Full Text Available
Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.
Kompleksiteit en bemiddeling: ʼn Model vir die ontwerp van gepaste regulering
Thesis (LLD)--Stellenbosch University, 2017
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | af_ZA |
| Published: |
Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1867614117604360192 |
|---|---|
| access_status_str | Open Access |
| author | Spruyt, Wynand Max Alexander |
| author2 | Human, Sonia |
| author_browse | Human, Sonia Spruyt, Wynand Max Alexander |
| author_facet | Human, Sonia Spruyt, Wynand Max Alexander |
| author_sort | Spruyt, Wynand Max Alexander |
| collection | Thesis |
| dc_rights_str_mv | Stellenbosch University |
| description | Thesis (LLD)--Stellenbosch University, 2017 |
| format | Thesis |
| id | oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/102801 |
| institution | Stellenbosch University (South Africa) |
| language | af_ZA |
| last_indexed | 2026-06-10T12:46:56.603Z |
| license_str | Other — see source repository |
| provenance_str_mv | Harvested via OAI-PMH from SUNScholar — Stellenbosch University Repository |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publishDateRange | 2017 |
| publishDateSort | 2017 |
| publisher | Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University |
| publisherStr | Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University |
| record_format | dspace |
| source_str | SUNScholar — Stellenbosch University Repository |
| spelling | oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/102801 Kompleksiteit en bemiddeling: ʼn Model vir die ontwerp van gepaste regulering Spruyt, Wynand Max Alexander Human, Sonia Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Law. Department of Private Law. Mediation (Law) Mediation -- Theoretical model General systems theory Compromise (Law) -- Regulation Dispute resolution (Law) -- Regulation UCTD Thesis (LLD)--Stellenbosch University, 2017 ENGLISH ABSTRACT : The purpose of this study is to design a theoretical model of mediation that can be utilised to analyse the impact of regulation on the mediation process – and specifically the impact on the diversity that is said to characterise it. Although mediation is inherently a private and informal dispute resolution process, it is increasingly subjected to prescriptive and formal regulatory requirements. Regulation inevitably results in tension between the informal nature of mediation and the rigidity, formality and prescriptive nature of regulation. This tension is generally known as the diversity-consistency dilemma. The dilemma implies that a proper analysis of the impact of regulation is required to ensure that the appropriate and effective regulation of mediation does not occur at the cost of the inherent nature and features of the mediation process. The argument put forward in this study is that the mediation process can be modelled as a complex social system. The singular character and unique qualities of this system – and specifically the complex interaction taking place within it – distinguishes mediation from other forms of dispute resolution. This complexity model of mediation therefore allows for an analysis of the impact that regulation has on the most fundamental qualities of the mediation process. A complexity model furthermore allows for the analysis of diversity, as a quality of the mediation process, from a unique and novel perspective. Diversity in mediation is typically equated to the procedural flexibility, informality and multi-functionality that is generally associated with mediation. However, a systems analysis shows that diversity is a product of the complex interactions taking place during mediation. Diversity is therefore an inherent and fundamental attribute of the mediation process. This research consequently succeeds in giving actual content and meaning to the concept of diversity in mediation. This content makes it possible to determine with certainty what the diversity-consistency dilemma truly implies for the appropriate and effective regulation of mediation. These implications are consequently examined for each of the three most general forms of regulation in the context of mediation, namely triggering laws, procedural regulation and standardising mechanism. This examination finds that the design and implementation of regulations are often based on theoretically unsound assumptions. These mechanisms are therefore often not optimally effective, and unnecessarily exacerbate the tension represented by the diversity-consistency dilemma. The purpose of this study is therefore to lastly also provide new perspectives on the regulation of mediation. These new perspectives prove that a complexity model of mediation – as well as the unique paradigm of complexity that it permits – enables the design and implementation of effective, appropriate, fair and theoretically sound forms of regulation that will ultimately ensure and support the use of mediation. Thereby actual and legitimate requirements for standardisation and consistency can be achieved without unduly restricting the diversity that fundamentally characterises the mediation process. AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING : Hierdie tesis stel dit ten doel om ʼn teoretiese model van bemiddeling te omskryf wat die ontleding van die impak van verskillende vorme van regulering op die bemiddelingsproses – en spesifiek die diversiteit waaraan dit gekenmerk word – moontlik maak. Ten spyte van die feit dat bemiddeling inherent ʼn privaat en informele proses is, speel dit toenemend af binne ʼn groeiende formele en dwingende regulatoriese raamwerk. Die regulering van bemiddeling lei gevolglik tot noodwendige spanning tussen die informele aard van bemiddeling en die rigiditeit, formaliteit en voorskriftelikheid van regulering. In algemene terme word hierdie spanning beskryf as die diversiteit-konsekwentheid dilemma. Hierdie dilemma impliseer dat die impak van regulering behoorlik ontleed moet word ten einde te verseker dat die gepaste en effektiewe regulering van bemiddeling nie ten koste van die inherente aard en kenmerke van die bemiddelingsproses geskied nie. Hierdie studie voer aan dat die bemiddelingsproses gemodelleer kan word as ʼn komplekse sosiale stelsel. Hierdie stelsel – en spesifiek die komplekse interaksie wat binne die stelsel plaasvind – beskik oor kenmerke en eienskappe wat uniek is tot bemiddeling as ʼn vorm van geskilbeslegting. Die modellering van bemiddeling as ʼn komplekse stelsel maak dit dus moontlik om die impak van regulering te ontleed aan die hand van die werklike en mees fundamentele eienskappe van die bemiddelingsproses. ʼn Kompleksiteitsmodel van bemiddeling maak dit verder moontlik om diversiteit as ʼn kenmerk van bemiddeling vanuit ʼn nuwe en unieke perspektief te ontleed. Diversiteit word tipies gelykgestel aan die prosedurele buigsaamheid, informele aard of multifunksionaliteit waaraan bemiddeling so geredelik gekenmerk word. ʼn Stelselontleding dui egter aan dat diversiteit ʼn produk is van die komplekse interaksie wat tydens die bemiddelingsproses plaasvind. Diversiteit is dus ʼn inherente kenmerk van bemiddeling. Hierdie studie slaag gevolglik daarin om werklike inhoud te gee aan die konsep van diversiteit in bemiddeling. Hierdie inhoud maak dit moontlik om opnuut en met sekerheid te bepaal wat die diversiteitkonsekwentheid dilemma impliseer vir die effektiewe en gepaste regulering van bemiddeling. Hierdie implikasies vir die drie algemeenste vorme van regulering in die konteks van bemiddeling – aktiveringsregulering, prosedurele regulering, en die regulering van standaarde – word vervolgens ondersoek. Die studie bevind dat talle aannames onderliggend tot die ontwerp en toepassing van regulatoriese maatreëls op bemiddeling nie teoreties verdedigbaar is nie. Hierdie regulatoriese maatreëls blyk nie alleenlik meermale nie optimaal effektief te wees nie, maar versterk inderwaarheid ook die spanning wat deur die diversiteit-konsekwentheid dilemma verteenwoordig word. Die doel van hierdie studie is daarom om ten laaste ook nuwe perspektiewe op die regulering van bemiddeling te identifiseer. Sulke nuwe perspektiewe bewys dat hierdie nuwe model van bemiddeling – sowel as die unieke paradigma van kompleksiteit wat dit daarstel – dit moontlik maak om effektiewe, gepaste, regverdige en teoreties verdedigbare vorme van regulering te ontwerp en toe te pas wat die gebruik van bemiddeling kan verseker en versterk. Sodoende word werklike behoeftes vir standaardisering en konsekwentheid aangespreek, sonder dat die inherente diversiteit waaraan bemiddeling gekenmerk word in die slag bly. Doctoral 2017-11-16T11:15:29Z 2017-12-11T10:55:59Z 2017-11-16T11:15:29Z 2017-12-11T10:55:59Z 2017-12 Thesis http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/102801 af_ZA Stellenbosch University xi, [5], 255 pages application/pdf Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University |
| spellingShingle | Mediation (Law) Mediation -- Theoretical model General systems theory Compromise (Law) -- Regulation Dispute resolution (Law) -- Regulation UCTD Spruyt, Wynand Max Alexander Kompleksiteit en bemiddeling: ʼn Model vir die ontwerp van gepaste regulering |
| title | Kompleksiteit en bemiddeling: ʼn Model vir die ontwerp van gepaste regulering |
| title_full | Kompleksiteit en bemiddeling: ʼn Model vir die ontwerp van gepaste regulering |
| title_fullStr | Kompleksiteit en bemiddeling: ʼn Model vir die ontwerp van gepaste regulering |
| title_full_unstemmed | Kompleksiteit en bemiddeling: ʼn Model vir die ontwerp van gepaste regulering |
| title_short | Kompleksiteit en bemiddeling: ʼn Model vir die ontwerp van gepaste regulering |
| title_sort | kompleksiteit en bemiddeling n model vir die ontwerp van gepaste regulering |
| topic | Mediation (Law) Mediation -- Theoretical model General systems theory Compromise (Law) -- Regulation Dispute resolution (Law) -- Regulation UCTD |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/102801 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT spruytwynandmaxalexander kompleksiteitenbemiddelingʼnmodelvirdieontwerpvangepasteregulering |