The Future Development of ADR

• Author: Andrew J. Pirie
• Profession: Faculty of Law. University of Victoria
• Pages: 379-399

379

CHAPTER 10

THE FUTURE

DEVELOPMENT OF ADR

“And the whole earth was of one language.”

1

— Genesis 11:1, King James Version

A. INTRODUCTION

Taking a broad view of alternative dispute resolution will not likely

lead to such a unilingual image but it can lead to the conclusion that all

peoples have an interest in the future development of ADR. For anyone

who will experience a dispute in the days ahead or come into contact

with conflict, the future shape of ADR will likely play a central role in

determining how the particular problem is experienced, processed and

resolved. Governments, organizations, and individuals — the whole

earth can be concerned with the disputing arrangements that the ADR

field will inspire.

Apart from such a widespread appeal, the future development of

ADR may be of most interest to those readers who see it in a different

light. For the ADR practitioners, legal professionals, academics, stu-

dents, and critics — many of whom are the leaders or future leaders in

this modern movement — the importance of ADR can extend well

1 H.H. Perritt Jr., “And The Whole Earth Was of One Language — A Broad View of

Dispute Resolution” (1983–84) 29 Vill. L. Rev. 1221.

380

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

beyond its personal benefits. For this group, ADR is a subject with

long-lasting appeal. Their exposure to ADR will have inspired changes

in outlooks and attitudes, in career paths and plans, and in practices

and beliefs. These individuals will have seen first-hand the positive

influences ADR can have on people’s lives or the concerns it can cause.

For the people and organizations that are already a part of ADR’s his-

tory, there will be a strong sense that it has something significant to

say. For them, its future development may be of ultimate import.

Where ADR is heading, what issues addressed, what challenges met,

what policies set, what changes made, or what status quo saved are

questions that merit close attention.

Of course, any discussion of what lies ahead in ADR must, to a

large extent, be general in nature. Whether ADR is narrow or broad,

mostly consensus-based or more broadly reframed, its future will

surely be more expansive in scope. This prediction appears indisput-

able even in a field where conflicts flourish. The future seems clearly

destined to be filled with more mandatory mediation, anxious on-line

negotiations, creative disputing designs, and increasingly complex

ADR laws requiring lawyers to advise and conference and research

agendas breaking new ground. Indeed, there is current law reform

research that now sees all conflict as a relational concept — the rela-

tionship between disputing parties having a large bearing on how dis-

putes are handled and a goal for civil and criminal disputes being a

transformation of these relationships between parties to the conflict.

2

If

relationships are at the core of all disputes in the future, the future

scope of ADR, a movement originally heralded as a way of preserving

continuing relationships, will surely be complete. There will be more

disputes of every imaginable shape and type to come under the ADR

purview, a transformed image of civil and criminal justice, and a need

for lawyers and others who are trained to work in these new milieus.

And, if the context of disputing — the where, who, what, when and

why — matters, the study of ADR in the future will bring so much

more into play. The diverse disputing details, the multidisciplinarity of

views, the broad goals and objectives, the practical skills and best prac-

tices — all parts of ADR now — seem only ready to grow. For such a

vast domain, general remarks are the only way, in such a short space,

to offer observations on future developments.

2 See the Discussion Paper “From Restorative Justice to Transformative Justice” of

the Law Commission of Canada at .