Abstract
It is becoming more common to speak about mediation as a
profession. This raises the question of what form mediation ethics
should take in the professional era. This article outlines two ways
of thinking about mediation ethics — the regulatory model and the
practice model — and considers their suitability to address the
challenge of professionalisation. I examine the main features of the
two models, then compare them with some core characteristics of
mediation as a dispute resolution process. I argue that while it is
tempting to associate professionalisation with the regulatory model,
the practice model offers some important advantages in the
mediation context. I conclude that the mediation profession should
aim to strike a balance between the two models, while generally
emphasising practice over regulation.
profession. This raises the question of what form mediation ethics
should take in the professional era. This article outlines two ways
of thinking about mediation ethics — the regulatory model and the
practice model — and considers their suitability to address the
challenge of professionalisation. I examine the main features of the
two models, then compare them with some core characteristics of
mediation as a dispute resolution process. I argue that while it is
tempting to associate professionalisation with the regulatory model,
the practice model offers some important advantages in the
mediation context. I conclude that the mediation profession should
aim to strike a balance between the two models, while generally
emphasising practice over regulation.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 5-14 |
Number of pages | 10 |
Journal | Bond Law Review |
Volume | 29 |
Issue number | 1 |
Publication status | Published - 2017 |