In this series of articles titled "Drafting an Arbitration Agreement in 2022," I explore the current events and social trends that practitioners should consider when drafting dispute resolution agreements. I covered the issue initially from my perspective, and then from the perspective of the drafters and the litigators.

In this fourth and final article of the series, I have sought contributions from four independent arbitrators, the professionals who ultimately are called upon to decide on disputes relating to arbitration agreements: Elisabeth Eljuri, an arbitrator focusing on cross-border energy, infrastructure and M&A disputes, and a former arbitration and transactional partner; Mike Lampert, a commercial arbitrator and mediator, and a former deputy general counsel of a financial institution; Jack Levin, a commercial arbitrator and mediator, and a former litigation partner; and Rebekah Ratliff, a JAMS arbitrator, mediator and neutral analyst focusing on commercial complex insurance and employment matters, and a former insurance professional.

As the reader may recall, in my first article, I suggested exploring the following five items for inclusion in dispute resolution agreements: an alternative arbitration center the parties may turn to in case their initial choice is no longer an option due to unforeseen events; whether hearings should (or may) be held remotely or in-person; cybersecurity measures to follow during proceedings; a description of equity, diversity and inclusion considerations to take into account when selecting arbitrators and arbitration venues; and a mediation clause before parties can move to an adjudicative process.