In furtherance of its vision, DRD makes information available to enable researchers and users of arbitration and mediation to see the non-confidential “inside” of how they each function separately and in concert today.

In doing so, the data reports show timeframes, settlement trends, average awards, counterclaim experience, gender participation of arbitrators and mediators, mediation success rates by case types, and a host of other valuable data from regular submissions by institutions worldwide.

While these data are essential to create norms for arbitral institutions worldwide, there are less traditional data that may also be useful for institutions in the near future. DRD is collecting, or will begin collecting, such data, which has heretofore been nonexistent. A short list of such information includes: cases in which a party has utilized electronic discovery; instances where arbitrators have considered 3rd party intervention; the extent to which parties have requested document production; and the scenario which is rare today except in hybrid cases, with elements of both commercial and treaty cases, where an individual or an organization has sought permission to file an amicus curiae brief. DRD also receives information regarding a range of motion practices including whether a party filed a motion for summary judgment, and if so, whether the submission was successful. This is only a partial list of inquiries, but represents a wide array of useful yet currently nonexistent data for the field of dispute resolution.

Undoubtedly, over time, DRD will field new and enlightening questions from those who study and use international commercial arbitration and mediation. These questions, which will be important to the field’s continued growth and success, will drive DRD’s data collection in the future. If you have such a question, please let us hear from you: [email protected]