Just biased or biased and just?: The role of procedural justice in biased mediation
Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (Two Years)), 20 credits / 30 HE creditsStudent thesis
Research on biased mediation largely focuses on comparing biased and unbiased mediation in terms of effectiveness. The field clearly lacks explanations for the variation of success within the group of biased mediators. This study seeks to address this lacuna by posing the question: why are some biased mediators more successful than others? The explanatory variable proposed to account for the variation of success is the mediator’s procedurally just behaviour in the mediation process. By considering both parties equally in the procedural design, biased mediators are able to develop trust with the disfavoured side. Consequently, the rising level of cooperation and integrative bargaining makes a substantial agreement more likely. The structured, focused comparison of the U.S. mediation in the Stormont talks in Northern Ireland, that produced the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, and the U.S. mediation at the Camp David II summit in 2000, that failed to generate a settlement between Israel and the Palestinian National Authority, gives strong support to the hypothesis: a biased mediator who acts procedurally just during the negotiation process is more likely to accomplish a substantial agreement than a biased mediator who favours one side in the process.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. , 70 p.
biased mediation, procedural justice, fairness, equality, mediation success, Stormont talks, Camp David II
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-295957OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-295957DiVA: diva2:935600
Subject / course
Peace and Conflict Studies
Höglund, Kristine, Professor