Empirical Studies in Culture, Society and Policy Making
Edited by Dimitri Vanoverbeke, Jeroen Maesschalck, David Nelken and Stephan Parmentier
Chapter 7: Towards an understanding of the 'Japanese' way of dispute resolution: how is it different from the West?
There has been a common recognition among socio-legal academics on the difference between Japan and several Western countries: Japan is not as litigious as these Western countries. Indeed, one of the long enduring debates has been whether the Japanese are reluctant to litigate or not. While there has been intense debate over the question, this formulation of the problem seems to be too ambiguous and general to conduct productive empirical research. This chapter aims to elaborate on the problem so that it can offer accurate guidance for empirical research, and to conduct a case study comparing alternative dispute resolution (ADR) legislation in both the UK and Japan in order to shed light upon the difference as well as similarity in attitudes with regard to dispute resolution between the two countries. While both countries have shared the promotion of ADR as a policy goal since the end of the 1990s, we can observe a subtle but important difference lying behind this policy convergence. Exploring this difference will lead us to a more sophisticated understanding of the role of the law and legal system in both countries.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.