Patrick G Coy

Patrick G Coy

Active in the field of peace and conflict studies since the early 1980s, Patrick Coy has been the editor of the annual research volume, Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, editing eight volumes of the series since 2000. He has also edited two other books (Social Conflicts and Collective Identities, and A Revolution of the Heart: Essays on the Catholic Worker). Dr. Coy has most recently co-authored Contesting Patriotism: Culture, Power and Strategy in the Peace Movement, published in 2009. Notably, his co-authored article, "Discursive Legacies: The US Peace Movement and Support the Troops," published in Social Problems, received the "Best Published Article Award for 2008" by the American Sociological Association's section on Peace, War and Social Conflict.

Professor Coy's research has been funded by the National Science Foundation, the Hewlett Foundation, the Albert Einstein Institution, the Council for International Exchange of Scholars, the American Sociological Association, and by the University Research Council of Kent State University. Patrick Coy was a Fulbright Scholar at the University of Botswana in 2000-10. He currently serves on the Board of Directors of the International Peace Research Association Foundation and the Board of Directors of the Cleveland Mediation Center. Professor Coy provides workshops and trainings in various aspects of conflict resolution, mediation, and nonviolent action to community, educational, and international groups.



Contact Patrick G Coy


Articles and Video:

A Stage Model of Social Movement Cooptation: Community Mediation in the United States (01/15/07)
The community mediation movement in the United States arose in the late 1970s as an alternative to a formalized justice system which was perceived to be costly, time consuming, and unresponsive to individual and community needs. Community mediation advocates also valued community training, social justice, volunteerism, empowerment and local control over conflict resolution mechanisms. But over the past quarter century, community mediation has become increasingly institutionalized and undergone various degrees of cooptation in its evolving relationship with the court system. Drawing on the literatures of dispute resolution, cooptation, and social movements, we analyze the evolution of community mediation and identify the degrees and dimensions of its cooptation.

Community Section Editorial (09/27/04)
Welcome to the Community Section. We have plenty of new content posted, and more on the way shortly.

Community Mediation And The Court System: The Ties That Bind (09/13/00)
Since their inception, community mediation programs in the United States have often been tied to the justice system. This proximity is expressed in a number of ways--courts are the leading source of case referrals for many programs; state or local court systems provide the majority of funding for many programs; and it is partly through these ties that mediation programs have attained legitimacy in the communities they serve. In fact, some programs are even housed within courthouses. While there are benefits that accrue to mediation programs because of the cozy nature of this relationship, it is not without problems for a movement that has also been deeply committed to community-building, citizen empowerment, and the building of alternative institutions. We will highlight and analyze some of these problems in what follows.

Disabilities And Mediation Readiness In Court-Referred Cases:Developing Screening Criteria And Service Networks (09/12/00)
Mediation is an ideal alternative to court for many matters. Referrals involving disputants with certain emotional or mental disabilities may or may not be appropriate for community mediation as it is currently being practiced. In many cases, community mediation must become more flexible and accessible, offering coaching in advance, allowing advocate participation, using mediators skilled in disability issues, and adapting the process. In other cases, centers must assess the "mediation readiness" of disputants. In all cases, community mediation needs to become more deeply nested in human services referral networks. Screening criteria through which mediation programs might assess disputant readiness is suggested.