International Journal of Law in the Built Environment

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the codes of professional conduct observed by construction mediators in England and Wales with the aim of assessing whether they raise awareness about party self-determination and inform users about variations in mediator approaches.

Design/methodology/approach – The research collated a list of construction mediation providers drawn from members of the Civil Mediation Council, professional bodies working in construction and other leading providers. A search was then made of mediation providers' web sites to find published codes of conduct.

Findings – A substantial number of providers do not emphasize party self-determination or the steps taken to inform users about mediator approaches in their online codes. Some organisations provide online access to “Mediation Agreements” which determine how the process and mediator approach is selected but generally codes do not place a specific duty on mediators to ensure parties enter mediation with informed consent about their approach.

Research limitations/implications – Online searches may not have found specific mediator codes if organisations publish overarching professional codes of practice for members, if the documents labels do not identify them as a mediator code, or if web sites are not searchable. Further research should investigate how codes of conduct affect construction mediators' practice.

Practical implications – Codes of conduct from countries and international organisations provide exemplars of good practice. Mediation providers in England and Wales should consider revising mediator codes to give weight to the principle of party self-determination and to articulate a duty that mediators inform users about their approach to ensure they obtain informed consent.

Originality/value – This is an original analysis of construction codes of conduct observed by mediators in England and Wales. A comparative analysis of codes from international sources contributes to the current debate on regulation and future policy developments.