal processes, pre- or post-dispute, when managing a mass disaster or large-scale dispute or conflict. The Series is an opportunity to identify not only the creative possibilities of these innovations and hybrids, but also to explore the logistical difficulties or ideological tensions that these new developments may present.
Key concepts: Alternative dispute resolution, Dispute resolution, Dispute mechanism, Online dispute resolution, Dispute board, Political science, Corporate governance, Collaborative governance