Search results

The purpose of this paper is to locate, describe and analyze the differences between the way migrants from communal cultures and local communities in Western Europe resolve intra-communal and inter-communal conflicts, and to use the findings to propose a hybrid alternative model that may be able to bridge across identified differences. Such a hybrid model will facilitate enhanced integration and adaptation between host and migrant communities, contributing to improved conflict resolution outcomes.

This paper starts with an exploration, review and analysis of existing relevant literature describing refugee/migrant–host community interactions and their consequences. The second stage includes review and analysis of relevant alternative dispute resolution (ADR) literature. The third stage undertakes an examination and analysis of the practices identified in stage two, and the fourth stage proposes a method that uses potentially “bridging” practices by incorporating useful and relevant elements from host and refugee communities’ ADR mechanisms, in a way that may help resolve inter-communal disputes.

The paper demonstrates significant differences between host and migrant communities’ dispute resolution practices and the integrability of relevant ADR approaches toward creating a usable, hybrid, bridging approach to handle inter-communal conflicts.

The paper proposes a hybrid “bridging” host–refugee inter-communal conflict management model. The proposed model should be tested to prove feasibility and viability.

Should the proposed model prove useful, the practical implications may lead to the construction and use of different (hybrid) conflict management mechanisms in appropriate communities. Such mechanisms may lead to a reduction in the number and severity of inter-communal conflicts.

A reduction in inter-communal conflicts within the framework of a host–migrant interface may have strong positive outcome to inter (and intra) communal relations and may reduce friction, crime, marginalization, hostility and radicalization.

The paper highlights the challenges to both migrant and host communities when it comes to finding a common ground for resolving inter-communal disputes and offers a pragmatic hybrid model to bridge cultural and functional gaps and help promote mutually satisfactory outcomes.

This paper aims to locate, describe and analyze the mechanism and impact of women's informal role within the formally male‐only Sulha – a prevalent, inter/intra‐communal dispute resolution process practiced by Muslim, Christian and Druze Arabs in Israel and in many other regions of the Middle East and the Muslim world. Furthermore, this paper seeks to explore the way men's formal roles and women's informal roles interact within the Sulha's strict patriarchal settings.

The first section of this paper uses interviews, participant observation and existing literature to locate, describe and analyze the specific ways in which women informally participate in and impact on the Sulha process. The second section uses a questionnaire, interviews, existing literature and analysis to examine the attitudes of men and women regarding women's current and future roles in Sulha.

The paper demonstrates that the formal (male‐only) visible part of the Sulha process coexists alongside a significant, yet mostly invisible, informal contribution of women – at each stage of the process. Furthermore, the paper shows that both men and women are cognizant of the informal role women play in Sulha, and that both men and women are open to a possible future expansion of the role of women in Sulha, including into formal roles.

The paper highlights the need to seek and evaluate informal, sometimes invisible, yet significant contributions of women to traditional dispute resolution processes in strict patriarchal cultures.