Abstract
AbstractNew Zealand provides a unique comparative case with its well‐embedded, comprehensive and flexible public dispute resolution services. Changes from collective to individual disputes and a resulting rise in institutional caseload have occurred since 1990, culminating in increased public information, enforcement and dispute resolution efforts. However, debates exist about improving access to justice, reducing legalism and providing proactive conflict resolution.
Full Text 
Sign-in/Register to access full text options
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Published version (
Free)
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
