Community Mediation in Plural Cities A Contextual Theory of Identity, Power, Trust, and Grassroots Ownership

Abstract

Community mediation was conceived as a community‐based alternative to courts, yet dominant models were elaborated in relatively homogeneous settings. High‐density, multiracial and multireligious cities generate recurring disputes in shared spaces, but also amplify identity meanings, structural inequalities, and legitimacy concerns linked to dense institutional fields. These plural city conditions shape who enters mediation, how parties participate, and whether outcomes endure. This article advances a contextual theory that starts from these urban conditions and specifies four interdependent dimensions that structure community mediation trajectories: identity configuration, power asymmetries, institutional trust, and grassroots ownership. A process model explains how these dimensions operate across entry, preparation, facilitated interaction, and implementation, and how they form recognizable configurations that widen or narrow the range of plausible outcomes. The theory is grounded through a practice‐based qualitative analysis of anonymized program documents and reflective case materials, reported through four composite vignettes. The article offers testable propositions for evaluation and a parallel community‐learning loop that supports collective sensemaking beyond individual cases.