Financing Dispute Resolution
Christopher Honeyman
40 pages when printed in original format.
Originally published 1995 by the U.S. National Institute for Dispute Resolution.
This report was the result of an eighteen-month consulting agreement with the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Opinions in the report are those of the author, and are not necessarily those of the Foundation. Excerpts from the executive summary and introduction follow.
Executive Summary
This report is the conclusion of an eighteen-month inquiry into the financing of the dispute resolution field (including its associated academic counterparts) and the possibilities for improvement. Its primary purposes are to begin to codify the strategies that will be necessary if an improvement is to be had, and to stimulate action, by drawing as many knowledgeable and committed people as possible into the dialogue which is the first stage of any broad-based activity.
The report begins with a description of its working assumptions and inherent biases, and continues with a discussion of the sectors considered, as well as some other possible ways of analyzing the field. The inquiry's source material is then summarized, including over sixty interviews, a number of group meetings and seven small new initiatives started as part of the inquiry.
The next and longest section discusses the strategies recommended. These begin with a brief analysis of some financing ideas which were superficially attractive but judged unlikely to produce results commensurate with the effort. This is followed by a series of substantive divisions of the field, for each of which specific financial strategies are recommended:
Teaching and research
Public policy and environmental
Community
Family
Federal government
Membership organizations
Because of the pervasive presence of the private sector throughout the field, its interests and needs are considered within each of the subject areas identified above. The courts and state government, for other reasons, are also considered in the course of the identified subject-matter sections. Brief overall conclusions complete the report, which is accompanied (in the original) by several appendices describing in more detail the initiatives undertaken during the inquiry.
Introduction
This report is the result of eighteen months' reflection on the present, and some
possible futures, of the dispute resolution field. It constitutes the final report of a
consulting role with the Hewlett Foundation. But by agreement with the Foundation, its
"final report" function is not its main purpose, and the Foundation is not its
principal intended audience.
This is, rather, a sort of extended essay, necessarily personal in nature (for the working
assumptions and caveats noted below are lengthy) but based on a kind of Cook's tour of the
field in all its diversity and internal contradiction. It is intended primarily for the
practical purpose of helping the practitioners, scholars and others whose work must be
funded in order for the field to reach its fullest potential. To that end the concept of
"financing" is applied in its broadest sense—that of enabling work
to get done.
Two successive preliminary drafts were previously circulated, and I am grateful for the
insights that resulted: More than twenty experts in various parts of this field took the
time to offer detailed amendments and corrections. Their reviews were thoughtful, and the
discussions which resulted have been extensive. This report reflects many improvements
which they suggested. The errors and misconceptions which remain are my own.
