ABSTRACT
Perspectives on the study of mediation For many years the study of mediation has suffered from conceptual imprecision and a startling lack of information. Practitioners of mediation, whether in the domestic or the international arena, have been keen to sustain its image as a mysterious practice, akin to some art form, taking place behind closed doors and totally inaccessible to any observer. Scholars of mediation, on the other hand, have not been too averse to thinking of their field of research as comprising idiosyncratic elements of ‘art’ and have not believed that the study of mediation was susceptible to a systematic analysis. In short, neither group believed that it could discern any patterns of behaviour in mediation’s various forms, or that any generalizations could be made about the practice in general. The prevalent agnosticism towards analysis and the desire to maintain the intuitive mystique of mediation are best exemplified in the comments of two noted American practitioners. Arthur Meyer, commenting on the role of mediators, notes that
the task of the mediator is not an easy one. The sea that he sails is only roughly charted, and its changing contours are not clearly discernible. He has no science of navigation, no fund inherited from the experience of others. He is a solitary artist recognizing at most a few guiding stars, and depending on his personal powers of divination.
