Mixed Mode Task Force


The Task Force is a combined effort by the College of Commercial Arbitrators (CCA), the International Mediation Institute (IMI) and the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution, Pepperdine School of Law. The Task Force has been charged with examining and seeking to develop model standards and criteria for ways of combining different dispute resolution processes that may involve the interplay between public or private adjudicative systems (e.g., litigation, arbitration, or adjudication) with non-adjudicative methods that involve the use of a neutral (e.g., conciliation or mediation), whether in parallel, sequentially or as integrated processes, which the Task Force has called “Mixed Mode Scenarios.” The terms of reference for the Task Force can be found here.

Practically speaking, this means exploring and investigating mixed mode practices from various cultural and legal standpoints, including information about current experience, best practices, and, where appropriate, the development of protocols to guide future implementation of mixed mode processes by neutrals more broadly. Some examples of questions to be explored are as follows:

  • What are the dynamics of and appropriate uses of non-binding or non-adjudicative processes (including non-evaluative facilitation as well as non-binding evaluation or advisory opinions) in promoting settlement?
  • In what ways may neutrals help parties tailor better dispute resolution processes, such as mediation “setting the stage” for arbitration and vice versa?
  • Under what circumstances, if any, might it be appropriate for a mediator to become an arbitrator or judge, or an arbitrator or judge to become a mediator, during the course of resolving a dispute?
  • Since recent studies show settlement is becoming increasingly likely during the course of commercial arbitration, should arbitrators be more deliberate about helping to set the stage for potential settlement? If so, what are appropriate ways in which this might be done? Might arbitrators, for example: (1) make decisions on discovery/information exchange issues or rule on motions which dispose of some aspects of the dispute; (2) encourage mediation or work with the parties to arrange mediation windows in the adjudication timetable; or (3) offer parties preliminary views on issues in dispute or issue preliminary findings of facts or conclusions of law?
  • What is the proper protocol for arbitrators or institutions to follow when parties ask them to convert a settlement agreement into an arbitration award? What other issues arise in enforcing mediated settlement?
  • In what ways, if any, might non-adjudicative neutrals and adjudicative neutrals appropriately communicate in the course of working together on resolving a particular dispute, whether in a sequential, parallel or integrated manner?
  • What combinations of non-adjudicative and adjudicative processes are most appropriate in the real-time management of conflict in ongoing relationships? 
These questions are of growing global significance in the management of conflict.

The Task Force exploring these issues is comprised of international experts in arbitration, adjudication, conciliation, litigation and mediation. The Task Force is divided into six different Working Groups, as follows:

  • Working Group 1: Mediators Using Non-Binding Evaluations and Making Settlement Proposals
  • Working Group 2: Mediators Setting the Stage for Adjudicative Processes and Other Dispute Resolution Options (e.g., Guided Choice processes)
  • Working Group 3: Neutrals “Changing Hats” (e.g., Med-Arb, Arb-Med or Arb-Med-Arb)
  • Working Group 4: Arbitrators Setting the Stage for Settlement
  • Working Group 5: Consent Awards and the Enforceability of Mediated Settlement Agreements
  • Working Group 6: Possible Interactions between Adjudicative and Non-Adjudicative Neutrals.

A key premise of our work is that perceptions and practices regarding the mixing of modes in domestic and international dispute resolution are often heavily influenced by one or more of the following: (1) national culture(s) and legal tradition(s), (2) the local legal profession; (3) practices in specific arenas of conflict; and (4) party priorities in specific transactions or circumstances. This premise has been borne out by recent feedback from the initial results from the Global Pound Conference (GPC) Series.

Keeping these important influencers in mind, the Task Force’s Working Groups will be asked to consider and to collect descriptions of experiences with mixed modes in their assigned Working Group topics, taking into consideration, among other things:

  • What culture(s) and legal tradition(s) are at work in this example? How might they have affected the choice of or nature of the process?
  • What impact did lawyers [or the neutral] have on the choice of or nature of process?
  • What is the commercial or relational background of the dispute(s) (e.g., construction, IP, IT, labor, etc.)?         What impact did this have on the choice of or nature of the process?   Were specific published dispute resolution procedures used?
  • To what extent was the choice of and nature of the process dictated by the particular priorities of the parties or other specific circumstances?
  • What are likely trends and points to watch out for in the future in relation to such processes (e.g., using internet and information technology).

The people participating in this Task Force and its Working Groups do so in their personal capacities. Their views, opinions and output should not be interpreted as reflecting the positions of any of their employers or other organisations with which they may be affiliated.

Terms of Reference & Working Groups

  1. CCA/IMI/Straus Institute International Task Force on Mixed Mode Dispute Resolution - Memo on the Task Force and Project (April 5, 2016)
  2. Table summarizing the composition of the 6 Working Groups

Download all

Mixed Mode Task Force Documents

TitleDescriptionVersionSizeHitsDate modifiedDownload
An Empirical Study of Arb-Med 164.22 kb62824-11-2017 DownloadPreview
Checklist of criteria for mixed modes process design

Working group document

230.26 kb10228-12-2018 Download
Comments on Gao Haiyan 393.37 kb71724-11-2017 DownloadPreview
Integrating Mediation into Arbitration_Why it Works in China 244.76 kb36224-11-2017 DownloadPreview
Proposed ADR clause for the Appointment of a Guiding Mediator for Commercial Agreements

Working group document

227.48 kb8028-12-2018 Download

Articles and Related Links

  1. Summary Report of the first meeting in September 23-24 2016 of the International Taskforce on Mixed Mode Dispute Resolution: Inaugural Summit at Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA, USA (2017)
  2. The Arbitrator's Mandate To Facilitation Settlement by Klaus Peter Berger and J.Ole Jensen (2017)
  3. Special Masters: How to Help Judges [and other Adjudicative Neutrals?] Extend Their Reach…And Exceed Their Grasp by Merril Hirsh (2017).
  4. The International Task Force on Mixed Mode Dispute Resolution: Exploring the Interplay between Mediation, Evaluation and Arbitration in Commercial Cases, 40 Fordham Int’ll L.J.839, by Tom Stipanowich and Veronique Fraser -- White Paper based on the Inaugural Taskforce Summit of September 2016, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2920785 (2017)
  5. Beyond Managerial Judges: Appropriate Roles in Settlement by Ellen E. Deason (2017)
  6. Guided Choice Dispute Resolution Processes: Reducing the Time and Expense to Settlement by Paul Lurie and Jeremy Lack (2014)
  7. Commercial Arbitration and Settlement: Empirical Insights into the Roles Arbitrators Play, 6 Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation 1 by Thomas J. Stipanowich & Zachary Ulrich, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2461839 (2014)
  8. Med-Arb: An Argument for Favoring Ex Parte Communications in the Mediation Phase by Edna Sussman (2013)
  9. Combinations of Mediation and Arbitration with the Same Neutral: A Framework for Judicial Review by Ellen E. Deason (2013)
  10. Dispute Resolution Mules - Preventing the process from being part of the problem by Michael Leathes (2012)
  11. The Neurophysiology of ADR and Process Design: A New Approach to Conflict Prevention and Resolution by Jeremy Lack and François Bogacz (2012)
  12. Med-Arb: Getting the best of both worlds, by Alan Limbury (2012)
  13. From Mediation to Settlement and from Settlement to Final Offer Arbitration: A Case Study of MEDALOA in a Transnational Business Dispute Mediation" by Mordehai Mironi in 5 New York Dispute Resolution Lawyer at p. 77 (2012)
  14. Appropriate Dispute Resolution: The Spectrum of Hybrid Techniques Available to the Parties, by Jeremy Lack (2011)
  15. Combinations and Permutations of Arbitration and Mediation: Issues and Solutions by Edna Sussman (2010)
  16. User Preferences and Mediator Practices: Can They Be Reconciled Within the Parameters Set by Ethical Considerations by Edna Sussman (2009)
  17. Hybrid Dispute Resolution Processes - 'Getting the Best While Avoiding the Worst of Both Worlds? by Alan Limbury (2009)
  18. Developing an Effective Med-arb/Arb-med Process by Edna Sussman (2009)
  19. International compendium on the subject of Med-Arb by the New York Dispute Resolution Lawyer, No. 1 Spring (2009)
  20. East Meets West: An International Dialogue on Mediation and Med-Arb in the United States and China, 9 PEPP. DISP. RESOL. L.J. 379 (2009) by Thomas Stipanowich, et al (Transcript of international videoconference co-sponsored by The Beijing Arbitration Commission and The Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution and moderated by TJS)
  21. The Interaction Between Arbitration and Mediation: Vision v Reality by Renate Dendorfer and Jeremy Lack (2007)
  22. Einstein's Lessons in Mediation, by Bob Bulder, Willem Kervers, Michael Leathes and Manon Schonewille (2006)
  23. Commercial Arbitration at Its Best: Successful Strategies for Business Users (Final Report of the CPR Institute Commission on the Future of Arbitration) (2001), edited by Thomas J. Stipanowich & Peter Kaskell, Chapter 1, pp. 18-33.

Taskforce Executive Committee Members

Klaus Peter Berger, Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Cologne - Germany (Co-Chair of Working Group 4).

Klaus Peter Berger is professor of domestic and international business and banking law, comparative and private international law at the University of Cologne, director of the Institute for Banking Law and the Center for Transnational Law (CENTRAL) at the Cologne law faculty. He has been Honorary Lecturer and Member of the Global Faculty at the Centre for Energy, Petroleum and Mineral Law and Policy, University of Dundee, Scotland (2000 – 2012), and visiting professor at the University of Virginia School of Law (1999) and at Columbia Law School, New York City (2014). Professor Berger is a practicing international arbitrator and member of the panel of arbitrators of the China International Economic Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC, Beijing, China), ICDR, International Arbitration Centre of the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber, Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), P.R.I.M.E. Finance, and Driver Contract Recognition Board (CRB, Formula 1), Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA). Professor Berger is author of more than 200 publications on domestic and international arbitration, contract law, trade law, M&A, banking and finance. See for a full list www.klauspeterberger.de. Professor Berger is member of the Board of the German Institution of Arbitration (DIS; President 2012-2016), and of the Board of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, co-editor of Arbitration International and member of the ICC Institute for World Business Law.
Kun Fan Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, McGill University- Canada (Co-Chair of Working Group 1)
FAN Kun teaches and researches in the areas of mediation, arbitration and comparative legal studies. She has worked in China, Singapore, U.S.A., Switzerland, France, Hong Kong and Canada, and speaks Chinese, English and French. Before moving to Montreal, she has taught at the Chinese University of Hong Kong for six years. She has also been a Visiting Scholar at Harvard Yenching Institute.  She has published extensively in the field of ADR and has received numerous awards in recognition of her academic contribution, including Norton Rose Faculty Scholar in Arbitration & Commercial Law 2017-2020, Best Research Outputs for Arbitration Theory in 2015 by China Arbitration Research Institute, Support for High-impact Scholarship 2013-2014 by the Committee on Focused Innovations Scheme, and Best Thesis in International Studies by the Swiss Network for International Studies Award in 2011. See for a full list https://www.mcgill.ca/law/about/profs/fan-kun. Apart from academic research, Professor Fan also has extensive experience in ADR practice, and has worked as counsel, secretary for the arbitration tribunal and arbitrator in a number of international arbitrations and domain name disputes, and has overseen over a hundred arbitrations administered by the ICC International Court of Arbitration when she worked as a Depute Counsel. She is called to the New York Bar, Executive Council Member of the China Academy of Arbitration Law, Domain Names Panelist of the Hong Kong International Arbitration Center (“HKIAC”) and the Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre (“ADNDRC”), Member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, Accredited Mediator of the Hong Kong Mediation Accreditation Association Limited (“HKMAAL”), and Arbitrator of Zhuhai Arbitration Commission International Arbitration Court and Nanjing Arbitration Commission.

Veronique Fraser, Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Sherbrooke - Canada (Co-Chair of Working Group 1)

Veronique Fraser, Ph.D. is a Law Professor in the Master’s program in Dispute Prevention and Resolution at the Faculty of Law of the University of Sherbrooke (Canada) and a Scholar-in-Residence at Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution, Pepperdine University School of Law (California). She teaches dispute prevention, cross-cultural dispute resolution, introduction to ADR, as well as clinical mediation. She is a lawyer and called to the bars of the provinces of Quebec (civil law) and Ontario (common law) in 2009, and an accredited mediator with the Quebec Institute of Mediation and Arbitration. She holds a Doctorate degree in Law (Ph.D., University of Ottawa), a Master in Transnational Law and Common Law (LL.M., University of Sherbrooke), and a Master of Laws in Dispute Resolution (LL.M., Pepperdine University). Professor Fraser has participated in the conception of training material for judges and Quebec’s crown corporations’ lawyers in the context of the implementation of judicial mediation in the Quebec Administrative Tribunal. She has completed an internship at the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) in the International Arbitration and Conciliation Section in Vienna (Austria), and has been a member researcher of the United Nations Governance Roundtable. Professor Fraser sits on the Editorial Board of the bilingual journal Négociations (De Boeck Publishing) and is a researcher for the Group for the Prevention and Resolution of Disputes (G-PRD) and for a major research project financed by the Canadian government on Access to Law and Justice (ADAJ). She is the author of numerous articles on dispute resolution and has been invited to speak by several renowned institutions, including the International Chamber of Commerce, the CPR International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution, the American Bar Association, Dispute Resolution Section, the Quebec Institute of Mediation and Arbitration and the Young Bar of Montreal.

Laura Kaster, Founder of Appropriate Dispute Solutions, USA (Co-Chair of Working Group 2)

Laura A. Kaster is an arbitrator, mediator, lawyer and experienced user of ADR services. As a neutral with over 30 years of experience with arbitration, mediation and settlement negotiation in a wide variety of complex commercial and intellectual property disputes, she brings a rare mix of experience and perspectives to this Taskforce. In 2014 she received the Boskey Award recognizing the ADR Practitioner of the Year from the New Jersey State Bar Association. In 2015, she was selected for the Master Mediators Panel of the American Arbitration Association and Who’s Who Legal, Mediation. She is a Fellow in the College of Commercial Arbitrators and an Executive Committee member for the National Academy of Distinguished Neutrals and the New Jersey Academy of Mediators and Arbitrators. She is on the New Jersey Supreme Court Committee on Complementary Dispute Resolution and the New Jersey Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Mediation Standards. She serves as a neutral in the greater New York metropolitan area, as an arbitrator and a mediator for CPR (and on its technology panel), the American Arbitration Association, ICDR, FINRA and the New Jersey and New York Courts. She is CEDR accredited and IMI Certified. She is also a member of the Tech List for the Silicon Valley Arbitration and Mediation Center. Ms. Kaster was President of the Judge Marie Garibaldi Inn of Court from 2015-17, devoted exclusively to alternative dispute resolution, and a past Chair of the NJSBA Dispute Resolution Section. She is a mediator for the Global Exchange Mediation Center, developing a mixed mode approach to international mediation under the New Jersey Statute and advisor to the Institute for Dispute Resolution at NJCU. She has published and spoken widely on issues involving arbitration and mediation, including Guided Choice. She is co-editor in chief of New York Dispute Resolution Lawyer, the Journal of the NYSBA Dispute Resolution Section and a member of its executive committee. She is also an adjunct professor of ADR at Seton Hall Law School and a member of the Center for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR) Global Mediation Panel. She was chief litigation counsel for AT&T Corporation and AT&T Labs for almost 10 years. Prior to her work at AT&T, she was a partner at Jenner & Block, where she worked for over twenty years.

Jeremy Lack, LAWTECH.CH, IMI Independent Standards Commission (ISC) – Switzerland (Co-Chair of Working Groups 2 and 6)

Jeremy Lack is an ADR Neutral specialized in international dispute prevention and resolution processes, as well as an independent lawyer specialized in new technologies, start-ups and intellectual property. He is a Vice-Chair of the Independent Standards Commission of the International Mediation Institute (IMI), the Chair of the Swiss Chamber of Commercial Mediation (Section Romandie), and a panelist with AAA/ICDR, CMAP, CPR, FIMC, IBMS, ICC, INTA, IMI, JAMS, SKWM/CSMC/SCCM, SIMC and WIPO. He qualified as an English barrister in 1989, as a US Attorney-at-Law in 1990/1 (NY State, CAFC & USPTO) and is admitted to the Geneva Bar since 2003 as a foreign lawyer. Jeremy is an associate Barrister with QUADRANT CHAMBERS in London, an advisor to CHARLES RUSSELL SPEECHLYS LLP in Geneva and London, and counsel to HELVETICA AVOCATS SARL in Switzerland, SCHONEWILLE & SCHONEWILLE LEGAL MEDIATION in the Netherlands, and NEGO-MEDIATIONS SARL in Switzerland. He has a MA (Oxon) degree in Physiological Sciences and in Jurisprudence from Lincoln College, Oxford University, is a registered US patent and trademark lawyer, and is a co-founder of www.neuroawareness.com. He is an adjunct faculty member at the Federal Polytechnic School of Lausanne (EPFL) in Switzerland. Jeremy handles international negotiations, mediations, conciliations and arbitrations, and combined hybrid processes in a wide range of fields and industries. He is a certified IMI mediation advocate and has written and lectured extensively on Guided Choice dispute resolution. He lives with his wife and two daughters in Geneva, Switzerland. For his IMI mediation and mediation advocacy profiles, see:

Deborah Masucci, IMI Co-Chair, Formerly Head of the Dispute Resolution Program at American International Group, Inc. - USA (Co-Chair of Working Group 6)

Deborah Masucci is currently Co-Chair and Board Member of the International Mediation Institute (IMI), Chair Elect of the New York State Bar Association Dispute Resolution Section, and was former Chair of the ABA Section for Dispute Resolution. She was recruited to AIG in 2003 to establish its Office of Dispute Resolution in the Litigation Management Division where she was responsible for the strategic use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and increasing the effective methods of appropriate dispute resolution used within the Claims Organization. Before leaving AIG she rolled out the Company’s employee dispute resolution program. Prior to joining AIG, Deborah was Vice President of the East Central Region and head of Professional Development for JAMS The Resolution Experts. She made her mark in ADR at FINRA, previously NASD, where she led the dispute resolution program for 15 years. She is an acknowledged expert on ADR who speaks regularly on the topic before legal and business organizations. She is a member of the International Arbitration Club of New York, a fellow of the American College of Civil Trial Mediators, a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, and an International Accredited Mediator with the Hong Kong Joint Mediation Centre. She serves on several committees committed to Diversity in ADR.  She also served on the New York State Bar Association’s Task Force on the Future of the Legal Profession. She regularly serves as an arbitrator and mediator.

Prof. Moti Mironi ((Mordehai) Mironi, Professor of Law, Haifa University - Israel. (Co-Chair of Working Group 3)

Prof. Moti (Mordehai) Mironi is a Professor of Law at Haifa University and Adjunct Professor at IDC. Formerly he was a faculty member at Tel Aviv University and Visiting Professor at Cornell University, USC Law School, the University of Alberta and Humboldt University Faculty of Law as well as Visiting Researcher at the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society. Prof. Mironi’s areas of teaching and research include mediation, negotiation, A.D.R., arbitration and labor and employment law. He has published many books and articles in these fields. Prof. Mironi is a Co-Founder and Secretary Treasurer of the Association of Academics for the Promotion of Mediation and Negotiation as an Academic Discipline; formerly a co-chair of the Israel Bar Association’s ADR Forum and a former President, Israel’s Mediators Association. Prof. Mironi serves on the mediation panel of WIPO, CAS, Milan Chamber of Commerce and OSCE Mediation and Dialogue Expert Roster. He is a member of the Labor Law Group and a Sustaining Academic Member of the C.P.R. Institute for Dispute Resolution and formerly was an overseas correspondent for the International Academy of Arbitrators. Prof. Mironi has been involved as a mediator in many international business and sport disputes as well as in major business and nationwide labor and public disputes, domesticaly. Among them: a dispute between war widows and the parents of the fallen soldiers, two nationwide doctors strikes in 2000 and in 2011, the negotiations over recovery agreements for the city of Jerusalem and the protracted land dispute between the Bedouin tribes (indigenous people) and the Israeli government.

Kathleen Paisley, Partner, AMBOS NBGO – Belgium (Chair of Working Group 5)

Kathleen Paisley is an American international dispute resolution specialist who has been acting as counsel and a neutral in mediations and arbitrations in London, Brussels, and Miami for more than 30 years. After starting her career as a legal advisor to the Iran-US Claims Tribunal in the Hague, she was a dispute resolution partner at Morrison & Foerster Brussels and While & Case London, where she acted in arbitration cases under all the major commercial arbitration rules and ICSID, as well as mediated under the WIPO Rules and as counsel in global patent and other highstakes IP matters. She is also one of the first certified mediators of investor-State cases and is a member of the ICCA Task Force on damages in international arbitration. In addition to her extensive dispute resolution experience, Kathleen also has in-depth non-contentious experience in IP, IT, US Antitrust /EU competition law and EU data protection, cyber security, biotech and pharmaceutical law. Ms. Paisley’s sector specific experience focuses primarily on four key economic sectors – (1) ICT, internet, e-commerce, and multi-media, (2) health care, biotech and pharmaceuticals, (3) energy, and (4) construction and issues related thereto. She has a JD from Yale Law School (1986), passed the·CPA Exam for Public Accountancy (1986), has an·MBA from Florida Atlantic University (Finance) (1984), and a·BS from Florida State University (Business Administration) (1981).

Co-Chair: Thomas Stipanowich, Professor of Law, Pepperdine University School of Law - USA (Co-Chair of Working Group 3).

Thomas Stipanowich holds the William H. Webster Chair in Dispute Resolution and is Professor of Law at Pepperdine University School of Law, as well as the Associate Dean leading Pepperdine’s Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution (ranked first by peers in U.S. News & World Report rankings for 12 of the last 13 years). Stipanowich came to Pepperdine in 2006 after serving for as the President and CEO of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR Institute), a Manhattan-based non-profit think tank, before which he enjoyed a long career as a chaired law professor, attorney, and dispute resolution professional. A noted scholar and the author of more than fifty books and articles, he co-authored a leading treatise on arbitration law that was cited by the Supreme Court and many other courts (and when published named Best New Legal Book by the Association of American Publishers). He received the D’Alemberte-Raven Award, the ABA Dispute Resolution Section’s highest honor, for contributions to the field of conflict resolution, and this year was given the CPR’s James F. Henry Award for “outstanding achievement by individuals for distinguished, sustained contributions to the field of ADR.” In recent years he was Scholar-in-Residence at the Park Lane (London) office of WilmerHale and the New Zealand Law Foundation’s International Visiting Scholar on Dispute Resolution. In the summer of 2015 he was Max Kade Visiting Scholar at Heidelberg University’s Institute of Private Law, and in 2017 was given the honorific title of Distinguished Professor of Law at National Law University, Delhi, India. Professor Stipanowich has devoted himself to real-world initiatives aimed at improving our approaches to conflict in a variety of settings. A peer recently wrote: “An unblinking commentator on both bad and good trends, Professor Stipanowich has been a virtual moderator, guiding and shaping the ongoing “multilogue” among corporations, academics, governments and neutrals. He has changed the language of [dispute resolution].” Stipanowich is a popular teacher, public speaker and professional skills trainer. A former construction lawyer and graduate architect, he regularly serves as an arbitrator or dispute resolution professional in complex construction and commercial cases in the U.S. and internationally.

Co-Chair: Edna Sussman, Independent Arbitrator and Mediator - USA (Co-Chair of Working Group 4)

Edna Sussman, www.sussmanadr.com is an independent arbitrator and mediator and the Distinguished ADR Practitioner in Residence at Fordham University School of Law. Formerly a partner in the firm of White & Case LLP, she has extensive experience having served as an arbitrator (as chair, sole or co-arbitrator) in over 200 cases and as a mediator in over 200 cases in a wide variety of complex international and domestic commercial disputes under many institutional rules and ad hoc. She serves on many institutional panels around the world including the AAA, ICDR, CPR, Brazil, Hong Kong, Singapore, South China, Shanghai, Korea, Kuala Lumpur, Vietnam, Swiss, Vienna, Dubai, Kigali, Lagos and British Columbia, Energy Arbitrators List Around the World, FINRA, National Futures Association, U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution, federal, state and bankruptcy courts in N.Y., and is registered with the ICC. Edna serves on the Board of the American Arbitration Association, as chair of the AAA-ICDR Foundation, as immediate past President of the College of Commercial Arbitrators and as founding Vice-Chair of the New York International Arbitration Center. She formerly served as chair of the Arbitration Committees of the ABA’s Dispute Resolution and International Sections. Edna has been recognized by Chambers Global and Chambers USA for International Arbitration and Mediation, by the International Who's Who of Commercial Arbitration and the International Who's Who of Commercial Mediation and by SuperLawyers and Best Lawyers for Alternative Dispute Resolution. She was named as one of the ten outstanding international mediators by Who’s Who Legal 2013 and selected based on peer review as Best Lawyer’s “2012 New York City Mediation Lawyer of the Year.” Edna has lectured and published widely on arbitration and mediation topics.

Other Members of the Task Force

  1. Kenny Aina (Nigeria)
  2. Nadja Alexander (Singapore)
  3. Shahla Ali (Hong Kong)
  4. Louise-Marie Bélanger (Canada)
  5. Gary Benton (USA)
  6. Sverre Blandhol (Norway)
  7. John Bosnak (Netherlands)
  8. Stephan Breidenbach (Germany)
  9. Dominique Brown-Berset (Switzerland)
  10. David Burt (USA)
  11. Maria Chedid (USA)
  12. Eleonora Coelho (Brazil)
  13. Malik bin Rabea Dahlan (UK)
  14. Ellen Deason (USA)
  15. Renate Dendorfer (Germany)
  16. Jalal El Ahdab (France)
  17. Kun Fan (Canada)
  18. Chen Fuyong (China)
  19. Eric Green (USA)
  20. Patrick Green (UK)
  21. Rowan Gregg (UK)
  22. Jim Groton (USA)
  23. Vivian Gu (China)
  24. Chen Guang (Dawn Chen) (China)
  25. Josephine Hadikusumo (Singapore)
  26. Howard Herman (USA)
  27. Merril Hirsh (USA)
  28. Charles Howard (USA)
  29. Cary Ichter (USA)
  30. Alexander Insam (Germany)
  31. Céline Jaspers (Belgium)
  32. Tan Jinghui (China)
  33. Barney Jordaan (Belgium)
  34. Catherine Kessedjian (France)
  35. Christopher Lau (Singapore)
  36. Erika Levin (USA)
  37. Song Lianbin (China)
  38. Alan Limbury (Australia)
  39. Xinbo Liu (China)
  40. Richard Mainland (UK)
  41. Jonathan Marks (USA)
  42. Paul E. Mason (Brazil)
  43. Michael McIlwrath (Italy)
  44. Christopher Miers (UAE)
  45. Mark Morril (USA)
  46. Christopher Newmark (UK)
  47. Dilyara Nigmatullina (Australia)
  48. Jackie Nolan Haley (USA)
  49. Susan Nycum (USA)
  50. Laila Ollapally (India)
  51. Jane Player (UK)
  52. Ute Quinn (USA)
  53. Jean-François Roberge (Canada)
  54. Ann Robertson (USA)
  55. Marcelo Rosadilla (USA)
  56. Jawad Sarwana (Pakistan)
  57. Jan K. Schäfer (Germany)
  58. John Sherrill (USA)
  59. Mercedes Tarrazón (Spain)
  60. Joe Tirado (UK)
  61. Nancy Vanderlip (USA)
  62. Marcio Vasconcellos (USA)
  63. Karinya Verghese (USA)
  64. Wolf von Kumberg (UK)
  65. Mohamed Abdel Wahab (Egypt)
  66. Janet Walker (Canada)
  67. Tony Willis (UK)
  68. Anil Xavier (India)
  69. Amanda Lees (Singapore)
  70. Steven Lim ( Singapore)
  71. Jessica Fei (China)
  72. Christine Kang (China)
  73. Chiann Bao (Hong Kong)
  74. Kim Rooney (Hong Kong)
  75. Brownwyn Lincoln (Australia)
  76. Gracious Timothy Dunna (India)
  77. Kabir Duggal (India)
  78. Anna Grishchenkova (Russia)
  79. Ruth Glick (USA)
  80. Fabiana Leite (Brazil)
  81. Ana Vermal (France)
  82. Rekha Rangachari
Those participating in this taskforce do so in their personal capacities. The views, opinions and output of the taskforce do not necessarily reflect the position of the member's employer or other affiliation.