Everyday Disputes and Mediation in the United States

A Reply to Professor Felstiner

Bibliographic Data

ID11565152
AuthorsRichard Danzig (corresponding author), Michael Löwy (0000-0001-5679-0927), Michael J Lowy
Year1975
Volume9
Issue4
Pages675-694
Publication date1975-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLaw & Society Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0023-9216 • E-ISSN: 1540-5893
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/3053343
OpenAlexW2319157486
LanguageEN
Citations received34
References cited20

In a recent article in these pages Professor W.L.F. Felstiner (1974) made a substantial contribution to the literature on dispute processing by analyzing the role of avoidance as a means of ending disputes, and by correlating the ubiquity of this technique with differing forms of societal organization. In brief, his insight—richly developed in the article—is that the tendency to walk away from contentious situations is greater in “technologically complex, rich societies” than in “technologically simple, poor societies.” This is because the organization of richer societies minimizes the importance and the intertwining (multiplexity) of family and other group ties and maximizes social, occupational and geographic mobility. In contrast, citizens of poorer societies are bound closely to the individuals in their communities and thus have a greater need and capacity for resolving—rather than walking away from—disputes with those individuals

Criminology · Mediation · Political science · Sociology · Conflict Management and Negotiation · Dispute Resolution and Class Actions · European and International Law Studies · Law

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub