Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Construction Industry

'The work provides, in an informative and entertaining way, a history and description of the current ADR landscape, comparing the varying techniques and their relative strengths and weaknesses. It compares the development of ADR methodologies across a number of jurisdictions and notes the encouraging approach taken by the TCC in its development in England and Wales. However, it does more than all this. It gives rise to a number of considerations, some of them relatively profound. These include, for example, why has the role of the (construction) professional been devalued? Should MEDIATION become compulsory in the resolution of construction disputes, should it replace Statutory Adjudication as the ""go-to"" method of initial resolution? Why do some jurisdictions (Scotland, in particular) lag in the use of MEDIATION. Why does MEDIATION look as though it might follow arbitration in losing its cost-effective appeal and is this an issue related to the increasing participation of solicitors? What can be done to prevent this happening? While aimed specifically at Construction, most of its contents apply equally to any Capital Project for example, the resolution of disputes relating to ""Techie Project Management"" such as computing capital projects in the Banking and Insurance sectors. It should arguably become essential reading for those in the ADR field and for construction professionals generally, (perhaps also wider ""Project Management"" professionals?) and should probably be prescribed reading for those taking the RICS ""Conflict Avoidance"" Pledge?'- Allan Mungall, BSc LLM CEng FICE FCIArb, Fellow of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators