This chapter explores how the primary and basic processes of negotiation, mediation, arbitration and adjudication have been blended, combined and changed to produce new forms of hybrid and mixed dispute resolution processes, which vary the roles of the parties (self-determination in mediation; representation in adjudication, arbitration and negotiation) and the third parties they may engage to assist in dispute resolution (or prevention) processes. As basic forms of dispute resolution have been used in different cultural, national, international and institutionalized settings, serving different purposes and different parties’ needs and interests, it is useful to think about whether each process has its own integrity, purpose and ethics (fairness, justice, efficiency, privacy or transparency), and what we gain and lose by combining and altering the basic forms. The chapter uses the jurisprudence of Lon Fuller to query what issues are raised by combining basic processes to create new and hybrid approaches in different contexts.
