Alternative Dispute Resolution: Definition, Impact, and effectiveness
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods have been adopted globally to sidestep the
lengthy and costly litigation process. Designed to resolve conflicts without legal action, ADR is
hailed for its efficiency and effectiveness. The United States Agency for International
Development (USAID) highlights that ADR often outperforms traditional courts in delivering
justice, particularly in nations where judicial systems have lost public trust and respect.
Furthermore, ADR enhances access to justice for individuals who cannot or prefer not to
engage with the court system, addresses conflicts in culturally sensitive manners, and upholds
social peace. Sauden & Chhetri (2023)
Omonjonova & Achilova (2024) elaborate on the definition of ADR and its practical aspects,
such as the differences between mediation and arbitration. ADR itself is still in its infancy in
some regions, but its advantages over litigation (lower costs and quicker resolution time) make it
an appealing alternative. An analysis of practice shows that alternative dispute resolution in the
Republic of Uzbekistan is only going through the initial stage of its development, especially
negotiation and mediation methods of conflict resolution. It should be noted that the
popularization of this phenomenon is facilitated by both the superior characteristics of
alternative methods of resolving civil disputes compared to the judicial method of protecting
violated rights and the strengthening of the regulatory framework, such as the adoption of the
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan of July 3, 2018, No.482 “On Mediation.”
Rizvi (2025) explores the impact of ADR on access to justice and clearing court dockets. A
comparative overview of large-scale research, case law, and comparative legal analysis helps
highlight the importance of ADR in navigating the limitations of traditional litigation. The study
delves into the advantages of ADR, including its flexibility, confidentiality, and
relationship-preserving capabilities, as well as criticisms pertaining to power imbalance,
enforceability, and procedural fairness. The research also examines the incorporation of ADR
within legal systems of different jurisdictions, emphasizing the significance of institutional
support, standardized procedures, and public awareness in enhancing effectiveness.
Widjaja (2024) supports the potential role of alternative dispute settlement in maintaining
relationships and resolving conflicts amicably. Negotiation and mediation enable communication
and prevent conflict escalation, offering advantages such as speedier processes, reduced costs,
and encouraging parties to be more active in finding mutually beneficial solutions. Furthermore,
ADR strategies help maintain relationships between disputing parties by fostering open
communication and cooperation, preventing future disputes, and promoting better relations.
However, alternative dispute settlement strategies may not be suitable for every situation. In
some cases, litigation may still be the better option, particularly when disputes involve complex
issues or one party refuses to participate in ADR efforts.
Jurgees, S. M. R., Suleman, S., & Shahid, A. (2024). Cultural and institutional barriers to
the adoption of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in Pakistan and developments in regulatory
practices on ADR. While issues remain of concern, initiatives are underway aimed at raising
awareness about ADR and cultural barrier. Outlook for future ADR in PakistanIndeed, legislative
changes and cultural acceptance of ADR are paving the way towards the increasingly
collaborative and efficient legal system. Cultural and institutional preferences in favor of more
traditional litigation can facilitate skepticism and resistance to adopting ADR approaches. More
familiar adversarial adversarial approaches are perceived as resistant to embracing more
collaborative and informal dispute resolution.
Pablo, J. 2024: Research gaps in ADR Specifically, research focusing on comparative
studies of dispute resolution across geographical regions; the need for theory (defined as a
theoretical explanation of why particular dispute resolution approaches may be more efficient
than others);and a lack of consideration of contextual factors that could contribute to the
effectiveness of mediation and arbitration. While both studies reported and incorporate relevant
factors such as collaborative communication and cultural sensitivity, further theoretical study is
needed to provide more evidence on the relationships among these factors and the
effectiveness of mediation and arbitration. 1 An additional gap identified in the research is the
lack of consideration for contextual factors that may contribute to the effectiveness of mediation
and arbitration. While both studies were useful in providing insights on the effectiveness of
mediation and arbitration in their respective contexts, there is a lack of comparative research
across geographical regions.
Sauden, A. et al (2023) assesses ADR effectiveness in legal disputes, ranking the most
frequently used methods and highlighting their practical implications. This research study used a
descriptive method in the assessment. Out of eight (8) projects, disputes related to four (4) were
settled by litigation based on ADR (Adjudication and Arbitration) decision, one was sent for the
reformation of arbitration by court/litigation and three (3) were awarded by ADR (Arbitration) but
remained pending in the settlement process by litigation till 14 May 2022. Negotiation (i.e.
amicable settlement) is the most applied ADR to resolve the disputes followed by Conciliation,
Mediation and Adjudication. Arbitration is used as the last stage of ADR due to its high legal
value in spite of the high time and cost. The study is significant for professionals to overcome
the identified causes effectively to create zero-dispute projects by handling the issues
in real time.
ADR Impact in Nigeria Usman I. Ahmed T. M. & Odobo S. O. (2025): ADR reduces litigation
backlog and lowers costs of dispute resolution. Furthermore it facilitates cooperative problem
solving. The study uses interest-based-relational approach (IBRA) to explore the effectiveness
of the ADR mechanism (mediation, arbitration, conciliation, and negotiation) in resolving
disputes in Nigeria by exploring the principles, processes, and outcomes of ADR. The paper
found that the ADR mechanism helped in reducing litigation backlog and associated costs,
facilitated collaborative problem-solving and preserving relationships or reputation among
others. ADR mechanisms provided enhanced flexibility and efficiency in dispute management,
significantly reducing the time and costs associated with traditional litigation.
Legal Basis and Practical Challenges of Alternative Dispute Resolution
The Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004, also known as Republic Act No. 9285,
was passed by the Philippine Congress. Its main objective is to support and encourage party
autonomy in resolving disputes, allowing individuals involved in a dispute to freely determine
their preferred method of resolution. The State recognizes the importance of using alternative
dispute resolution (ADR) to expedite and ensure fair justice while alleviating the burden on court
dockets. Therefore, the Act establishes mechanisms and procedures to facilitate the effective
utilization of ADR as an alternative means of resolving suitable cases.
The Katarungang Pambarangay (KP) system in the Philippines exemplifies the nation's
dedication to decentralized conflict resolution, with a focus on mediation and community
participation, Roxas, J. G., (2024). Under the law that mandates the KP (Presidential Decree
1508, signed on June 11, 1978, later integrated into the Local Government Code (RA 7160)),
amicable settlement of certain disputes is to be employed using traditional Filipino values (e.g.,
community harmony, hiya, utang na loob, amor propio, and palabra de honor) that governed
early dispute resolution systems in the country. The goal of this law is (1) to obtain a just,
speedy, and inexpensive settlement of disputes at the barangay level; (2) to preserve Filipino
culture and tradition concerning amicably settling disputes; and (3) to help unclog court dockets.
Adamos, P. I. (2023). The Katarungang Pambarangay (KP) is an alternative system of
justice that decongests court dockets and provides a means of accessing and satisfying dispute
settlement at a reasonable price. It has ratified the UN Sustainable Development Goals in terms
of access to justice. It is said that as a preliminary process in the filing of some cases in court,
this aims to decongest the court dockets and achieve a speedy and inexpensive administration
of justice. The accessibility of this venue for the amicable dispute settlement of the conflicts
existing in a locality is consistent with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals as it
endeavors to fully protect the universally accepted human rights, as well as promote the rule of
law. It has been established that access to justice is a basic principle in the rule of law.
Adian, N., & Asiri, M. (2024) investigate the governance structures of Barangay Daerah
(ADR) implementation processes at the barangay level. Findings indicates that competent
barangay leaders contribute to the effectiveness of ADR regardless of their demographic
factors. Good governance can be termed as a basket of practices including professional civil
service, anti-corruption policies, transparency and accountability, democratic decision making,
rule of law, protection of human rights and independent judiciary. According to the findings,
Punong Barangays in Hadji Panglima Tahil, Province of Sulu are competent in their respective
duties and functions. In no way has age, gender, average monthly income, or educational
attainment influenced their assessment of competencies.
In Agoot, F., & Cruz, S. F. D. (2024), they point out the relationship of Barangay Human
Rights Councils to dispute resolution. More specifically, their study found that these councils
work in harmony with some key government agencies wherein effective guidance and
implementation could be guaranteed. The findings also indicate the interrelation of the Barangay
Human Rights Council with other stakeholders of the community, namely, the Department of
Social and Welfare Development, Department of Interior and Local Government, and
Commission on Human Rights, in order to guide the implementation for the barangay to function
effectively and efficiently. The findings further suggest the importance of the councils upholding
the rights of the community.
Añana, E. L. A., Javier, J. J. M. & Sarno, J. M. D. (2024) A descriptive and narrative study
of public awareness on the Barangay Justice System and it’s relation to the knowledge of legal
procedure in conflict management skills. The findings indicate that legal procedure knowledge
and the effectiveness of the members of the Lupong Tagapamayapa in solving disputes were
the significant predictors in the study. According to the results of this study, awareness of the
barangay justice system is high with the highest mean score on conciliation efforts to reconcile
parties (4. 63), and issuance of certificate to file action (5. 27), obtaining the lowest combined
mean score of $4. 51. Concerning conflict management skills, compromising got the highest
mean score (4. 64), while avoiding getting the lowest (3. 83) and a cumulative total of 4. 35.
Probable relationship of awareness on barangay justice system and conflict management
skills[10] The R2 tells us that 35. 5% of the data considered fit into the regression model and the
correlation between the two variables was 0. 650, meaning that there is a high correlation. Of
the four predictive factors, the proper application of the legal procedures is found to be
significant which is less than the threshold of 0. 05 (level of significance), This is in line with the
finding that proper application of the legal procedures have a significant impact on conflict
management skills of the Lupong Tagapamayapa.
However, despite the establishment of barangay dispute resolution in the Philippines,
several hurdles remain in its implementation. One important issue is a lack of information and
comprehension among barangay officials and community members regarding the KP process
and their rights under it. Hence, the system is underutilized, and many choose to use more
formal legal channels instead (Acabo, J. G., Acbay, J. J., Acbay, J. J., & Caila, J. M., 2021).
Glubwila, S., Khruakham, S., & Boonpadung, P. (2021) identify challenges in Philippine
community justice, including outdated mediation laws, lack of mediator training, and a high
volume of disputes that delay resolution. The result of this study revealed problems and
obstacles in the implementation of community justice practices in the Philippines include lack of
training in mediation and laws related to the dispute; a lengthy period of 30 days is required for
a dispute resolution process due to large numbers of disputes brought to the system; and an
outdated community mediation law since its enactment in 1991.
Roy, W. J. P. & Yabut, J. J. (2024) identify the most common disputes among the Filipino
people, such as domestic violence and land disputes. The lack of community cooperation and
involvement in ADR are also highlighted as challenges, both in terms of building trust and in
terms of inculcating stakeholder engagement. The inability of community cooperation in the
process of conflict resolution is a major challenge and plays out across the full social spectrum
of local governance, where effective resolution requires an extensive process involving many
facets of efforts: trust building; learning about Filipino culture; emphasis on Filipino beliefs;
capacity building by officials; and facilitation of community participation.
Verdad, J. (2024) studies the experiences of the Lupon chiefs and finds that although they
are satisfied with the outcome of conflict resolution, they face obstacles such as legal
limitations, lack of cooperation from the disputing parties and recommend training programmes
and institutional support to enhance the effectiveness of these interventions. But Lupon chiefs
also face challenges such as unresolved conflicts, legal constraints and lack of cooperation from
disputing parties. To overcome these barriers they apply strategies such as re-evaluating
conflicts, seeking legal advice and using personal and psychological approaches. In addition,
their aspirations for improving the justice system includes a focus on continuous learning,
maintaining integrity and advocating for better compensation and incentives, reflecting their
dedication to enhancing both personal and institutional capacities. Consistent with emergent
themes identified, it is recommended that the Katarungang Pambarangay system be rendered
more effective, equitable and efficient by implementing the appropriate training and
development programs for its Lupon chiefs and members.
Noveloso, J. P. N., Nebrida, A. P., Badua, R. B., Calica, C. C. R. M., Diza, P. B. A. D.,
Ragonton, V. N., & Chatoy, T. A. (2024) examine the KP system in Bacnotan, La Union, finding
that it effectively promotes law and order but requires continuous improvement and adaptation
to local conditions. This is best evidenced by high implementation levels, performance in
general, compliance with the requirements, awareness of and concern about the results, and
good efficiency. The system is operating well in general, but needs continual improvement and
needs to be adapted to the local situations in order to maintain good operation. The KP system
should continue to be a critical part of the local justice system and improve the community
well-being by addressing the issues identified and increasing the benefits it offers.
Alternative dispute resolution methods
Arbitration is a widely used alternative dispute resolution (ADR) method where a neutral
third party, known as an arbitrator, renders a binding decision after hearing arguments and
evidence from both parties. The enforceability of arbitral awards is recognized under various
legal frameworks, such as the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of
Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958). According to Born, G. B. (2021), arbitration is particularly
effective in commercial disputes, providing a private, efficient, and enforceable resolution
compared to traditional litigation. In the Philippines, Republic Act No. 9285 institutionalizes
arbitration as a means to resolve disputes efficiently, reducing the burden on the judicial system.
Mediation is a voluntary and collaborative process in which a neutral mediator facilitates
communication between disputing parties to help them reach a mutually acceptable resolution.
Unlike arbitration, mediation does not involve a binding decision by a third party. The United
Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Mediation (2018)
provides an international legal framework for mediation. Studies, such as Menkel-Meadow, C.
(2024), highlight the benefits of mediation in preserving relationships, especially in family and
community disputes. The Philippine Katarungang Pambarangay system integrates mediation,
requiring disputing parties to undergo conciliation before escalating matters to formal courts (RA
7160).
Conciliation is an ADR process similar to mediation but involves a more active role for the
neutral third party, who suggests potential solutions to the dispute. The United Nations
Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (2019), also
known as the Singapore Convention, emphasizes the growing global reliance on conciliation.
According to Rizvi (2025),conciliation is highly effective in labor and commercial disputes where
maintaining business relationships is crucial. In the Philippines, the Department of Labor and
Employment (DOLE) actively promotes conciliation through the National Conciliation and
Mediation Board (NCMB) to resolve labor disputes before they escalate into strikes or lockouts.
Amicable settlement is a broad ADR mechanism that encompasses negotiation, mediation,
and conciliation, often used at the community level to prevent disputes from reaching courts.
The Katarungang Pambarangay system in the Philippines mandates amicable settlement for
minor disputes at the barangay level, emphasizing traditional Filipino values such as community
harmony and respect (RA 7160). Research by Widjaja (2024) supports the effectiveness of
amicable settlements in reducing court backlogs and promoting social cohesion. However,
challenges such as a lack of awareness and proper training among barangay officials hinder its
full implementation (Acabo et al., 2021).
Studies have shown that ADR mechanisms contribute to faster conflict resolution, lower
litigation costs, and improved relationships between disputing parties. In particular,
barangay-level mediation and conciliation processes under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law
serve as primary tools for local dispute settlement. These mechanisms empower barangay
officials to act as mediators, encouraging parties to reach amicable settlements without
escalating to formal court proceedings.
Research on ADR effectiveness in local settings suggests that its success depends on
multiple factors, including the competency of barangay mediators, community awareness and
participation, and the level of compliance with ADR agreements. Additionally, findings indicate
that while ADR provides a more accessible and cost-effective means of resolving disputes,
challenges such as lack of public trust, limited knowledge of ADR processes, and inconsistent
enforcement of agreements hinder its full potential.
REFERENCE
Widjaja, G. (2024). Managing Legal Disputes through Alternative Disputes Resolution. Journal
of Ecohumanism, 3(3), 451-460.
Pablo, J. (2024). Effectiveness of Mediation and Arbitration as Alternative Dispute Resolution
Methods in Mexico. Journal of Conflict Management, 4(1), 38-50.
Rizvi, N. A. Bridging the Justice Gap: The Efficacy of ADR in Modern Legal Systems.
Sauden, A., & Chhetri, S. (2023). An Assessment of the Effectiveness of Alternative Dispute
Resolution Methods. Journal of Productive Discourse, 1(1), 53-64.
Jurgees, S. M. R., Suleman, S., & Shahid, A. (2024). The Role of Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR) in Pakistan's Legal System. Qlantic Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(1),
194-202.
OMONJONOVA, K., & ACHILOVA, L. (2024). The effectiveness of alternative methods of
commercial dispute resolution: a comparative analysis of arbitration and mediation.
Usman, I., Ahmed, T. M., & Odobo, S. O. (2025). Achieving Effective Conflict Resolution through
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms in Nigeria. Journal of Guidance and
Counselling Studies, 9(1), 1-15.
Born, G. B. (2021). International Arbitration: Law and Practice. Kluwer Law International BV.
Menkel-Meadow, C. (2024). Dispute Resolution as Civil Justice: The Evolution of Process
Pluralism. UC Irvine School of Law Research Paper, (2024-20).
Roxas, J. G. Performance and Challenges in the Implementation of Alternative Dispute
Resolution in the Barangay Level: Exploring New Strategies.
Adamos, P. I. (2023). Certificate Course in Katarungang Pambarangay Administration and
Alternative Dispute Resolution Program: Opportunities and Challenges. UNIVERSITAS-The
Official Journal of University of Makati, 11(1).
Adian, N., & Asiri, M. (2024). An assessment on the competencies in local governance among
the punong barangays in the Municipality of Hadji Panglima Tahil, Province of Sulu. Social
Psychology and Human Experience, 1(1), 1-18.
Agoot, F., & Cruz, S. F. D. (2024). Capacity Building of the Barangay Human Rights Council
Towards an Empowered Decision-Making Process. CGCI International Journal of
Administration, Management, Education and Technology, 1(3), 158-183.
Añana, E. L. A., Javier, J. J. M., & Sarno, J. M. D. (2024). AWARENESS ON OF THE
BARANGAY JUSTICE SYSTEM AND ITS RELATIVITY CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SKILLS OF
LUPONG TAGAPAMAYAPA IN STA. MARIA, DAVAO OCCIDENTAL, PHILIPPINES.
International Journal of Legal Studies (IJOLS), 17(1), 113-148.
ACABO, J. G., Acbay, J. J., Acbay, J. J., & Caila, J. M. (2021). Dispute Resolution and its
Effectiveness in the Municipality of Buenavista. SMCC Higher Education Research Journal
(Criminal Justice), 4(1), 1-1.
Glubwila, S., Khruakham, S., & Boonpadung, P. (2021). Community justice as a conflict
management mechanism in Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Myanmar. Kasetsart
Journal Of Social Sciences, 42(3), 688-693
Roy, W. J. P., & Yabut, J. J. A. Exploring violence and peace communication in barangay
governance: A case study of Barangay Nagbunga in Zambales, Philippines.
Verdad, J. (2024). Mediating Disputes in the Barangays: The Work World of Lupon Chiefs.
International Journal of Law and Politics Studies, 6(5), 205-225
Noveloso, J. P. N., Nebrida, A. P., Badua, R. B., Calica, C. C. R. M., Diza, P. B. A. D., Ragonton,
V. N., & Chatoy, T. A. (2024). Harmonizing community justice: Evaluating the effectiveness of
Katarungang Pambarangay in Bacnotan, La Union. International Research Journal of Science,
Technology, Education, & Management (IRJSTEM), 4(2).
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/justice-delayed-denied-hurried-buried-reformation-system-jahan-
ara
https://uncitral.un.org/en/texts/mediation
https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1991/ra_7160_1991.html
https://www.singaporeconvention.org/
https://dole.gov.ph/news/from-january-to-august-dole-awards-p49-893-million-to-5326-workers-t
hrough-alternative-dispute-resolution-mechanism/
https://www.philstar.com/the-freeman/cebu-news/2023/11/11/2310569/lupon-saves-government-
millions-adjudication-cost-dilg
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/26/53492
https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2004/ra_9285_2004.html
