AI-Driven Dispute Resolution As A Sustainable Institutional Innovation In India’s Construction Entrepreneurship Ecosystem
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69980/1psb9k04Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Construction Disputes, Institutional Innovation, Construction EntrepreneurshipAbstract
This study examines the role of artificial intelligence (AI)–driven alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms as an institutional innovation within India’s construction entrepreneurship ecosystem. The research investigates whether AI-enhanced negotiation systems improve dispute resolution efficiency, settlement outcomes, and stakeholder perceptions in construction dispute management. A mixed-methods research design was employed, combining quantitative survey analysis with qualitative semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were collected from 247 professionals, including construction practitioners, legal experts, and ADR specialists across five major construction markets in India. Statistical techniques such as descriptive analysis, reliability testing, factor analysis, analysis of variance, and regression analysis were used to evaluate dispute resolution performance and stakeholder perceptions associated with AI usage. Additionally, 32 in-depth interviews were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis to capture stakeholder perspectives and institutional dynamics related to AI adoption. The findings indicate that AI-enhanced ADR significantly improves dispute resolution outcomes. Resolution time decreased by 28.3%, while settlement rates increased by 16.3% compared with traditional negotiation methods. Perceptual indicators also improved substantially, with stakeholder satisfaction, cost efficiency, and process transparency increasing by more than 30%. Regression analysis further confirmed that AI usage is a strong predictor of dispute resolution efficiency. However, respondents identified algorithmic bias, data privacy concerns, and regulatory uncertainty as important barriers to large-scale adoption. Overall, the study demonstrates that AI-driven ADR represents a promising institutional innovation capable of strengthening dispute governance, improving operational efficiency, and supporting entrepreneurial resilience within the construction sector.
References
1.Alaloul, W. S., Liew, M. S., Zawawi, N. A. W. A., & Mohammed, B. S. (2018). Industry revolution IR 4.0: Future opportunities and challenges in construction industry. In MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 203, p. 02010). EDP Sciences.
2.Arcadis. (2022). Global construction disputes report 2022: A foundation for change. Arcadis NV.
3.Aydoğan, R., Baarslag, T., Fujita, K., Mell, J., Gratch, J., De Jonge, D., ... & Jonker, C. M. (2020, April). Challenges and main results of the automated negotiating agents competition (ANAC) 2019. In European Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (pp. 366–381). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
4.Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
5.Brilakis, I., Girolami, M., & Sacks, R. (2020). Building Information Modelling, Artificial Intelligence and Construction Tech.
6.Broyde, M. J., & Mei, Y. (2024). Don't Kill the Baby! The Case for AI in Arbitration. NYUJL & Bus., 21, 119.
7.Cheung, S. O., & Pang, K. H. Y. (2013). Anatomy of construction disputes. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(1), 15–23.
8.Coglianese, C., & Dor, L. M. B. (2020). AI in Adjudication and Administration. Brook. L. Rev., 86, 791.
9.Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
10.De'Shazer, M. (2024). Advancing legal reasoning: The integration of AI to navigate complexities and biases in global jurisprudence with semi-automated arbitration processes (SAAPs). arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.04140.
11.Ermakova, E. P., & Frolova, E. E. (2021). Using artificial intelligence in dispute resolution. In Smart technologies for the digitisation of industry: Entrepreneurial environment (pp. 131–142). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
12.Evans, D. L., Guillon, S., Losey, R., Washington, V., & Yancey, L. G. (2024). Dispute resolution enhanced: How arbitrators and mediators can Harness generative AI. Dispute Resolution Journal, 78(1).
13.Francis, M., Perera, S., Zhou, W., & Nanayakkara, S. (2025). Artificial intelligence applications for proactive dispute management in the construction industry: A systematic literature review. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 30, 711–730.
14.Katz, D. M., Bommarito II, M. J., & Blackman, J. (2017). A general approach for predicting the behavior of the Supreme Court of the United States. PloS one, 12(4), e0174698.
15.Lewis, M., Yarats, D., Dauphin, Y., Parikh, D., & Batra, D. (2017, September). Deal or no deal? End-to-end learning of negotiation dialogues. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 2443–2453).
16.Lodder, A. R., & Zeleznikow, J. (2012). Artificial intelligence and online dispute resolution. In Online Dispute Resolution: Theory and Practice A Treatise on Technology and Dispute Resolution (pp. 73–94).
17.Mahfouz, T., & Kandil, A. (2012). Litigation outcome prediction of differing site condition disputes through machine learning models. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 26(3), 298–308.
18.Nash, J. F. (1950). The bargaining problem. Econometrica, 18(2), 155–162.
19.Olugboyega, O., Alfred, C., Ajao, F. A., & Adenji, T. E. (2024). Potentials of an artificial intelligence-based dispute resolution system as an alternative dispute resolution method for construction disputes. In International Conference on Infrastructure and Sustainable Development (pp. 12–14).
20.Putera, N. S. F. M. S., Saripan, H., Abu, R., & Hassan, S. M. A. (2021). Artificial intelligence for construction dispute resolution: Justice of the future. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Social Sci, 11(11), 139–151.
21.Raiffa, H. (1985). The art and science of negotiation. Harvard University Press.
22.Stipanowich, T. J., & Lamare, J. R. (2014). Living with ADR: Evolving perceptions and use of mediation, arbitration, and conflict management in fortune 1000 corporations. Harv. Negot. L. Rev., 19, 1.
23.Susskind, R., & Susskind, D. (2017). The future of the professions: How technology will transform the work of human experts. Journal of Nursing Regulation, 8(2), 52.
24.Tijdeman, M. (2024). Predicting the outcome of Automated Negotiations using Machine Learning (Master's thesis).
25.Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.
26.Zeleznikow, J. (2016). Can artificial intelligence and online dispute resolution enhance efficiency and effectiveness in courts. In IJCA (Vol. 8, p. 30).
27.Zhao, Y., & Chen, H. (2024). Enhancing access to digital justice: Digital governance of dispute resolution and dispute prevention in online commercial activities. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 15(2), 273–304.
