{"title":"新西兰公共纠纷解决方式的变化","authors":"Erling Rasmussen, Danaë Anderson","doi":"10.1111/irj.12407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>New 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":46619,"journal":{"name":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS JOURNAL","volume":"54 4-5","pages":"341-358"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The changing face of public dispute resolution in New Zealand\",\"authors\":\"Erling Rasmussen, Danaë Anderson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/irj.12407\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>New 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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46619,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS JOURNAL\",\"volume\":\"54 4-5\",\"pages\":\"341-358\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS JOURNAL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/irj.12407\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/irj.12407","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
The changing face of public dispute resolution in New Zealand
New 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.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
