Law Commons^™

Rationality Revisited: A Response To Professor Greenberg, S.I. Strong

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

Scholarly debate is meant to improve the legal community’s understanding of both the value and the limitations of a particular strand of research. While it is useful to identify areas of principled disagreement, there are times when criticism is not based on different interpretations of law or theory but instead on a misapprehension of the underlying facts or the context in which the initial analysis is placed. In those types of situations, it is necessary for the original author to provide a formal response to keep errors from entering into the legal literature.

This Article provides just such a response …

Realizing The Gap Between Rationality And Information, Elayne E. Greenberg

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

The Online Journal requested that I evaluate Professor Strong’s empirical research, “Realizing Rationality: An Empirical Assessment of International Commercial Mediation,” reported in 23 Wash. & Lee. L. Rev. 1973 (2016). The purpose of Professor Strong’s research is to help “fill the informational gap” about international commercial mediation for the United Nations Commission on International Trade (hereinafter UNICITRAL) Working Group II (Arbitration and Conciliation) so that the Working Group could better assess whether, in fact, there is a need for a new UNCITRAL instrument to enforce global commercial mediation agreements. Professor Strong’s research offers insightful nuggets about international commercial mediation that …