Yun Zhao and Zhiming Xiao on The Regulatory Framework for Crowdsourced Online Dispute Resolution: Revisiting the Dispute Resolution Triangle (Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal)

"The Regulatory Framework for Crowdsourced Online Dispute Resolution: Revisiting the Dispute Resolution Triangle"
Yun Zhao, Zhiming Xiao (PhD Candidate)
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
Published online: February 2026

Abstract: Crowdsourced Online Dispute Resolution (CODR) constitutes a transformative approach to digital-era disputes, fundamentally reconceptualizing dispute resolution through distributed participant networks rather than merely digitizing traditional alternative dispute resolution. Anchored in Katsh and Rifkin’s dispute resolution triangle (trust, convenience, expertise) and Perritt’s co-regulatory governance model, this paper analyzes CODR’s evolution from early systems such as iCourthouse to contemporary implementations. Case studies of eBay Community Court (contractual self-regulation prioritizing convenience) and Xianyu Small Court (state-aligned hybrid governance optimizing expertise through algorithmic juror specialization) demonstrate how platforms operationalize these theoretical frameworks. The legal analysis examines jurisdictional fragmentation and enforcement challenges, revealing how regulatory adaptations—from international harmonization to platform-level solutions—balance innovation against institutional legitimacy. Ultimately, CODR’s viability depends on dynamically synthesizing Katsh-Rifkin’s triad within co-regulatory paradigms across transnational contexts.

Suhong Yang on The International Organization for Mediation in Hong Kong: A New Chapter in Global Dispute Resolution? (The AsianSIL Voices)

"The International Organization for Mediation in Hong Kong: A New Chapter in Global Dispute Resolution?"
Suhong Yang
AsianSIL Voices
Published online: October 2025

Introduction: Mediation is an important means, for peaceful settlement of international disputes, which is stipulated in various treaties including the UN Charter. The nature of the mediating process promotes the preservation of relationships between the parties and aims to achieve win-win results rather than an adversarial approach where one side must win and the other must lose. On 30 May 2025, the signing ceremony of the Convention on the Establishment of the International Organization for Mediation (IOMed, IOMed Convention, respectively) was held in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China after two to three years of preparatory work, during which 33 countries, mostly from Africa, Asia, and Latin-America, signed the IOMed Convention. The Convention entered into force on 29 August 2025, following ratification by China, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. The IOMed became operational on 20 October 2025. Presently, the total number of signatory countries has reached 37. 

The IOMed is the first intergovernmental organization dedicated to resolving international disputes through mediation. It is also the first international organization headquartered in Hong Kong, a development which has the potential to raise the international profile of Hong Kong as a “capital” for mediation in the world, and strengthen the role of Hong Kong as a hub for international dispute settlement, building on its strong foundation in international arbitration.

This blog highlights the potential of IOMed in global dispute resolution, and reflects on critical perspectives to offer constructive suggestions.

(Please click here to view the full article on AsianSIL Voices.)

Weixia Gu on All Flowers Blossom: The New Dynamic of Arbitration in Asia (Asian Dispute Review)

"All Flowers Blossom: The New Dynamic of Arbitration in Asia"

Weixia Gu

Asian Dispute Review

Published online: July 2025

Abstract: This article sets out the results of a study which examines and compares dispute and caseload data from six leading Asian international arbitral institutions over the period 2018-2024, updating the results of a study of 2018. The findings reveal that several Chinese institutions, notably the Shanghai International Arbitration Centre (SHIAC) and the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC), have outpaced their Singaporean counterpart, the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC), by a significant margin, in terms of (1) percentage growth in both total and average amounts in dispute and (2) what this means as to their role and influence in developing arbitration in the Asia region.

Wilson Lui and Vincent Ip on Conflicting Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Clauses (Asian Dispute Review)

"Conflicting Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Clauses"

Wilson Lui (Pre-Doctoral Fellow 2022–23), Vincent Ip

Asian Dispute Review

Published online: July 2025

Abstract: This article considers the approaches adopted by the courts of Hong Kong, Singapore and England & Wales towards the reconciliation or otherwise of conflicting dispute resolution clauses contained in multiple but related contracts. There is an overriding need for clarity of approach in construing conflicting clauses so that due regard may be had to upholding the agreed intention of the parties to such contracts. In addition to three broad paradigms of conflicting clauses, particular attention is drawn to a public policy-based ‘centre of gravity’ or ‘closeness’ approach that common law courts have recently begun to develop. The authors argue, however, that mutual invalidation of conflicting clauses should be avoided.

Jiajun Luo on Internalizing Public Disputes: The Rise of China’s Administrative Reconsideration Under Xi (HJRL)

"Internalizing Public Disputes: The Rise of China’s Administrative Reconsideration Under Xi"
Jiajun Luo (PhD 2025)
Hague Journal on the Rule of Law
Published online: June 2025

Abstract: This article examines the strategic shift in China’s public dispute resolution under Xi Jinping, marked by the elevation of administrative reconsideration over judicial review as the primary and preferred channel for resolving disputes between citizens and government agencies. The 2023 Administrative Reconsideration Law institutionalizes recent reform efforts, formalizing its role as a more flexible, efficient, and internally dispute resolution alternative to litigation. These changes support the Party’s vision of self-regulation within the bureaucracy and reduced dependency on courts, by bolstering administrative reconsideration’s procedural efficiency and institutional powerbase to review both legality and reasonableness of administrative actions. However, despite increased case volume, administrative reconsideration in China continues to face challenges, including bureaucratic resistance that limits its effectiveness in addressing citizen grievances. Moreover, although agency review aligns with the Party’s preference for concentrated power and minimal public scrutiny, judicial review and petitioning remain entrenched avenues for public dispute resolution. Ultimately, this internal approach reflects Xi’s vision of rule of law, in which public grievances are managed within the administration to project an image of an omnipotent state, capable of self-correcting governance issues. Rooted in China’s paternalistic tradition, administrative reconsideration embodies a broader theme to portrays the regime as a benevolent authority that resolves disputes on behalf of the public, rather than empowering individuals to address them independently.

Weixia Gu comments on the establishment of the International Organization for Mediation

"Hong Kong hits a high with global legal body, but now comes the hard part"
Jess Ma, Jeffie Lam, Harvey Kong
South China Morning Post
31 May 2025

Hong Kong made a groundbreaking move on Friday (30 May 2025) when it became the headquarters for a new intergovernmental mediation body but the unit’s real tests will be in the types of substantive cases it handles and whether more countries will join the convention, experts have said.

While the China-led International Organisation for Mediation launched on Friday with 33 signatories, and the conspicuous absence of major Western countries, leading lawyers said they expected more nations would join once the body’s work was promoted.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi was front and centre at a high-level ceremony for countries to formally sign as founding members of the organisation…

Asked about the participating countries, former justice minister Teresa Cheng Yeuk-wah stressed that each one was an equal entity that should not be judged as “big or small”…

Hong Kong’s traditional rival Singapore had earlier spearheaded the formation of the Singapore Convention on Mediation, a treaty which came into force in 2020 and governs the enforcement of mediation outcomes in international commercial disputes.

The two world superpowers – China and the United States – were among the 46 nations that signed the multilateral treaty in 2019, alongside countries such as Britain, Japan and Australia.

Gu Weixia, an associate professor of the University of Hong Kong’s law faculty, said that the Singapore convention was a treaty led by the UN Commission on International Trade Law and acted as an enforcement tool for mediation outcomes.

“Its scope of application is comparatively restrictive,” she explained.

“It only targets international commercial mediation, and it only affects enforcement [of mediation settlement agreements].”

Gu, a dispute resolution specialist, also highlighted that more than 40 countries had signed the treaty, but only 18 had ratified it. Singapore and Japan are the only developed nations to have ratified the convention.

She said the International Organisation for Mediation has a wider scope of application, including interstate and investor-state disputes. It also offers additional options for legal services in the city.

“Most international legal capitals are in the West, such as The Hague, Geneva, New York and Washington,” Gu said. “The International Organisation for Mediation established in Hong Kong is a big booster for the city’s status in international law.”

Click here to read the full text on SCMP website.

Kelvin Low and Peter Watts on The Case for Cryptoassets as Property (New book chapter)

"The Case for Cryptoassets as Property"
Peter Watts, Kelvin Low
in Law at the Cutting Edge: Essays in Honour of Sarah Worthington, edited by Sinéad Agnew and Marcus Smith (Bloomsbury Publishing, April 2024), Chapter 14, pp. 281 - 299

Abstract: Cryptoassets, introduced in the wake of the Great Recession (2007-2009), have proven to be very divisive. Embraced by some as part of a revolutionary future, they are derided by others as the misconceived fever dream of naïve technologists who don’t understand how the real world works. Despite a recent meltdown in the cryptoasset markets, or perhaps because of it, the courts will increasingly have to resolve disputes over cryptoassets. An important question that has dramatic implications on how such disputes are resolved is, “Should cryptoassets be considered property?” In this bifurcated contribution, two contrasting positions are taken. “The Case for Cryptoassets as Property” presents the case for classifying cryptoassets as property, arguing that it greatly simplifies dispute resolution. “Better Left to the Legislature?”, on the other hand, disputes the capacity of the courts to do so. It is our shared hope that, through this adversarial process, we shine a clearer light on the arguments that judges and other lawmakers ought to consider as they face the coming deluge of disputes.

Please click here to read the book chapter on SSRN.

Yang Lin on Self-Regulatory ODR in China’s e-Commerce Market (Amicus Curiae)

"Self-Regulatory ODR in China’s e-Commerce Market : An Examination of Alibaba’s Taobao Platform and Crowdsourced ODR"
Yang Lin (PhD 2022)
Amicus Curiae
Published Online: February 2025

Abstract: This article explores the evolution and application of online dispute resolution (ODR) within China’s e-commerce landscape, focusing on the self-regulatory mechanisms employed by Alibaba’s Taobao platform. It provides an overview of China’s ODR development, analyses Taobao’s crowdsourced jury system as a case study, and examines the platform’s rulemaking and dispute resolution procedures. The analysis highlights Taobao’s ability to resolve disputes efficiently while addressing important challenges, such as transparency, data privacy and legal accountability. The study emphasizes Taobao’s role in shaping China’s e-commerce governance, underlining the need for balance between innovation and consumer trust in a rapidly expanding digital marketplace.

New Book Edited by Yun Zhao and Jędrzej Górski: Aviation Law and Governance - Navigating Global Challenges and Conflicts (Routledge)

Aviation Law and Governance - Navigating Global Challenges and Conflicts
Edited by Jędrzej Górski, Yun Zhao
Routledge
Published in February 2025
444 pp.

Book Description: Exploring the intricate relationship between law, economics, and global politics, this book examines the regulatory environment of the aviation industry.

Tracing the historical development of aviation law, the book has a particular focus on how economic polycentrism and the liberal international economic order have influenced the sector's regulatory framework. It discusses the aviation industry's responses to unforeseen global events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and geopolitical conflicts, providing a detailed analysis of the legal mechanisms that ensure industry stability and resilience. Key topics include the role of arbitration in resolving disputes, the impact of international regulations, and the critical contributions of both public and private actors in shaping aviation law. Additionally, the book explores the challenges posed by new and emerging technologies, such as the increasing automation in aviation systems and the legal considerations surrounding cybersecurity in aviation operations. The collection also features diverse international case studies, offering practical examples of legal challenges and solutions in different contexts. By examining the intersection of various legal disciplines and the global nature of aviation, this comprehensive exploration not only reflects on past and present challenges but also provides forward-looking insights into the future of aviation law.

The book will be of interest to researchers in the field of air transport law and dispute resolution, offering a thorough understanding of the legal and economic complexities facing the industry today.

Shahla Ali on Conciliation Beyond the Courts – Aspirations and Limits of Mandated and Voluntary Court Mediation Programmes From a Multi-Jurisdictional Perspective (CPLJ)

"Conciliation Beyond the Courts – Aspirations and Limits of Mandated and Voluntary Court Mediation Programmes From a Multi-Jurisdictional Perspective"

Shahla Ali

in Comparative Procedural Law and Justice, edited by B Hess,M Woo,L Cadiet,S Menétrey, and E Vallines García (CPLJ Part XV Chapter 2)

Published online: November 2024

Introduction:

As judicial systems advance, evolving conceptions of justice are reflected in varying emphasis on the role, place and practice of conciliation beyond civil courts. How such programmes provide opportunities for party-directed reconciliation on the one hand while ensuring access to formal legal channels on the other remains an area of continued enquiry. The question this section seeks to explore is what drives the development of a nation’s particular approach to its court mediation system, whether voluntary or mandatory. How important is party choice in the success of court-connected mediation programmes? Given that ‘public means available for financing dispute resolution are not unlimited,’ a balancing of individual process choices and social efficiency requires careful investigation. Variation among such programmes in diverse societies reflects, to a large extent, distinct approaches to individual and collective responsibility for the financial, social and temporal resources required for resolution. In some jurisdictions, the design of court mediation structures may align with a view of conciliation as the mainstream, normatively preferable, rather than an ‘alternative’ approach to the resolution of disputes. In others, individual rights, protections, and choices are prioritized, with parties given the option to decide whether to engage in conciliation processes. The first part of this paper explores the motivations behind varying court mediation programme designs, voluntary or mandated, and the relative benefits, challenges and implications of such design choices. Examples of jurisdictions in which mediation has long been considered mainstream are explored to understand continuities in court-connected mediation programmes. This is followed by a discussion of comparative survey findings examining the impact of judicial mediation structure (mandated or voluntary) on perceptions of justice, efficiency and confidence in courts in ten jurisdictions.

Please click here to read the full text.

Shahla Ali's Project Update with the Institute for Transnational Arbitration (ITA)

With a growing attention to inclusivity and representation in the context of increased global integration, Professor Shahla Ali's research is inspired by the necessity to expand inclusivity and collaboration in the development of global legal instruments, as well as in the study and participation in cross-border dispute resolution and in the resolution of infrastructure disputes.

Her work includes "Forming Transnational Dispute Settlement Norms. Soft Law and the Role of UNCITRAL''s Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific", "Comparative and Transnational Dispute Resolution", "Diversity in International Arbitration", and a recent article "The Seeming Paradox of Prevention".

To learn more about this, and to hear Professor Ali talk about her research on access to justice, watch this short video prepared for the ITA Academic Council "What I Am Working On" project.

(Please click here to view the original post prepared by ITA on LinkedIn.)

Welcome the new Global Academic Fellow Dr Suhong Yang!

Welcome to Dr Suhong Yang who joined the Faculty of Law as a Global Academic Fellow. Dr. Suhong Yang is an international lawyer interested in criminal law, human rights, and environmental law issues. Her S.J.D. dissertation investigates the legitimacy of international and hybrid criminal tribunals that try atrocity crimes in post-conflict situations. Suhong was awarded as a David D. Caron Fellow and a Salzburg Cutler Fellow for her research. Her work has appeared or is forthcoming in the Chinese Journal of International Law, Denver Journal of International Law & Policy, European Papers, George Mason International Law Journal, International Legal Materials, and Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting.

At the HKU Faculty of Law, Suhong is engaged in teaching activities and assisting the Director of the Centre for Comparative and Public Law in research-related activities. Prior to joining the HKU, Suhong was a Judicial Fellow at the International Court of Justice, working with Judge H.E. XUE Hanqin. She also served the Office of the President of the U.N. International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, and the Legal Policy Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Suhong holds a Bachelor of Laws degree from Renmin University of China, and LL.M. and S.J.D. degrees from Georgetown University Law Center. In addition to the academic degrees, she also studied at the University of Oxford, Kathmandu School of Law, and Cheng-Chi University (Taiwan) in different capacities. Suhong has facilitated teaching or been invited to give guest lectures on tort law, international law, US law, and Chinese law at Georgetown University, Leiden University, and Renmin University.

Suhong is currently Vice-Chair of the International Criminal Law Interest Group of the American Society of International Law (ASIL), and Secretary of ASIL Women in International Law Interest Group. She served as Co-Chair of ASIL New Professionals Interest Group from 2019 to 2023.

Yun Zhao and Hui Chen on Enhancing access to digital justice: digital governance of dispute resolution and dispute prevention in online commercial activities (Journal of International Dispute Settlement)

"Enhancing access to digital justice: digital governance of dispute resolution and dispute prevention in online commercial activities"
Yun Zhao, Hui Chen
Journal of International Dispute Settlement (idae001, 2024)
Published online: February 2024

Abstract: This article examines relevant theories and practices concerning the strengthening of access to digital justice and explores pathways to expanding the application of online dispute resolution (ODR) to dispute prevention in online commercial activities. It focuses on how to enhance both efficiency and fairness in four stages of commercial activities, namely, deal-making (contract formation), contract performance, dispute resolution, and the enforcement of final results. At the deal-making stage, the application of e-signatures is analysed with respect to the prevention of compliance and security risks. The best practices of smart contracts and blockchain technology are also investigated to promote relevant innovative designs in the digital governance of online contract performance. In addition, top-down and bottom-up ODR platforms are compared in terms of their respective patterns for enhancing efficiency and fairness, as well as their differing potential for institutionalization. Finally, existing ODR self-enforcement models are explored, with emphasis on the ‘preauthorization’ model and the example of Taobao.

Jamieson Kirkwood on Characterization (and Registration) of a “BRI Dispute” (Asian Journal of International Law)

"Characterization (and Registration) of a “BRI Dispute”"
Jamieson Kirkwood
Asian Journal of International Law, First View
Published online: October 2023

Abstract: This article explores the terms “BRI dispute” and “BRI jurisprudence”. It undertakes a practical and theoretical analysis that considers whether “BRI disputes” have distinct and visible characteristics and are capable of being identified in a legal sense. This is important since practitioners – arbitration centres and law firms – use the term broadly and without specific criteria. By exploring the customary usage and the approach of legal scholars to the term, presenting examples of “BRI disputes” and examining their unique features, and constructing a theoretical approach (utilizing the concepts of ratione materiae, ratione loci, ratione temporis, and ratione personae; and considering the jurisprudence of the ICSID), this article moves from a broad to a narrow analysis to develop both a definition and a system of registration of “BRI disputes” for use by academics, practitioners, and policymakers.

Jamieson Kirkwood on Constructing a Theoretical Framework for a Rules-Based Approach in BRI Dispute Resolution (Sing JLS)

" Constructing a Theoretical Framework for a Rules-Based Approach in BRI Dispute Resolution"
Jamieson Kirkwood
Singapore Journal of Legal Studies
Published online: September 2023

Abstract: This article constructs a theoretical framework that sets out the basis for instituting a rules-based approach in BRI dispute resolution. This article is a response to the fact that there have been numerous calls for instituting a rules-based approach in BRI dispute resolution, but there has been little written in terms of laying a theoretical foundation for doing this. In such way, this article fills this gap by analysing what a rules-based approach to dispute resolution means, exploring what the BRI actually is and considering why rules are understood to be necessary in BRI dispute resolution. Although the article principally adds to the ongoing academic discussion regarding the reform of BRI dispute resolution it is also of use to practitioners and policy makers active in this field.

HKU Law Welcomes Dr Massimo Lando, Assistant Professor

Welcome to Dr Massimo Lando, who joins the Faculty of Law as an Assistant Professor. Dr Lando is a general international lawyer. Before joining HKU, he was Assistant Professor at the School of Law of City University of Hong Kong (2020-2023). Previously, he was an Associate Legal Officer at the International Court of Justice, working with Judge Dalveer Bhandari and Judge ad hoc Charles N. Brower (2017-2020). Dr Lando completed his PhD at the University of Cambridge. He obtained an LLM also from the University of Cambridge and an LLB from the University of Milan. He is a member the Bar of England and Wales (Gray’s Inn). Dr Lando is a Global Fellow at the Centre for International Law of the National University of Singapore. He will be Director of Studies at the 2027 Winter Session of The Hague Academy of International Law.

     His Research areas include:

• Sources of International Law
• Law of the Sea
• International Dispute Settlement
• International Law & National Law
• Immunity
• International Economic Law
  

     Dr Lando's Editorial Positions and Professional Affiliations include:

• Member of the Bar of England and Wales (Gray’s Inn)
• Global Fellow, Centre for International Law, National University of Singapore
• Editorial Board, Ocean Development & International Law
• Academic Review Board, Cambridge International Law Journal
• Co-chair, International Courts and Tribunals Interest Group, American Society of International Law
• Member, American Society of International Law
• Member, Italian Society of International Law

David Kwok on ASEAN Dispute Settlement and the Temple of Preah Vihear (Journal of Dispute Resolution)

"ASEAN Dispute Settlement and the Temple of Preah Vihear"
David Y.K. Kwok
Journal of Dispute Resolution
Published online: 8 August 2023
Abstract: The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (“ASEAN”) was established in 1967. The founding members of ASEAN are Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. Five other countries have since joined ASEAN, including Brunei, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia and Myanmar. Today, ASEAN represents a strong economic organization which has Gross Domestic Product ranking top ten in the world. As to why the founding members decided to establish such an organization, Piris and Woon take the view that it was for the purpose of combating communism during the 1960s. In 2007, a milestone event for ASEAN was the adoption of the ASEAN Charter (“the Charter”). The Charter is ASEAN’s Constitution. According to the Charter, some of the purposes of this organization are “to maintain and enhance peace, security and … to promote ASEAN identity … to create a single market and production base …” There are a number of underlying principles including “respect for the independence, sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity and national identity of all ASEAN Member States …” The Charter also sets up a number of bureaucratic structures within ASEAN such as the ASEAN Summit, the ASEAN Coordinating Council, the ASEAN Community Councils...

Wilson Lui on The Need for Finality and Certainty in International Commercial Dispute Resolution (new book chapter)

"The Need for Finality and Certainty in International Commercial Dispute Resolution"
Wilson Lui (Pre-Doctoral Fellow)
in Sundaresh Menon and Anselmo Reyes (eds), Transnational Commercial Disputes in an Age of Anti-Globalism and Pandemic (Hart Publishing: 2023),
Chapter 7, pp 183–208
Abstract: This chapter considers the notions of finality and certainty in international commercial dispute resolution, including their interactions with party autonomy, comity, and sovereignty. It looks at the different approaches to manage concurrent proceedings and to recognise and enforce judgments and awards, as well as the considerations of due process and public policy. It discusses how the Hague Conference on Private International Law, in particular the 2005 and 2019 HCCH Conventions, may promote finality and certainty by attempting to harmonise these different approaches. Lastly, it examines some of the effects and developments that the COVID-19 pandemic has brought to the landscape of international commercial dispute resolution.

New Book Edited by Shahla Ali: Comparative and Transnational Dispute Resolution (Routledge)

Comparative and Transnational Dispute Resolution
Edited by Shahla Ali
Routledge 
Published in February 2023
270 pp.

Book Description: This edited volume presents research and policy insights into the theory and practice of dispute systems reform in diverse jurisdictions. It highlights how important extra-judicial mechanisms are for resolving cross-border disputes, as evidenced both by the breadth of scholarship dedicated to the issue and the proliferation of parties resorting to non-litigious dispute resolution mechanisms in recent years.

     Drawing on selected case studies, the book examines the impact of comparative research and policy analysis in advancing reform of dispute resolution institutions at both the regional and global levels. It explores the challenges and opportunities of understanding and assessing developments in systems of dispute resolution in diverse social and political contexts through comparative research.

     With a growing number of disputes which have come to involve cross-border issues, anyone interested in transnational and comparative dispute resolution will find this book a useful reference.

Reviews: 

‘An extraordinary collection of comparative perspectives is presented in this engaging book. It is arguably more important than at any time in the past, given increasing globalisation, to consider what current themes and approaches exist across jurisdictions that can enable us all to deal with disputes effectively. It is a delight to read and engage with the perspectives of these outstanding thinkers.’

Prof. Tania Sourdin, Dean and Head of School, Newcastle Law School

‘Anyone engaged in the serious study of legal dispute resolution should not only read this book, but also keep it at hand. Dispute resolution students, scholars, practitioners, and policymakers—especially but not only those working across borders—will find striking insights and actionable wisdom about how to research, design, and reform effective dispute resolution systems.’

Dr. Joshua Karton, Associate Professor, Queen’s University Faculty of Law

"This pathbreaking book brings new perspectives to the study of comparative and transnational alternative dispute resolution. It promises to change the way with we understand the laws, systems, and institutions undergirding the global practice of mediation, arbitration, and other extra-judicial methods."

Dr. Zach Calo, Professor of Law, Hamad bin Khalifa University College of Law and Public Policy

Summary of the book based on this link: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4344527

Angela Zhang et al on Improving Dispute Resolution in Two-Sided Platforms: The Case of Review Blackmail (Management Science)

"Improving Dispute Resolution in Two-Sided Platforms: The Case of Review Blackmail"
Yiangos Papanastasiou, S. Alex Yang, and Angela Huyue Zhang
Management Science
Published online on 23 January 2023
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4655

Abstract: We study the relative merits of different dispute resolution mechanisms in two-sided platforms in the context of disputes involving malicious reviews and blackmail. We develop a game-theoretic model of the strategic interactions between a seller and a (potentially malicious) consumer. In our model, the seller takes into account the impact of consumer reviews on his future earnings; recognizing this, a malicious consumer may attempt to blackmail the seller by purchasing the product, posting a negative review, and demanding ransom to remove it. Without a dispute resolution mechanism in place, the presence of malicious consumers in the market can lead to a significant decrease in seller profit, especially in settings characterized by high uncertainty about product quality. The introduction of a standard centralized dispute resolution mechanism (whereby the seller can report allegedly malicious reviews to the host platform, which then judges whether to remove the review) can restore efficiency to some extent but requires the platform’s judgments to be both very quick and highly accurate. We demonstrate that a more decentralized mechanism (whereby the firm is allowed to remove reviews without consulting the platform, subject to ex post penalties for wrongdoing) can be much more effective, while simultaneously alleviating—almost entirely—the need for the platform’s judgments to be quick. Our results suggest that decentralization, when implemented correctly, may represent a more efficient approach to dispute resolution.

This paper was accepted by Victor Martínez-de-Albéniz, operations management.

Funding: S. A. Yang and A. H. Zhang acknowledge the support of the Hong Kong General Research Fund [Grant “Decentralizing Platform Governance: Innovations from China; Project 17614921].

Supplemental Material: The online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4655.