By Hon. Prof. Kariuki Muigua, OGW, PhD, C.Arb, FCIArb is a Professor of Environmental Law and Dispute Resolution at the University of Nairobi, Member of Permanent Court of Arbitration, Leading Environmental Law Scholar, Respected Sustainable Development Policy Advisor, Top Natural Resources Lawyer, Highly-Regarded Dispute Resolution Expert and Awardee of the Order of Grand Warrior (OGW) of Kenya by H.E. the President of Republic of Kenya. He is the Academic Champion of ADR 2024, the African ADR Practitioner of the Year 2022, the African Arbitrator of the Year 2022, ADR Practitioner of the Year in Kenya 2021, CIArb (Kenya) Lifetime Achievement Award 2021 and ADR Publisher of the Year 2021 and Author of the Kenya’s First ESG Book: Embracing Environmental Social and Governance (ESG) tenets for Sustainable Development” (Glenwood, Nairobi, July 2023) and Kenya’s First Two Climate Change Law Book: Combating Climate Change for Sustainability (Glenwood, Nairobi, October 2023), Achieving Climate Justice for Development (Glenwood, Nairobi, October 2023) and Promoting Rule of Law for Sustainable Development (Glenwood, Nairobi, January 2024)*
Despite their inherent advantages, ADR mechanisms face certain challenges that could potentially hinder their suitability in managing governance conflicts. One of the cardinal principles of ADR is party autonomy. However, in the case of an organization, it may not be possible to get a common position due to the different players at stake. Most organizations have formal procedures for identifying the persons who are authorized to speak for them but such procedures are imperfect and merely designed to facilitate transactions between the organization and outsiders, rather than to insure that the members of the organization in fact agree with a particular decision.
Consequently, the management of a corporation may settle a suit through ADR mechanisms to prevent embarrassing disclosures about its managerial policies when such disclosures might well be in the interest of the shareholders of the organization. Unlike litigation, there is a lack of foundation for continuing judicial involvement in most of the ADR mechanisms such as mediation. In litigation, judgment does not bring an end to a lawsuit and many other processes may follow. Parties may seek several remedies from the court which issued the judgment such as rectification of an order and review.
A dissatisfied party can also appeal to a higher court to challenge a lower court’s decision. These remedies are not available in some of the ADR mechanisms where the principle of finality is emphasized. Where parties have recorded a consent decree as in the case of mediation, there no basis through which a party can seek to modify or vary the decree. ADR Mechanisms also impede vigorous enforcement measures. In litigation, measures such as contempt powers and execution of decrees and orders are available in enforcing decisions. However, decisions in ADR mechanisms such as negotiation and mediation are non-binding and their enforcement depends on the goodwill of the parties. This could be problematic for an organization especially in dealing with outside parties such as debtors who may refuse to comply with negotiated or mediated agreements. The organization may thus be forced to seek the judicial process due to its ability to guarantee enforcement of decisions.
Recommendations for Overcoming Shortcomings of ADR in Governance Conflicts
Conflict Avoidance
The best conflict management strategy is conflict avoidance. It has been argued that in conflict management, individuals prefer avoidance to confrontation even at the risk of a financial loss, in the belief that confrontation might disrupt interpersonal harmony between the parties involved.66 Organizations can endeavour towards conflict avoidance through simple techniques involving their day to day operations such as facilitating harmonious working relationships, Corporate Social Responsibility and adhering to principles of good corporate governance.
Adopting an Effective Conflict Management Strategy
The aim of conflict management is to help parties possessing incompatible goals to find some solution to their conflict. To achieve this aim, it is necessary to identify the source of the conflict, the participants and the most appropriate conflict management mechanism for the particular situation. It has been argued that there are three sources of organizational conflict; structural conflict arising out of the need to manage the inter-dependence between different organizational sub-units); role conflict arising from sets of prescribed behaviour and resources conflict stemming from interest groups competing for the resources of an organization.
Understanding the source of a conflict within an organization improves the probability of effective conflict management. An organization should thus adopt an effective conflict management strategy that is able to detect the source of the conflict and recommend a suitable mechanism in handling such conflict. In large organizations, it is possible to find a committee or group tasked with conflict management. For small organizations, it is important to ensure availability of an individual skilled in conflict management. Organizations can also facilitate conflict management training skills such as negotiation and mediation to the management and board members.
Incorporating the use of ADR in an Organization’s Policy Framework
The foregoing discussion has demonstrated that ADR mechanisms especially mediation and negotiation are effective in managing governance conflicts. Organizations should encourage their use by incorporating them in their policy framework. Further when entering into contracts with third parties such as creditors, clients and suppliers, it should be ensured that such contracts contain dispute resolution clauses which clearly stipulate the mechanism of conflict management. This prevents the uncertainties that might ensue in case a conflict arises and the possibility of such a conflict ending up in court due to absence of an ADR clause.
Conclusion
Governance conflicts are inevitable. However, what sets a good organization apart is the ability to manage governance conflicts in an effective, efficient and expeditious manner without prejudicing its core business. ADR mechanisms especially mediation and negotiation offer a channel through which this goal can be attained. Managing governance conflicts through ADR is an ideal that can be achieved to promote sound corporate governance.
This is an extract from Kenya’s First ESG Law Book: Embracing Environmental Social and Governance (ESG) tenets for Sustainable Development” (Glenwood, Nairobi, July 2023) by Hon. Prof. Kariuki Muigua, OGW, PhD, Professor of Environmental Law and Dispute Resolution, Senior Advocate of Kenya, Chartered Arbitrator, Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021 (Nairobi Legal Awards), ADR Lifetime Achievement Award 2021 (CIArb Kenya), African Arbitrator of the Year 2022, Africa ADR Practitioner of the Year 2022, Member of National Environment Tribunal (NET) Emeritus (2017 to 2023) and Member of Permanent Court of Arbitration nominated by Republic of Kenya and Academic Champion of ADR 2024. Prof. Kariuki Muigua is a foremost Environmental Law and Natural Resources Lawyer and Scholar, Sustainable Development Advocate and Conflict Management Expert in Kenya. Prof. Kariuki Muigua teaches Environmental Law and Dispute resolution at the University of Nairobi School of Law, The Center for Advanced Studies in Environmental Law and Policy (CASELAP) and Wangari Maathai Institute for Peace and Environmental Studies. He has published numerous books and articles on Environmental Law, Environmental Justice Conflict Management, Alternative Dispute Resolution and Sustainable Development. Prof. Muigua is also a Chartered Arbitrator, an Accredited Mediator, the Managing Partner of Kariuki Muigua & Co. Advocates and Africa Trustee Emeritus of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators 2019-2022. Prof. Muigua is a 2023 recipient of President of the Republic of Kenya Order of Grand Warrior (OGW) Award for his service to the Nation as a Distinguished Expert, Academic and Scholar in Dispute Resolution and recognized among the top 5 leading lawyers and dispute resolution experts in Band 1 in Kenya by the Chambers Global Guide 2024 and was listed in the Inaugural THE LAWYER AFRICA Litigation Hall of Fame 2023 as one of the Top 50 Most Distinguished Litigation Lawyers in Kenya and the Top Arbitrator in Kenya in 2023.
References
Brock, W.A. and Taylor, M.S., “Economic growth and the environment: a review of theory and empirics.” Handbook of economic growth 1 (2005): 1749-1821.
Cameron, A., Metternicht, G. and Wiedmann, T., “Initial progress in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): a review of evidence from countries.” Sustainability Science 13, no. 5 (2018): 1453-1467, 1453.
Clune WH and Zehnder AJB, ‘The Three Pillars of Sustainability Framework: Approaches for Laws and Governance’ (2018) 9 Journal of Environmental Protection 211.
Clune WH and Zehnder AJB, ‘The Three Pillars of Sustainability Framework: Approaches for Laws and Governance’ (2018) 9 Journal of Environmental Protection 211.
Dernbach, J.C. and Mintz, J.A., “Environmental laws and sustainability: An introduction.” Sustainability 3, no. 3 (2011): 531-540, 531.
Dernbach, J.C. and Mintz, J.A., “Environmental laws and sustainability: An introduction.” Sustainability 3, no. 3 (2011): 531-540, 532.
Dernbach, J.C. and Mintz, J.A., “Environmental laws and sustainability: an introduction. Sustainability, 3 (3), 531-540.” (2011), 532.
Environment UN, ‘Promoting Environmental Rule of Law’ (UNEP – UN Environment Programme, 5 October 2017).
Environment UN, ‘Sustainable Development Goals’ (UNEP – UN Environment Programme, 19 October 2017).
Fallah Shayan, N., Mohabbati-Kalejahi, N., Alavi, S. and Zahed, M.A., ‘Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)’ (2022) 14 Sustainability 1222, 8 accessed 13 July 2022.
Fallah Shayan, N., Mohabbati-Kalejahi, N., Alavi, S. and Zahed, M.A., ‘Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)’ (2022) 14 Sustainability 1222, 14.
Hickel, J., “The contradiction of the sustainable development goals: Growth versus ecology on a finite planet.” Sustainable Development 27, no. 5 (2019): 873-884, at 874 & 875.
Higgs, Kerryn. “How sustainable are the SDGs?” (2020): 109-130, 109 < https://anzsee.org.au/wpcontent/uploads/2020/07/EESolutionsFutureRoyalDraftJuly2ndFIN ALEbook.pdf#page=109> accessed 13 July 2022.
Joachim H Spangenberg, ‘Economic Sustainability of the Economy: Concepts and Indicators’ (2005) 8 International Journal of Sustainable Development 47.
Julie L Drolet, ‘Chapter 14 – Societal Adaptation to Climate Change’ in Trevor M Letcher (ed), The Impacts of Climate Change (Elsevier 2021) accessed 14 July 2022.
Ketschau, T.J., “Social sustainable development or sustainable social developmenttwo sides of the same coin? the structure of social justice as a normative basis for the social dimension of sustainability.” International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics 12, no. 3 (2017): 338-347, 338.
Kramer, J.M. and Johnson, C.D., “Sustainable Development and Social Development: Necessary Partners for the Future.” Sustainable Development (1996), 79.
Kramer, J.M. and Johnson, C.D., “Sustainable Development and Social Development: Necessary Partners for the Future.” Sustainable Development (1996), 79.
Martens, Jens. “Redefining policies for sustainable development.” Exploring (2018): 11, 20.
Michel J, The Rule of Law and Sustainable Development. Center for Strategic & International Studies, 2020, 5.
National Environment Management Authority, Kenya State of Environment Report 2019-2021 1849/Kenya%20State%20of%20Environment%20Report%202019-2021%20final-min.pdf accessed 17 July 2022.
OECD, OECD Business and Finance Outlook 2020: Sustainable and Resilient Finance (OECD 2020).
Panayotou, T., “Economic Growth and the Environment.” CID Working Paper Series (2000), 1.
Roy, P.P., Rao, S., Marshall, A.P. and Thapa, C., ‘Mandatory Corporate Social Responsibility and Foreign Institutional Investor Preferences’ (2020).
SDG 8, UN General Assembly, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, 21 October 2015, A/RES/70/1.
Szetey, K., Moallemi, E.A., Ashton, E., Butcher, M., Sprunt, B. and Bryan, B.A., ‘CoCreating Local Socioeconomic Pathways for Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals’ (2021) 16 Sustainability Science 1251, 1251 accessed 13 July 2022.
Szetey, K., Moallemi, E.A., Ashton, E., Butcher, M., Sprunt, B. and Bryan, B.A., ‘Co-Creating Local Socioeconomic Pathways for Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals’ (2021) 16 Sustainability Science 1251.
UN General Assembly, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, 21 October 2015, A/RES/70/1.
Urama, Kevin, Nicholas Ozor, and Ernest Acheampong, “Achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Through Transformative Governance Practices and Vertical Alignment at the National and Subnational Levels in Africa,” SDplanNet Africa Regional Workshop, March 3–5, 2014.
Urama, Kevin, Nicholas Ozor, and Ernest Acheampong, “Achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Through Transformative Governance Practices and Vertical Alignment at the National and Subnational Levels in Africa,” SDplanNet Africa Regional Workshop, March 3–5, 2014, 2.
Urama, Kevin, Nicholas Ozor, and Ernest Acheampong, “Achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Through Transformative Governance Practices and Vertical Alignment at the National and Subnational Levels in Africa,” SDplanNet Africa Regional Workshop, March 3–5, 2014, 3 < https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/sdplannet_africa.pdf> Accessed on 25 June 2022.
Vatn, Arild, Environmental governance: institutions, policies and actions, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2015, p. 133.