Crossref DOIMemberCiteFactoropen accessissn
SJIF Impact Factor 8.659 | ISSN: 2582-3930
IJSREM Logo

International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management

(Gateway to Global Scholars - An International, Scholarly, Multi-Disciplinary, Open Access Journal)

Peer-Reviewed Journal Designed to Meet UGC's Quality Parameters

HomeCurrent IssuePast IssuesPay OnlineConferencesEditorial BoardAbout UsContact Us
IJSREM

Loading article...

Follow Us

  • Google Scholar
  • ResearchGate
  • Academia.edu
  • Mendeley
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Instagram

Journal Policies

  • Peer Review Policy
  • Publication Ethics
  • Copyright Infringement
  • Refund & Cancellation Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy

Journal Identifiers & Licenses

  • ISSN Verified: 2582-3930ISSN Verified: 2582-3930
  • Crossref DOI: 10.55041Crossref DOI: 10.55041
  • SJIF Ranking: 08.659SJIF Ranking: 08.659
  • Licensed under CC BY 4.0Licensed under CC BY 4.0
  • ISO Certification: 9001:2015ISO Certification: 9001:2015
  • Indexed & Cited In: Google ScholarIndexed & Cited In: Google Scholar

Contact Us

International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management (IJSREM)

#62/1, New No 7, 1st Cross, 2nd Main, Ganganagar, R T Nagar, Bangalore North, Bangalore, Karnataka, India – 560032
[email protected]+91 93911 67991
logos
logos
Working Hours

Mon – Sat: 9:00 AM – 6:00 PM

Sunday: 10:00 AM – 4:00 PM

+91 93911 67991

© 2026 IJSREM – International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management. This is an open-access journal. Articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
ArticlePeer ReviewedOpen AccessPlagiarism Passed
Paper ID:IJSREM64747

“ADR as a Tool for Access to Justice: A Comparative Study of Developed and Developing Countries”

Stream/Area:

-

Subject:

-

Paper ID:

IJSREM64747

Volume:

10 |

6 |

Jun 2026

Pages:

1-15

Publication Frequency:

Monthly (12 issues per year)

DOI
Digital Object Identifier
Not assigned

License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.

Share this article:

Authors

Shivam Bhati

Shivam Bhati

School of Law, Justice & Governance, Gautam Buddha University, Greater Noida

GAUTAM BUDDHA UNIVERSITY

Download Author Certificate
Pawan Yadav

Pawan Yadav

School of Law, Justice & Governance

GAUTAM BUDDHA UNIVERSITY

Download Co-Author Certificate

Author Services & Downloads

Full ArticlesAcceptance Certificate

Abstract

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has emerged as an indispensable component of contemporary justice systems worldwide. The increasing burden on courts, rising litigation costs, procedural complexities, and delays in adjudication have encouraged governments and legal institutions to promote alternative mechanisms for dispute settlement. ADR encompasses various processes, including arbitration, mediation, conciliation, negotiation, and Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), all of which seek to provide efficient, cost-effective, and accessible justice. This research undertakes a comparative analysis of ADR frameworks in developed and developing countries, focusing on legal structures, institutional support, accessibility, public awareness, technological integration, and effectiveness in dispute resolution. The study examines jurisdictions such as the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada alongside selected developing nations, including India and other emerging economies. Through doctrinal and comparative legal research methods, the paper evaluates statutes, judicial decisions, policy documents, and academic literature. The findings indicate that developed countries generally possess stronger institutional mechanisms, greater public confidence, advanced technological infrastructure, and comprehensive legislative frameworks supporting ADR. In contrast, developing countries continue to face challenges such as inadequate awareness, limited professional training, infrastructural deficiencies, and inconsistent implementation of ADR policies. However, recent legislative reforms and technological advancements have created significant opportunities for strengthening ADR systems in developing jurisdictions. The study concludes that ADR remains a vital instrument for enhancing access to justice and reducing judicial backlog. It recommends legislative strengthening, professional accreditation systems, expansion of court-connected ADR programs, and increased investment in Online Dispute Resolution platforms to ensure more effective and equitable dispute resolution globally.

KEYWORDS

Alternative Dispute Resolution Access to Justice Developed Countries Developing Countries Comparative Study Mediation Arbitration Legal Reform ODR Legal Accessibility

Cite This Article

Shivam Bhati, Pawan Yadav, "“ADR as a Tool for Access to Justice: A Comparative Study of Developed and Developing Countries”," International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 1-15, Jun 2026.

Full Article/Conclusion

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has become an essential component of modern justice systems across the world. The growing burden on courts, increasing litigation costs, procedural complexities, and delays in judicial proceedings have highlighted the need for effective alternatives to traditional litigation. ADR mechanisms such as negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and Online Dispute Resolution provide practical solutions that promote faster, more affordable, and more accessible justice. This study has examined the concept, evolution, and development of ADR and has compared its implementation in developed and developing countries. The analysis demonstrates that ADR plays a significant role in improving access to justice, reducing court congestion, preserving relationships, and promoting efficient dispute resolution. It also highlights the increasing importance of ADR in addressing the challenges faced by contemporary legal systems. The experiences of developed countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada demonstrate that successful ADR systems require strong legislative support, effective institutions, professional standards, judicial encouragement, and public confidence. These countries have integrated ADR into their justice systems and have achieved considerable success in resolving disputes efficiently and cost-effectively. Developing countries, particularly India, have also made substantial progress in strengthening ADR mechanisms. Legislative reforms, establishment of mediation centres, promotion of arbitration, and judicial initiatives have contributed significantly to the growth of ADR. However, challenges relating to awareness, infrastructure, funding, professional training, and technological accessibility continue to affect implementation. The emergence of Online Dispute Resolution represents one of the most important developments in the field of ADR. Technological innovation has expanded access to justice by enabling parties to resolve disputes remotely and efficiently. ODR has become increasingly relevant in an interconnected and digitalized world, particularly following the global shift toward virtual proceedings. The comparative analysis conducted in this research indicates that institutional support, legal certainty, professional competence, and technological advancement are key factors influencing the success of ADR systems. Countries that invest in these areas are more likely to achieve effective and sustainable dispute resolution outcomes. In conclusion, ADR is not merely an alternative to litigation but a vital component of a modern and efficient justice system. As societies continue to evolve and disputes become increasingly complex, the importance of ADR will continue to grow. Governments, courts, legal professionals, and policymakers must work collaboratively to strengthen ADR frameworks, promote public awareness, improve professional training, and encourage technological innovation. Such efforts will contribute to a more accessible, efficient, and responsive system of justice capable of meeting the needs of individuals, businesses, and society as a whole.  

References

1 Shahriaz Ahmmed, “Access to Justice through District Legal Aid Office (DLAO): Addressing Barriers of the Informal Justice System in Bangladesh,” Khulna University Studies, 2024, 284–94, http://kus.ku.ac.bd/kustudies/article/view/1210. 2 Ashok Kumar, Alternative Dispute Resolution System: Global and National Perspective (KK Publications,                                                                                                                                 2021), https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=pSFCEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR20&dq=ADR+as +a+Tool+for+Access+to+Justice:+A+Comparative+Study+of+Developed+and+Developing+Countries &ots=EY3VbnvQu_&sig=T37rkdr3lJ7HaIm4olK7swgcBTA. 3Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa, (2013) 5 SCC 226 4 Josephine N. Maragia, “Critical Analysis of Court-Annexed Mediation in Promoting Access to Justice in          Kenya”  (PhD   Thesis,  University  of       Nairobi,2021), https://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/handle/11295/20267245.

Editorial & Review Transparency

Publication Date

6/10/2026

Peer Review Type

Double-Blind Peer Review

Review Rounds: 2

Documents

Review Report (Confidential)
Copyright Form (Office)

Article Metrics & Impact

Article Views

0

Total views since publication

PDF Downloads

2

Total downloads since publication

Geographic Reach

5

Indexing, Archiving & Preservation

Google Scholar
Academia
ResearchGate
Crossref
SSRN
Semantic Scholar
Thomson Reuters
WorldCat
Mendeley
OpenAlex
EBSCO
Zenodo

Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.

Ethics, Compliance & Transparency

Plagiarism Screening

This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.

Funding Information

No funding information available for this research.

Similar & Recommended Articles

Similar Articles by Topic

Related research in the same subject area

Loading similar articles...