| contributor author | John P. Gnaedinger | |
| date accessioned | 2017-05-08T21:14:13Z | |
| date available | 2017-05-08T21:14:13Z | |
| date copyright | August 1987 | |
| date issued | 1987 | |
| identifier other | %28asce%290887-3828%281987%291%3A3%28150%29.pdf | |
| identifier uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/43833 | |
| description abstract | Interest in alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques for the construction industry has grown in recent years. Traditional litigation has been criticized on several fronts. The traditional procedures are often cumbersome, expensive, and lengthy. The outcome of litigation is uncertain and often confusing. For certain cases, alternative procedures may be useful in quickly resolving disputes. Sometimes there is no alternative to litigation. Each case is unique, and the appropriate form of dispute resolution mechanism must be established for each project. This paper reviews the process of mediation/arbitration, and compares that process to other alternative dispute resolution procedures. | |
| publisher | American Society of Civil Engineers | |
| title | Mediation/Arbitration: Alternative Dispute Resolution Process | |
| type | Journal Paper | |
| journal volume | 1 | |
| journal issue | 3 | |
| journal title | Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities | |
| identifier doi | 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(1987)1:3(150) | |
| tree | Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities:;1987:;Volume ( 001 ):;issue: 003 | |
| contenttype | Fulltext | |