A Collaborative System at Its Core

Niamh Leinwather opened the session by reframing arbitration not merely as a dispute resolution mechanism, but as a fundamentally collaborative enterprise. Drawing on her experience at the Vienna International Arbitral Centre (VIAC), Leinwather emphasised that arbitration depends on trust between parties from different legal systems, cultures, and commercial realities.

That trust, she argued, is not accidental. It is the product of decades of global engagement, shared standards, and cross-border cooperation between institutions, practitioners, and academics. In an increasingly fragmented yet interconnected world marked by geopolitical tensions alongside globalised supply chains, collaboration is not optional; it is essential.

Institutions play a foundational role in facilitating this collaboration. Leinwather highlighted VIAC’s ambassador network, spanning more than 50 practitioners across three continents, as a practical example of bridging divides between East and West, and between civil and common law traditions. She also referenced her role with IFCAI (the International Federation of Commercial Arbitration Institutions), where institutions collaborate for the broader good of arbitration.

Yet collaboration does not begin and end with institutions. It requires active participation from practitioners, academics, and the next generation of arbitration professionals.

Practitioners in Practice: Collaboration on the Ground

Knud Jacob Kundsen brought the discussion into the day-to-day realities of practice. From his perspective, global collaboration is most visible when dealing with unfamiliar substantive laws or procedural rules. In such cases, reliance on local counsel is indispensable. The seamless integration of local legal expertise into international arbitration proceedings exemplifies collaboration at its most practical.

Kundsen also pointed to the institutional perspective, particularly in arbitrator appointments. Boards comprised of members from different jurisdictions bring collective knowledge that extends beyond technical legal understanding. They contribute cultural awareness, sensitivity to political and regional dynamics, and insight into relationships that may not be apparent on paper.

Leinwather underscored that this human, contextual intelligence, especially in appointment decisions, is unlikely to be replaced by artificial intelligence. It remains one of arbitration’s distinctly human advantages.

At the same time, she noted the importance of empowering local practitioners to move beyond purely “local counsel” roles and take on arbitration mandates more fully. Exposure to cross-border cases enhances the wider arbitration ecosystem.

Preparing the Next Generation

Velimir Živković addressed the academic perspective, focusing on whether students are being adequately prepared for international arbitration. He emphasised the value of institutional internships and secondments, which provide insight into how arbitration functions behind the scenes. However, such opportunities remain limited and highly competitive.

Leinwather highlighted collaborative initiatives between institutions, including secondment programmes between VIAC and the SCC, as examples of how knowledge exchange can be strengthened. Expanding similar opportunities for students would further democratise access to arbitration practice.

The Vis Moot was identified as one of the strongest examples of global collaboration in action. With over 400 teams participating annually, it provides students with a practical, cross-border experience drafting submissions, presenting arguments, and engaging with diverse legal traditions.

Participation in mooting, Leinwather noted, signals more than theoretical knowledge. It demonstrates practical engagement, international exposure, and a capacity for collaboration, all of which are critical skills in arbitration.

Technology, Access, and Levelling the Field

The conversation then turned to technology and artificial intelligence. While AI presents challenges, it also lowers barriers to participation.

Susan Mutangadura, speaking from Zimbabwe, reflected on how technology has made global engagement more accessible across Africa. Digital platforms facilitate networking, access to information, and participation in discussions that might otherwise require significant travel resources.

Mutangadura also addressed the longstanding concern that African practitioners and arbitrators have been underrepresented in disputes relating to African resources. She highlighted the ICC Academy initiative aimed at training arbitrators from the region to ensure familiarity with institutional standards, removing a common barrier to appointments.

Leinwather acknowledged progress, particularly in gender diversity, but noted that geographical diversity remains a significant challenge. While institutional appointments have improved in gender balance since the early 1990s, broader regional representation still requires sustained effort.

Small Initiatives, Structural Change

The session concluded with a discussion on whether global change requires large-scale programmes or smaller targeted initiatives.

Kundsen referenced the Danish Institute of Arbitration’s initiative spotlighting female arbitrators as an example of how focused action can create momentum and visibility. Smaller initiatives, he suggested, can act as catalysts for broader institutional change.

Živković proposed the idea of a “Vis Moot South”, potentially hosted in Africa, to further diversify access and participation. The proposal captured the session’s central theme: meaningful collaboration often begins with practical steps and shared commitment.

Throughout the discussion, one point remained clear: building an arbitration practice, whether as an institution, practitioner, or student, depends on active, sustained global collaboration. Arbitration thrives not in isolation, but in connection.