Bibliographie sélective OHADA

The institutionalization of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes is the most recent development in the policy effort to reform the American civil justice system. However, the research is inconclusive and contradictory on the performance of ADR processes in institutionalized settings. This study introduces a production m odel of third party dispute resolution processes to compare the performance of court annexed arbitration, judicial settlem ent conference, and trial processes. To explain the processes’ performance, a strategic behavior model of third party dispute resolution processes identifies four strategic behaviors which influences process perform ance: integrative, distributive, opportunistic, and distributive. Through conceptualization of the m odels, several hypotheses are developed. This study introduces a production m odel of third party dispute resolution processes to compare the performance of court annexed arbitration, judicial settlem ent conference, and trial processes. To explain the processes’ performance, a strategic behavior model of third party dispute resolution processes identifies four strategic behaviors which influences process perform ance: integrative, distributive, opportunistic, and distributive. Through conceptualization of the m odels, several hypotheses are developed. This study concludes that the court annexed arbitration is the best performing process. Of the various dispute, disputant, and process characteristics identified to explain process perform ance, only the disputant’s perception of process equity during the process is significant and positive. The policy inference is that policy makers can reduce disputant costs while improving delay, process equity, and satisfaction through court-annexed arbitration.