Designing Justice: Legal Institutions and Other Systems for Managing Conflict

Published in cooperation with the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolutio

When We Hold No Truths to Be Self-Evident: Truth, Belief, Trust, and the Decline in Trials

This article will explore the relationship between the vanishing trial and the changing ways in which we think about truth. First, it briefly overviews how we think about knowing what is true: epistemology and this history of philosophy. Second, it looks to the philosophy of science and history of social science for new theories and methods about how we ascertain and construct meaning and what we believe to be real and true. Third, it examines our changing relation to information in the face of the information explosion : information is the evidence upon which we reach a conclusion about what is true. Fourth, it relates these changes to the philosophy of law and theories of the jury and adversary system. Fifth, it examines what social science has taught us about truth, belief, trust, justice, and control over information. Finally, it addresses how these changes may explain why litigants are using mediation, arbitration, and other forms of appropriate dispute resolution in lieu of the adversarial civil trial

Reflections on Designing Governance to Produce the Rule of Law

This article first briefly reviews definitions of the rule of law. Second, it briefly reviews current understandings and approaches to governance. Third, it introduces the concept of dispute systems design, its application to collaborative governance across the policy continuum, and failures in the rule of law as seen through this frame. Finally, it provides examples of rule of law initiatives organized across the policy process in governance

Mediation in Employment and Creeping Legalism: Implications for Dispute Systems Design

This article will explore the question of creeping legalism in mediation of statutory disputes arising out of employment. First, it will briefly review the issue of creeping legalism in arbitration. Second, it will introduce dispute systems design (DSD). Third, it will review the analogous debate on legalism in mediation in three design contexts: evaluative mediation of employment disputes in the court-connected setting, grievance mediation embedded in the collective bargaining agreement, and transformative mediation of employment disputes in the United States Postal Service\u27s (USPS\u27s) REDRESS program. Most employees do not face a choice among mediation models; instead, they choose among adjudicative processes or mediation. Thus, the article will conclude by reporting the results of an interview study comparing USPS employees\u27 experiences in the EEO complaint process, grievance arbitration, and employment mediation. These results show that an individual employee complainant may benefit from a non-adversarial, non-legalistic, and voluntary mediation model that seeks to foster communication and mutual understanding

Closing Discussion

Moderator: Lisa Blomgren Bingham, Visiting Professor, Boyd School of Law, UNLV; Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affair