Abstract:Purpose This study aims to explore the factors whereby some international organizations (IOs) are more effective than others in international mediation and proposes three types of hypotheses through combining quantitative and qualitative analysis. First, IOs with greater institutional capabilities for gathering, exchanging and disseminating conflict-related information are more likely to mediate effectively. IO bias is another factor of influence in this regard. Second, IOs with greater institutional capabilities for deploying field missions and guaranteeing agreement are more likely to mediate effectively and maintain durable peace. Third, IOs with higher amounts of leverage are more likely to mediate effectively. Design/methodology/approach The study establishes two data sets: one on interstate conflict; the other on intrastate conflict, thus to cover as many research samples as possible and avoid sampling bias. Findings Results of the statistical analysis indicate that no matter interstate or intrastate conflict, IOs with higher institutional capabilities for diplomatic interventions are more likely to bring conflict parties to an agreement and thereafter maintain short-term peace. IOs with higher institutional capabilities for economic sanctions are similarly effective. Furthermore, IOs with greater institutional capabilities for field mission deployment mediate more effectively, whether in facilitating peace agreements or maintaining short-term and long-term peace after the agreement. IO bias and preference, however, have no significant impact on mediation effectiveness. Research limitations/implications This study has made no in-depth explorations of such existing and important research areas as different third-party comparisons of the mediation effect. Practical implications This paper attempts to make some contributions to the topic of mediation effectiveness through applying a bargaining model to the research and performing a statistical analysis based on both an interstate conflict data set and an intrastate conflict data set. Originality/value This paper provides an in-depth causal analysis and thoroughgoing comparison of the effectiveness of IOs in both interstate conflicts and intrastate conflicts.

Cultural Similarity and Mediation Offers in Interstate Conflicts, 1945–1995

The Hypothesis of Cultural Differences in Sino-Us Relation with International Political Conflicts

Mediating International Conflicts: Is Image Change Necessary?

The Effectiveness in International Mediation of International Organizations

A Comparison of the Effectiveness of International Conflict Mediation Strategies

Cultural Diversity and Conflict Resolution: Best Practices in Multicultural Societies

CORRELATION BETWEEN CULTURAL DIMENSIONS AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON CONFLICT STYLE PREFERENCES

The History of Regulating Mediation

Combining Mediation and Arbitration in International Commercial Dispute Resolution

Mediation, Military, and Money: The Promises and Pitfalls of Outside Interventions to End Armed Conflicts

Between indifference and coercion: Third-party intervention techniques in ongoing disputes

When context trumps culture: Persuasion in international business disputes

The impact of cultural diversity and intercultural competence on conflict management styles in Egypt

Not All Blarney Is Cast in Stone: International Cultural Conflict in Northern Ireland

Similarity-attraction across ethnic, religious, and political groups: does celebrating differences or similarities make a difference?

Pragmatic Strategies in Interpersonal Conflict Resolution: A Cross-Cultural Analysis

Multiplex communities and the emergence of international conflict

Mediation and indigenous conflict resolution practices: Lessons from global indigenous communities

Similarity enhances psychological compatibility: Serial mediation effect of psychological kinship and intergroup contact

Cooperation in multicultural negotiations: How the cultures of people with low and high power interact.

Diversity and Conflict