Abstract
This chapter represents an effort to link concepts that appear to be and are commonly placed in distant theoretical areas but belong much closer together in practical terms: the principles of internet governance, and the networked information society converging in rules on one hand; and self-regulation competences required for collaborative and alternative conflict management on the other. They condense the public and the private roles in compatible regulatory models that could match sociability, economics and technologies of the times. It is an essay on competences, public policies that are not preceded by standards and principles that do not seem to have been captured by the laws. The institutionalization strategy on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) for cross-border consumer redress in the European Union will be the reference to assess regulatory impact and argue for consistency. Legislating ADR and ODR aims at supporting electronic commerce as an essential component of the digital agenda; the flagship initiative that establishes the digital single market according to the European 2020 Strategy. Questions must be raised considering the marked emphasis placed on promoting social changes merely by passing new laws. The importance of understanding that the European Union is not capable of supplanting its members in turning institutional formulas into operational strategies is underlined, as well as a reflection on the need to support the social and economic transformations that have followed the remarkable developments in telecommunications and other digital technologies. Conceiving a European dispute resolution culture, enabled and mediatized by technological solutions is a viable solution to prevent more of the perceived shortcomings of public actions, and a truly innovative ODR systems design, could support the transition. This text invites the integration of concepts, disciplines and practices, respect for principles and their consistent application to solutions that could improve human transactions for a sustainable digital economy where empowered private actors can efficiently contribute to the ongoing collective transformations of the global governance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Mobile technologies are leading the expansion of the digital economy and interconnectivity in the world; their use continues to raise, and its platforms replace rapidly some of the services that the personal computers used to provide. The figures that the International Telecommunications Union publishes on its webpage speak by themselves: http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx.
- 2.
The value of information is not as disputed as it has been theorizing about it in the human rights context. Information could be also seen as externality to fundamental rights such as dignity and equality or an indispensable mean to achieve the exercise of rights that are affected by the internet and other telecommunication technologies. For an instance on how this discussion is proposed see: Tiilikka (2013).
- 3.
The rights of the personality (as defined by the civil law tradition) that are being compromised include the following among others: honour, reputation, identity, authorship, intimacy, privacy, etc. Electronic databases and registries, especially when handling sensitive information are not neutral containers exempt of worth, as the section written by Kristi Joamets explains.
- 4.
Look into: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/2012-calendar.
- 5.
Some of the panels of the Global INET 2012 are recorded and available online at: http://www.livestream.com/inet2 One of them discusses the rule of law and Internet.
- 6.
See for more information: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-194_en.htm and http://ec.europa.eu/justice/effective-justice/files/cepj_study_scoreboard_2014_en.pdf with facts and figures about the Study of the functioning of judicial systems in the EU Member States. ADR has been closely linked to the justice system function and could be relevant for its improvement. Indicators on this respect are included in the Digital Agenda Scoreboard (2014), addressing the training of judges, evaluation of court activities and availability of special resources such as Information and Communication Technologies and ADR methodologies.
- 7.
Dynamic rules that could be adjusted according to further and faster technological advancements and the differing capabilities of the many possible actors would represent a step forward in the disentanglement of the socio-political labels of the times. Such flexibility is not compatible with regulatory systems affected by the constraints of the rule of law doctrine. On this respects, consult: Baldwin et al. (2011) and Levi-Faur (2011) on regulations and regulatory governance in general; Gibbons (1996) on different types of regulations depending on their agents; and Trubek (2007) reflecting on the transformations of the legal rules and new patterns of governance.
- 8.
Reflexive governance is a recent concept that refers to a self-critical and iterative form of inclusive and participative administration of affairs. It questions static and rigorous roles and goals and implies that the institutions that apply it are constantly transforming through learning. This represents a concrete strategy in the field of laws and government for the creation of better rules. Consult Hendriks and Grin (2007) and Voss et al. (2006).
- 9.
Electronic resources including to level domains, IP addresses and the Internet root zone. On Internet layering and its regulatory implications see Solum and Chung (2003). Solum was one of the first authors conceptualizing in a cross-disciplinary way on the ICTs engineering aspects affecting regulatory systems.
- 10.
Institutions is used in this context in its organic meaning, referring to entities with different degree of involvement and power influence and control the networks, including the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and its supporting organizations.
- 11.
By mediatized it is meant the use of tools, mainly ICTs as mediums in human interaction.
- 12.
See details on the WSIS 2014 online at: http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2014/forum/.
- 13.
- 14.
- 15.
Taking place in all innovation cycles according to Utterback’s (1996) reference work: Mastering the dynamics of innovation.
- 16.
Other so-called principles have been issued in declarations by multilateral organizations and other independent entities interested in raising awareness about their goals and interests. Among them for example, The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) that oversees internet standards development processes; The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), a United Nations agency involved with internet governance functions that include developing of standards, quantitative assessments (statistical) and research (Internet Governance Project, 2004); the Internet Systems Consortium; the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); etc. The list of public, private and mixed organizations that work on this area and perform functions of Internet governance at the national, regional, and international levels continuously grow. For a detailed overview, see Internet Governance Project, 2004; see also Mueller (2004).
- 17.
The Internet is a partial approximation to the digital world as a whole. It refers only to some of the Information and telecommunications technologies, but also invokes the presence of the Information Society. ICTs and the Information Society cover areas outside of the strict domains of the internet and its protocols but the expression “internet governance” will continue being the reference to all activities resembling but not equivalent to governing the network of networks. The internet protocol (IP) is the most important of the communication technical standards. Mobile technologies compete with it, and expand rapidly, but have not yet displaced the importance of the Internet. On figures concerning these issues consult documents and publications online at: http://www.internetsociety.org/igf?gclid=CNTdguL-lr0CFcuWtAodjgEAAA and statistical databases in the ITU website.
- 18.
The requirement that internet governance should be conducted according to multi-stakeholder principles was first stated at the WSIS summit of 2003; despite its wide acceptance it is not clear to what extent it shoudl constitute by now a norm of customary international law. See for a current publication on its development: http://www.internetsociety.org/sites/default/files/bp-msfinalreport-20132010-en.pdf. See also Infra note, 22.
- 19.
The formulation of dynamic rules, and innovative normative solutions that could combine adaptability, flexibility and openness is preferable to attempting to force regulatory uniformity, and even coherence of rules in a context so complex, polycentric and changing.
- 20.
For instance information pairing life, freedom, and property in the catalogue of human rights doctrines or/and the construction of a social order of the networks with their own description of public goods, etc. These reflections are owed to a multitude of authors from an interdisciplinary background on laws, politics, sociology and economics. From classic texts such as Mill (1859) on liberty; to very recent essays such as Misztal’s (2013) about trust and social order.
- 21.
In here, the references to formal institutions regard laws, statutes and all normative options that follow the rule of law doctrine. Informal institutions in contrast, are all other regulatory systems that condition, affect and influence human behaviour. This approach is presented using expressions that resemble sociological, organizational and managerial terminology, with a purpose. Their use is explained in detail by Solarte-Vasquez (2013) in Regulatory patterns of the internet development: Expanding the role of private Stakeholders through Mediatized “Self-regulation”.
- 22.
A summarized primer on the history of internet was also proposed by Solarte-Vasquez (2013). Supra note, 20. But many more are available in popular and academic literature.
- 23.
The rule of law in democratic systems operates through legislative development, controlled public policy and laws as equalizers of legal systems (to comply with the material requirement of legal integrity, that laws must be general and abstract, and prevent fuzzy, arbitrary rule). See for a recent publication on the rule of law: Barnett (2014).
- 24.
The text of the Tunis agenda for the Information society is available online at: http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html.
- 25.
In Gelbstein and Kurbalija (2005). Issues of internet governance used from the late nineties are like clusters that infrastructure and standardization, legal aspects, economy, and developmental and socio cultural.
- 26.
Supra note, 14.
- 27.
On Sørensen et al. (2012). Where the authors assess in detail meta-governance tools for institutional design, strategic planning, methodologies and process management, and direct participation.
- 28.
Consult the social theory for the information age by Christian Fuchs.
- 29.
EU open Internet Action: http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/eu-actions.
- 30.
See from the Council of Europe the “Declaration by the Committee of Ministers on Internet governance principles (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 21 September 2011“available online at: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1835773 for an example of engagement of other bodies concerned with the same interests.
- 31.
In the international aspect of the digital agenda for Europe, the commission explains its endorsement of the multistakeholders principle. Read on Action 97 online at: http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/international/action-97-promote-internationalisation-internet-governance. See also Da Silva (2007) on what the future of ICTs was envisioned like according to the EU public policy of the time.
- 32.
Conflict management theory is extensively referenced in ADR literature, for instance by publications of the Harvard Negotiation Project and associated scholars. Visit their webpage for further information at: http://www.pon.harvard.edu/category/research_projects/harvard-negotiation-project/. Also see: Ramsbotham et al. (2011) and Deutsch et al. (2011).
- 33.
Laws and social development of practices, habits, etc. See also supra note, 19.
- 34.
Ideas about how societies change, ways to explain social evolutionary development, about methods of explaining social and behaviour, power and other deep structures. In contemporary social theory, some themes are of primary concern: socialization, social interaction, social institutions and the self, the possibilities and paths of social transformation. Look into the theory in Giddens work on Social theory and modern sociology, published in 2013. A prominent author is Jürgen Habermas (1987) who theorizes on modernity and contemporary problems (very interestingly assessing the doctrine of the rule of law in a critical “social-evolutionary context,” and current politics, particularly in the German context). Habermas’s theoretical approach emphasizes in the possibilities of reason and emancipation as human capacities.
- 35.
No strict and universal definition of society has been universally accepted. In literature and doctrine. Information or network society is a choice that suits the theories justifying the present analysis and the conclusions that it draws. The two are used interchangeably throughout this text merely for convenience, without negating the differences that some scholars like Castells have conceptualized on the matter.
- 36.
See Sect. 3.
- 37.
Supra note, 33. A marked degree of involvement, more regulatory diversity, co-regulation, consensus building, regulatory innovation and implementation, new partnerships, withdrawal of public intervention from some areas, self regulation, etc. These all require freedom, and discipline (self-reliance).
- 38.
- 39.
- 40.
Supra note, 26. Fuchs on the Internet and Society, and a social theory in the information age. He is not a radical determinist but considers that new phenomena deserves innovative assessments in combination with traditional social sciences methods. He is a proponent of a critical theory in regard to ICTs and society. See also Hofkirchner (2007) on more of self-regulatory theories and critical theory in connection to the networked society.
- 41.
Find a complete reasoning in his article: Webster (2002).
- 42.
Texts and developments are available in the WSIS webpage at: http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/background.asp?lang=en&c_type=res. Additional documents, reports and follow up reviews are also accessible on the same webpage at: http://www.itu.int/wsis/index.html. The WSIS declaration of principles can be found at: http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs/geneva/official/dop.html.
- 43.
See the OECD website for information on policy and recommendations on the internet economy: http://www.oecd.org/internet/ieconomy/, information economy: http://www.oecd.org/sti/ieconomy/measuringtheinformationeconomy.htm and consumer policy in context: http://www.oecd.org/sti/consumer/consumersinthedigitaleconomy.htm.
- 44.
The principle reads: “Users should be fully empowered to exercise their fundamental rights and freedoms, make informed decisions and participate in Internet governance arrangements, in particular in governance mechanisms and in the development of Internet-related public policy, in full confidence and freedom.” The full text is availableonline at: http://www.coe.int/t/informationsociety/documents/CM%20Dec%20on%20Internet%20Governance%20Principles_en.pdf.
- 45.
Information society as a concept was already mentioned in official documents a decade ago when the transition to the digital knowledge-based economy was starting to be a priority. In fact, the launch by the Commission of the eEurope initiative took place already in 1999, followed by the eEurope2002, the eEurope2005, and the i2010 and most recently the Digital Agenda (DA). This last is part of the Europe 2020 strategy, aimed at the optimal development of the potential of information and communication technologies (ICTs), to promote innovation, economic growth and progress. One of the most relevant pillars on inclusion and empowerment is Pillar VI. Actions that support it are explained in detail online at: http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/our-goals/pillar-vi-enhancing-digital-literacy-skills-and-inclusion. See also Sect. 4.
- 46.
European consumer policy strategy 2007–2013, available onlineat: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/overview/cons_policy/doc/EN_99.pdf.
- 47.
The full text of the Agenda is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/strategy/docs/consumer_agenda_2012_en.pdf. Consumer empowerment, according to it, is based in four pillars related to safety, knowledge (awareness), enforcement and redress, and alingnment between policy and socio economic change. A working document on knowledge enhancement is recommended, also available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/strategy/docs/swd_document_2012_en.pdf.
- 48.
See supra text accompanying note 40.
- 49.
This would be the case, for instance of the property law structures that are deeply challenged in their formulation, legitimacy and applicability by the new digital economy logic of abundance, difussion and egalitarian forces. Authors like Fuchs consider that networks oppose ownership and compel the atomization of captalism, as networks are expansion and redistribution of resources and with them, of power. Information being the most important comodity in this context and the content that provides the mediums with meaning. Networks are in essence a negation of individual ownership and the atomism of capitalism. Global economic networks and cyberspace.
- 50.
Fuchs supra note, 37.
- 51.
Marx’s works [in particular reflections from his economic and philosophic manuscripts: Marx (2012), interprets Fuchs, talk of cooperation as the concerted use of resources and socialization for the purpose of liberation. He also explains that cooperation could be an objective dimension of an ethic that strives for self-realization and inclusion through self-determination, instead of competition and abuse that would lead to the gain of some at the expense of others. In this sense, Marx ideology indeed suggests that competition separates men from their essence. Although cooperation at least theoretically would maximize the chances for success, collective action can also degenerate, and so the benefits of leaving collaboration to the hope of being inherent to society is dangerous. It also denies individual competences and characteristics. Cooperation can be taught from a very pragmatic point of view of convenience and sharing of risks and responsibilities like it is proposed in the field of Conflict Management and Alternative Dispute Resolution, but cannot be imposed. Collaboration, as most legal systems of the world establish, is voluntary and manifests through instruments like agreements.
- 52.
Capurro and Hjørland (2003).
- 53.
- 54.
This evolution signals the integration of data that presuposes the semantic web 3.0, highly collaborative, proactive and constructive. It would lead to the management of content by the web, enabled to recombine data and information and understand it, in a way an “smart“ entity capable of processsing content intelligently using data mining processes. For an accessible explanation of the semantic web, consult: Yu (2007). On the future of an integrative Web 3.0 see: Gruber (2008).
- 55.
The principles of EU conferral, subsidiarity, proportionality are some of the Union’s founding principles. Read more in the EU webpage at: http://europa.eu/scadplus/constitution/competences_en.htm. See also supra note 6 on reflexive governance, and the writings on political communication: Jessop (2003).
- 56.
- 57.
Infra note, 81.
- 58.
The proactive law approach is an innovative vision interested in integrating preventive law philosophy, ADR principles and contract management. It develops by influence of the Nordic School of Proactive law (http://www.proactivelaw.org/) that supports its theoretical and practical developments. Consult the works of Helena Haapio, and also, for instance: Sorsa (2009).
- 59.
Examples of the principle of contractual freedoms are explicitly established in legal systems around the world, and in particular in constitutions and civil codes and legal acts that are based in the Napoleonic code of 1804 (Spanish, German and Swiss legislation have their roots in the Roman Law tradition of the 19th Century just as most of the civil law codes across Latin America that uphold to the maximum the principle of freedom of contract). Article 1134 of the French Civil Code, reads: “Les conventions légalement formées tiennent lieu de loi à ceux qui les ont faites. Elles ne peuvent être révoquées que de leur consentement mutuel, ou pour les causes que la loi autorise. Elles doivent être exécutées de bonne foi.” See also some examples on the Spanish Constitution Art.8 and art.53, and art.1255 of the Spanish Civil Code; German Constitution art.2(1) and its law of obligations (albeit its dramatic changes in favour of a new consumer protection oriented policy to modernise a civil code first enacted in the year 1900. The reforms entered into force in 2002, marking a path in the direction determined by supranational legislation); Chilean Civil code art.1545, Colombian National Constitution of 1991 articles 13 and 16; Colombian Civil code art.1602 (valid contracts constitute law between the parties); an example of jurisprudencial reasoning on this respect is also available online at: http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/relatoria/2008/c-1194-08.htm.), etc. Doctrinal development of the principles can be found in classical reference texts such as in Ourliac and de Malafosse (1969) and Pothier et al. (1839). Robert H. Small. T. Jurisprudencial sources and doctrine have also developed the theory in connection to the economic system of free markets where commerce is expected to flourish auspiced not by the state but by private agency and the market forces. In Europe, most recently, the law of obligations and contracts has found a harmonizing option in the so-called consumer protection laws. These specific developments aim at restating and diffusing precisely what the traditional values that were already present in legislations of member states guarantee on individual freedoms and the co-regulatory power of private persons. Only, that consumer protection laws establish limits and specific protection measures that aim at empowering the population and enhancing their trust in the system. In sum, in a legal system where economic freedom is promoted, the state must facilitate private regulatory activities through legally enforceable agreements that permit an efficient exchange of products and services.
- 60.
- 61.
As referenced By Deci and Ryan (2012).
- 62.
Consult the Monti report, available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/bepa/pdf/monti_report_final_10_05_2010_en.pdf.
- 63.
The Directorate General of Health & Consumers and the Directorate General Joint Research Center created a unique measure of consumer empowerment named the Consumer Empowerment Index. It considers three main dimensions: Consumer skills, Awareness of consumer legislation and Consumer engagement, claiming that it encompases the concept.
- 64.
Gerard Nierengberg (1968) is considered to be the father of the art of negotiation, his book “The art of Negotiating” popularized the discipline.
- 65.
- 66.
- 67.
These are the places where theoretical developments have also been most prolific.
- 68.
Explained in detail in Solarte Vasquez (2014).
- 69.
Ibid., 66.
- 70.
For a recent approach on the specifics of assisted negotiation consult Wall and Dunne (2012), and on the relativizing the influence of style in the field of assisted negotiation, a study by Wall and Kressel (2012). See also Ross and Stittinger (1991) writing on the wiser context of dispute resolution
- 71.
In the conflict management literature from the Harvard negotiation project and on, the terms, adversarial and associative, positional and principled and destructive and constructive are also of common use.
- 72.
Essentials on the negotiation theory studied and proposed by Ury and Fisher. See also infra note, 77.
- 73.
Replaceable and instrumental support would be software for legal informatics, visualization tools, data mining, retrieval and systematizing of information, translation services and virtual meeting environments to record sessions and progress during proceedings. One project of the last sort is being the subject of research by the faculty of Industrial Engineering at Aalto University in Finland. For detailed information access the URL.
- 74.
“Internet governance is the development and application by governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet”. Consult documents of the WSIS webpage and the sections above developing the concept of ICTs governance principles.
- 75.
Supra note, 51.
- 76.
- 77.
EU legislation should also be compared with the broader UNCITRAL developments on ODR aiming at establishing international normative standards on these processes and their practice. See: Preamble 2 draft Procedural Rules and A/CN9/WG III/WP112 UNCITRAL Working Group III (Online Dispute Resolution) Note by the Secretariat 28. February 2012, These rules do not focus on harmonization or subject matter i.e. consumer protection legislation but with a much more pragmatic vision intend to have the most applicability to high volume and low cost disputes in general.
- 78.
See: Bellucci and Zeleznikow (2005).
- 79.
To create a cooperative relationship, improve communication and influence people’s perceptions positively. In transactions mediated by technology in particular, where the human factor is reduced, more objective interaction is possible reducing strain, reducing negative emotions and diminishing the positive as well. Technology can also distract if the user interfaces are not transparent and well mapped but this belongs to the field of human-computer interaction in the computer science domain. All those converging disciplines actively explore applications for conflict management support, in the search for solutions beyond the mere replication of analogous processes in the internet or the mobile technologies. For a contrasting perspective, look in Alexander (2005). Blurring the disctinction between diffusion and mere reach.
- 80.
ADR was long unregulated, separating it from adjudicatory processes and increasing its popularity in fields that need the most agility such as commercial law and international trade. This is also believed to have favoured a continuous, undisturbed evolution. On integrative and principled conflict management a classic text, explaining the core strategy of the Harvard Negotiation program, is Getting to Yes: Fisher et al. (2011). In perspective: Schneider (2013). Also consult the work of Louis M. Brown on preventive law for applications of perspective, for instance in his classical publications: Brown (1956) and Brown and Brown (1975). Preventive law proposes a problem solving and creative lawyering style that aims at practicing a less adversarial legal profession.
- 81.
Available Online at: http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/digital-agenda-europe.
- 82.
Consumer Protection Policy Strategy for Europe 2007–2013. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/strategy/index_en.htm#intro.
- 83.
The Monti Report: A New Strategy for the Single Market: Report to the President of the European Commission is available Online at: http://ec.europa.eu/bepa/pdf/monti_report_final_10_05_2010_en.pdf, on the Single Market Acts I and II consult: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/smact/index_en.htm. Details and documents on the Agenda 2020 can be found online at: http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/index_en.htm.
- 84.
See the section defining these goals online at: http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/our-goals/international.
- 85.
The full text of the directive is available online at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32000L0031:EN:NOT, to consult in detail policy, legislative process and reports visit the corresponding page at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/e-commerce/communications/2012/index_en.htm, including the updated e-commerce Action plan 2012–2015 accessible online at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/e-commerce/docs/communications/130423_report-ecommerce-action-plan_en.pdf where explicit references to ADR and ODR are made in detail.
- 86.
Revise the summary report online at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/docs/2010/e-commerce/summary_report_en.pdf.
- 87.
All reports and documentation on policy making supporting records, consultation and impact assessments are available online or linked at: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress_cons/adr_policy_work_en.htm. This is a revealing test of society’s readiness: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_299_en.pdf. For an author’s view on the potential of ADR in the field of e-comercein particular, consult Brannigan (2004). Revise the summary report online at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/docs/2010/ecommerce/summary_report_en.pdf. Also find a complete doctrinary analysis of the EU consumer legislation and its current challenges in Weatherill (2013). EU consumer law and policy.
- 88.
- 89.
The European Commission states that in the EU by now, more than 750 institutionalized ADR schemes are currently into place. See: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress_cons/adr_odr_eu_en.htm and the source report again: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress_cons/adr_study.pdf
- 90.
Consult The Directorate General for Health and Consumers reports for comparison between Estonia: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress_cons/docs/MS_fiches_Estonia.pdf And the United Kingdom: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress_cons/ecc_united_kingdom_en.htm, for instance.
- 91.
- 92.
The policy development and preparatory works can be consulted online at: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress_cons/docs/adr_citizen_summary_en.pdf.
- 93.
See the data collected in this statistical report: http://www.idate.org/fic/revue_telech/462/C&S43_UDEKEM-GEVERS_POULLET.pdf on measures of engagement of customers in the EU.
- 94.
Supra note, 66.
- 95.
Four to five decades ago the ADR movement became popular because it sought to resolve the problems of unsatisfactory dispute resolution practices and alleviate the costs of adversarial litigation endured by society and the public institutions. In the European Union nowadays, their normative consideration attends to very different motivators. The spread or e-commerce urges legal development to adapt to technical and social innovative practices as part of optimizing and expediting transactions through incremental deregulation.
References
Alan, W. (2001). Regulations and Standards for Online Dispute Resolution: A Primer for Policymakers and Stakeholders. ODR News, February 15, 2001.
Alexander, N. (2005). Mobile mediation: How technology is driving the globalization of ADR. Hamline Journal of Public Law & Policy, 27, 243.
Baldwin, R., Cave, M., & Lodge, M. (2011). Understanding regulation: Theory, strategy, and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Banisar, D. (2011). The right to information and privacy: Balancing rights and managing conflicts. World Bank Institute Governance Working Paper.
Barnett, R. E. (2014). The structure of liberty: Justice and the rule of law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bellucci, E., & Zeleznikow, J. (2005). Developing negotiation decision support systems that support mediators: A case study of the Family_Winner system. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 13(2), 233–271.
Bennett, C. J., & Howlett, M. (1992). The lessons of learning: Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change. Policy Sciences, 25, 275–294.
Black, J. (2001). Decentring regulation: Understanding the role of regulation and self-regulation in a “post-regulatory” world. Current Legal Problems, 54, 103–147.
Black, J., Lodge, M., & Thatcher, M. (Eds.) (2005). Regulatory Innovation: A Comparative Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Civic Consulting (2011) Consumer market study on the functioning of e-commerce and internet marketing and selling techniques in the retail of goods. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/consumer_research/market_studies/e_commerce_study_en.htm
Bradley, G. (2006). Social informatics—from theory to actions for the good ict society. In Social Informatics: An Information Society for all? In Remembrance of Rob Kling (pp. 383–394). Berlin: Springer.
Bradley, G. (2010). The Convergence Theory on ICT, Society, and Human Beings: Towards the Good ICT Society. Information and Communication Technologies, Society and Human Beings: Theory and Framework, 30, 30–48.
Brannigan, C. (2004). Beyond e-commerce: Expanding the potential of online dispute resolution. Interaction, 16, 15–17.
Brown, L. M. (1956). The Law Office. A Preventive Law Laboratory (pp. 940–953). University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
Brown, L. M., & Brown, H. A. (1975). What counsels the counselor-the code of professional responsibility’s ethical considerations-a preventive law analysis. Val. UL Rev., 10, 453.
Capurro, R., & Hjørland, B. (2003). The concept of information. Annual review of information science and technology, 37(1), 343–411.
Castells, M. (2008). The new public sphere: global civil society, communication networks, and global governance. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 78–93.
Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture (Vol. 1). Hoboken: Wiley.
Cutler, A. C., Haufler, V., & Porter, T. (Eds.). (1999). Private authority and international affairs. Albany: Suny Press.
Da Silva, J. S. (2007). Future internet research: The EU framework. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 37(2), 85–88.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Overview of self-determination theory. The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation.
DeNardis, Dr. Laura, The Emerging Field of Internet Governance (September 17, 2010). Yale Information Society Project Working Paper Series. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1678343
Deutsch, M., Coleman, P. T., & Marcus, E. C. (Eds.). (2011). The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice. Hoboken: Wiley.
Epstein, R. A. (2009). Principles for a free society: Reconciling individual liberty with the common good. New York: Basic Books.
Eurobarometer. (2011) Special report on Consumer empowerment. Report nr 342. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/consumer_empowerment/docs/report_eurobarometer_342_en.pdf
European Commission. (2000) Directive on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce), Directive 2000/31/EC of 8 June 2000. Available at: http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32000L0031:EN:HTML.
European Commission. (2011). Communication from the Commission “Towards Single Market Act”, COM(2010) 608. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/smact/docs/single-marketact_en.pdf
European Commission. (2012) Communication “A coherent framework to build trust in the Digital single market for e-commerce and online services”. http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/ecommerce/communication_2012_en.htm
Fuchs, C. (2007). Internet and society: Social theory in the information age. London: Routledge.
Fuchs, C. (2010). Theoretical foundations of defining the participatory, co-operative, sustainable information society. Information, Communication & Society, 13(1), 23–47.
Fuchs, C., Hofkirchner, W., Schafranek, M., Raffl, C., Sandoval, M., & Bichler, R. (2010). Theoretical foundations of the web: cognition, communication, and co-operation. Towards an understanding of Web 1.0, 2.0, 3.0. Future Internet, 2(1), 41–59.
Gelfand, M. J., Fulmer, C. A., & Severance, L. (2011). The psychology of negotiation and mediation.
Gibbons, L. J. (1996). No regulation, government regulation, or self-regulation: social enforcement or social contracting for governance in cyberspace. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, 6, 475.
Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis (Vol. 241). Oakland: University of California Press.
Giddens, A. (2013). Social theory and modern sociology. Hoboken: Wiley.
Gruber, T. (2008). Collective knowledge systems: Where the social web meets the semantic web. Web semantics: science, services and agents on the World Wide Web, 6(1), 4–13.
Habermas, J. (1987). The philosophical discourse of modernity. Twelve lectures.
Habermas, J. (1996). Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hilbert, M., & López, P. (2011). The world’s technological capacity to store, communicate, and compute information. Science, 332(6025), 60–65.
Hofkirchner, Wolfgang. (2007). A critical social systems view of the internet. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 37(4), 471–500.
Julio, C. B. (2012). Libertad de Contratación, Orden Público y sus repercusiones en el marco de la Arbitrabilidad. Indret: Revista para el Análisis del Derecho, 2, 1–31.
Levi-Faur, D. (2011). Regulation and regulatory governance. Handbook on the Politics of Regulation, pp. 1–25.
Martens, B., & Turlea, G. (2012). The drivers and impediments for online cross-border trade in goods in the EU. Digital Economy Working Paper 2012/1.
Menkel-Meadow, C. (2000). Mothers and fathers of invention: The intellectual founders of ADR. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 16, p 1.
Mill, J. S. (1859). 1975, on liberty in three essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Misztal, B. (2013). Trust in modern societies: The search for the bases of social order. Hoboken: Wiley.
Mitchell, W. J. (2004). Me++: The cyborg self and the networked city. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Mueller, Milton L. (2002). Ruling the root: Internet governance and the taming of cyberspace. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Nierenberg, I. G. (1968). The art of negotiating, psychological strategies for gaining advantageous bargains. USA: Hawthorn Book a Division of Elsevier-Dutton, New York Press.
Perillo, J. M. (2004). Robert J. Pothier’s influence on the common law of contract. Texas Wesleyan Law Review, 11, 267.
Planiol, M., & Ripert, G. (1959). Treatise on the civil law (pp. 153–55). Eagan: West Publishing Company.
Poblet, M. (2011). Mobile technologies for conflict management. Berlin: Springer.
Pothier, R. J., Le Trosne, M., & Aguesseau, H. F. (1839). A treatise on the law of obligations, or contracts: 2 (Vol. 2). Robert H. Small.
Rawls, John. (1971). A theory of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ross, L., & Stittinger, C. (1991). Barriers to conflict resolution. Negotiation Journal, 7(4), 389–404.
Russell, S. (2012). O. El contrato normativo: análisis de una categoría. Crónica del acto de defensa de tesis doctoral hispano-francesa (UCM, 3.7. 2013).
Schultz, T. (2011). The roles of dispute settlement and ODR (pp. 135–155). Berlin: Kluwer.
Solarte-Vasquez, M. C. (2013). Regulatory patterns of the internet development: Expanding the role of private Stakeholders through Mediatized “Self-regulation”. Baltic Journal of European Studies, 3(1), 84–120.
Solum, L. B., & Chung, M. (2003). Layers principle: Internet achitecture and the law. The Notre Dame Law Review, 79, 815.
Thompson, L. (1990). Negotiation behavior and outcomes: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. Psychological bulletin, 108(3), 515.
Tiilikka, P. (2013). Access to information as a human right in the case law of the European court of human rights. Journal of Media Law, 5(1), 79–103.
Trubek, D., & Trubek, L. G. (2007). New governance and legal regulation: complementarity, rivalry, and transformation. Columbia Journal of European Law, 13(3), 539–564.
Utterback, J. M. (1996). Mastering the dynamics of innovation. Boston: Harvard Business Press.
Vansteenkiste, M., Niemiec, C.P., & Soenens, B. (2010). The development of the five mini-theories of self-determination theory: an historical overview, emerging trends, and future directions. In T.C. Urdan, & S. A. Karabenick (Eds.) The Decade Ahead: Theoretical Perspectives on Motivation and Achievement (Advances in Motivation and Achievement (Vol. 16, pp. 105–165), Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Solarte Vasquez, M. C. (2014). The institutionalization process of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms in the european union. L’Europe Unie/United Europe: The Estonian Legal Developments Experience.
Voss, J. P., Bauknecht, D., & Kemp, R. (Eds.). (2006). Reflexive governance for sustainable development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Wall, J. A., & Dunne, T. C. (2012). Mediation research: A current review. Negotiation Journal, 28(2), 217–244.
Wall, J., & Kressel, K. (2012). Research on mediator style: A summary and some research suggestions. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 5(4), 403–421.
Weatherill, S. (2013). EU consumer law and policy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Woodley, A. E. (2012). Resolving the world’s commercial disputes: An integrated model for e-learning and ODR. International Journal of Technology Policy and Law, 1(2), 217–233.
World Bank. (2012) Governance indicators, database available at http://data.worldbank.org/datacatalog/worldwide-governance-indicators
Castells, M. (1996). The information age: Economy, society and culture (Vol. I): The rise of the network society. Cambridge MA/Oxford UK: Blackwell Publishers ISBN: 1-55786-616-3 / 1-55786-617-1 (pbk)
Castells, M. (1997). The information age: Economy, society and culture Vol. II: The power of identity. Malden MA/Oxford UK: Blackwell Publishers ISBN: 1-55786-873-5/ 1-55786-874-3 (pbk)
Castells, M. (1998). The information age: Economy, society and culture Vol.III: End of millennium. Malden MA/Oxford UK: Blackwell Publishers ISBN: 1-55786-871-9 (alk.paper)/ 1-55786-872-7 (alk. paper)
Castells, M. (2004). 1. Informationalism, networks, and the network society: a theoretical blueprint. The Network Society, 3, 3–45
Fisher, R., Ury, W. L., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. London: Penguin
Gelbstein, E., & Kurbalija, J. (2005). Internet governance: issues, actors and divides. Diplo Foundation
Haufler, V. (2013). A public role for the private sector: Industry self-regulation in a global economy. Carnegie Endowment
Hendriks, C. M., & Grin, J. (2007). Contextualizing reflexive governance: the politics of Dutch transitions to sustainability. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 9(3–4), 333–350.
Jessop, B. (2003). Governance and meta-governance: On reflexivity, requisite variety and requisite irony. Governance as Social and Political Communication, 142–172. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Kessler, F., & Fine, E. (1963). Culpa in contrahendo, bargaining in good faith, and freedom of contract: A comparative study. Harvard Law Review, 77, 401.
Marx, K. (2012). Economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844. Mineola: Courier Dover Publications.
Mensch, B. (1981). Freedom of contract as ideology. Stanford Law Review, 33, 753–772
Mueller, M., & McKnight, L. (2004). The post-.COM internet: toward regular and objective procedures for internet governance. Telecommunications Policy, 28(7), 487–502
Ourliac, P., & de Malafosse, J. (1969). Histoire du Droit privé (2ème ed., p. 114). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Pound, R. (1909). Liberty of contract. Yale Law Journal, 18, 454–487
Ramsbotham, O., Miall, H., & Woodhouse, T. (2011). Contemporary conflict resolution. In Polity, M. Deutsch, P. T. Coleman & E. C. Marcus (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice. Hoboken: Wiley
Reichman, J. H., & Franklin, J. A. (1999). Privately legislated intellectual property rights: Reconciling freedom of contract with public good uses of information. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 147, 875–970
Schlechtriem, P. (1988). Borderland of tort and contract-opening a new frontier, The. Cornell Int’l LJ, 21, 467.
Schneider, A. K. (2013). Beyond theory: Roger Fisher’s lessons on work and life. Negotiation Journal, 29(2), 171–177.
Sørensen, E., Torfing, J., Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2012). Interactive governance: Advancing the paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sorsa, K. (2009). The proactive law approach: A further step towards better regulation. Tala, J. & Pakarinen A.(Eds.), Changing Forms of Legal and Non-Legal Institutions and New Challenges for the Legislator-International Conference on Legislative Studies in Helsinki. National Research Institute of Legal Policy. Research Communications 97, 35–70
Tolsada, M. Y. (2001). Sistema de responsabilidad civil, contractual y extracontractual. Dykinson.
Webster, F. (2002). Theories of the information society. International Library of Sociology.
Yu, L. (2007). Introduction to the semantic web and semantic web services. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Solarte-Vasquez, M.C. (2014). Reflections on the Concrete Application of Principles of Internet Governance and the Networked Information Society in the European Union Institutionalization Process of Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods. In: Kerikmäe, T. (eds) Regulating eTechnologies in the European Union. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08117-5_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08117-5_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-08116-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-08117-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)