State policy design, not culture, suppresses Japan’s litigation rate

Evidence

Even as Japanese society changes, litigation rates remain low because the government has designed policies to discourage litigation. The Japanese government has restricted the size of the legal profession, thereby reducing access to legal services. The total number of practicing lawyers in Japan is lower than the number of graduates each year from U.S. law schools, and in Japan only 500 new lawyers annually are permitted to pass the bar exam. The rules of Japanese courts, such as the ban on class-action suits, also discourage individuals from pursuing claims. Finally, when disputes do arise, the Japanese government has developed alternative forums to handle them, such as its system of court-annexed mediation and the Traffic Accident Dispute Resolution Center. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1147

Categorization

• XREF: Institutional access design parallels the law-merchant and access-to-justice material the reader has studied. — connects to: Japan’s low litigation rate cannot be explained by culture alone — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1146; Japan’s low litigation rate defies modernization-based explanations since it is advanced and urbanized; Government litigation policies shape litigation rates more than societal development does — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2317 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Government litigation policies shape litigation rates more than societal development does #expands (0.95) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2317
• Japan’s low litigation rate cannot be explained by culture alone #expands (0.88) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1146
• Japan’s low litigation rate defies modernization-based explanations since it is advanced and urbanized #corroborates (0.82)
• Fixed legal rules beat discretionary state power even when imperfect #complicates (0.72) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 135
• States pursue conflicting policies by ignoring cross-policy implications #responds-to (0.70) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2589