2005

First published in the launch issue of the Asian Journal on Mediation, this paper discusses how new technologies can be used for online dispute resolution (ODR) specifically in Asia. ODR refers to dispute resolution processes such as mediation assisted by information technology, particularly the internet. The paper explains that ODR uses a range of tools and can be used for almost any type of dispute. ODR websites use tools such as email, voice conferencing, instant messaging, bulletin boards and video facilities to enable them to resolve disputes where it would be impossible or inadvisable to meet in person. Examples of ODR in the Asia Pacific region include addressing internet disputes (especially domain names), consumer disputes, commercial disputes, courts and justice, etc.

The authors suggest that a more Asia-Pacific perspective needs to be taken that responds to the patterns of technology adoption in this region. In particular, the next generation of online dispute resolution systems will need to reflect the rich diversity of cultures in Asia and its unique socio-political context. In doing so, these ODR systems will need to address peacebuilding and conflict transformation using technologies already prevalent in the region, like mobile telephony and community internet radio to create hybrid systems.

According to the paper, an Asian perspective for ODR-involved systems for peacebuilding and conflict should address the following challenges:

• Systems architecture geared for Asian conditions - open and sustainable standards are imperative in terms of supporting the long-term needs of peacebuilding. Closed standards that are based on proprietary solutions may lock communities into frameworks that may be sub-optimal for successful conflict transformation and at worst, may impede progress and result in the resumption of violent conflict. Open standards encourage creative mixing and matching of suitable ODR frameworks
  to create customised solutions that best fit specific geo-physical context and the specific issues that the process is founded upon.
• Legal and political context - working in concert with progressive legal frameworks, ODR systems must endeavour to transform the interactions of stakeholders to explore mutual interests and the root causes of conflict.
• Resistance from communities to personal computer (PC) based frameworks - Those who have invested millions of dollars in years of research and development for PC based ODR systems have a vested interest in the promotion of PCs as the central component information and communication technology (ICT) frameworks for conflict transformation, yet the authors argue that PCS require maintaiennec and skills that are not always available. It is argued that frameworks need to make use of technology already in the hands of such communities in the creation of systems that support and strengthen conflict transformation using existing capacities.
• Culture & language - current ODR systems usually do not consider the entrenched cultures of disputants or ways in which such cultures help or impede mediation processes. Influencing the selection of technology to the modes of service delivery, the study of culture will play a vital role in the creation of ODR systems in Asia for processes that are unique to the region – conflict transformation, peacebuilding, nation-building and resource conflicts that arise from large scale humanitarian disasters. The ability to access and benefit from ODR systems for such tasks will also rely heavily on the politics of language - systems that use English exclusively will alienate large swathes of grassroots communities who do not speak, read or write English.

The authors propose that it is necessary to take into consideration the rich texture of grassroots needs in post-conflict contexts and develop frameworks that consider the following:

• defining ODR requirements and systems based on needs and priorities that have been expressed by the communities and users themselves, and not just articulated by political stakeholders or traditional power-centres;
• development of state-of-the-art tools to ignite community aspirations and transfer appropriate skills for fostering sustainable development, while at the same time keeping in mind the fragility of socio-political relations in the context of on-going peace processes;
• expansion of a community’s social capital through enhanced access to ODR, while "eschewing the facile notion that the prevalence of PC’s itself is indicative of community empowerment;"
• embedding community-based ODR services within existing economic, governance and social structures, while at the same time creating opportunities for communities to use ODR systems to transcend regressive socio-political
  architectures and create new social contracts;
• Infusing enhanced capabilities for information access within & between communities, for purposes of grassroots conflict transformation.

The authors conclude that online mediation has great potential to assist in resolving disputes. In the Asia Pacific region, it has a particular place in enabling access to justice for large populations who have little access to dispute resolution by other means. However in order to make use of this potential, a specially developed Asia-Pacific perspective needs to be taken that recognises the distinctive patterns of technology use in the region and the particular cultural or other factors at play in each context. According to the report, "online dispute resolution has already arrived in the Asia Pacific. The challenge is to ensure that the next generation of ODR meets the challenges of a diverse, demanding and dynamic region."