skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 204345 Find in a Library
Title: Ruimte voor Mediation
Author(s): L. Combrink-Kuiters; E. Niemeijer; M. ter Voert
Date Published: 2003
Page Count: 221
Sponsoring Agency: Netherlands Ministerie Van Justice
2500 Eh the Hague, Netherlands
Publication Number: ISBN 90-5454-398-1
Sale Source: Netherlands Ministerie Van Justice
Box 20301
2500 Eh the Hague,
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Book (Softbound)
Language: Dutch
Country: Netherlands
Annotation: This study evaluated two mediation projects under the Netherlands justice policy promoting Alternative Dispute Resolution both before and during court proceedings and what results are being achieved with mediation and what circumstances are important to the process.
Abstract: Mediation is seen as contributing to decreasing the number of court cases. Mediation can lead to delegalizing conflicts and has the advantage of keeping individuals responsible for their conflict. In the Netherlands, promoting Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is part of justice policy. Two comprehensive mediation projects were initiated under this policy. The first, the court-based model seeks to investigate whether or not referral to mediation during legal proceedings has significant added value. The second concerns the referral of clients by the legal aid service. The evaluation of the projects consisted of two parts: (1) focusing on the organization and the performance of both projects and (2) the quality of the referral procedure and the mediation process, specifically the mediation agreement. In the court-based project 61 percent of the mediations reached an agreement and in the legal aid project 78 percent were successful. In both projects, the parties involved were satisfied with the mediation and with the skills of the mediator. They indicated that they would choose mediation in the future. The results indicate that there is no best practice in the method of referral and no best criterion for selecting cases for referral. The most important condition for reaching an agreement is the willingness of both parties to negotiate. The conclusion drawn is that there is room for negotiation both before and during court proceedings. Future research should investigate whether the investment in management, quality, and support needed to keep referral to mediation successful brings the expected benefits.
Main Term(s): Mediation
Index Term(s): Alternative court procedures; Alternative dispute settlement; Court reform; Dispute resolution; Negotiation; Netherlands
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.