Anna High ’ s masterful and thoughtful book, Non-Governmental Orphan Relief in China: Law, Policy and Practice , examines the interplay between non-governmental and governmental orphan relief efforts in Mainland China. Both specialist and non-specialist readers will appreciate the humanitarian value of this work, focusing as it does on issues of child rights in the context of China ’ s most disadvantaged children — gu ’ er , otherwise known as “ the lonely orphans. ” High ’ s book is the result of in-depth socio-legal case-based research published by the Routledge Contemporary China Series focusing on the legal grey zone of non-state orga-nized gu ’ er relief in contemporary China. It draws on a multi-year process participant observation and semi-structured interviews with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and private caregivers across rural and urban China to shed light on the ambiguous role of law in child welfare. The author ’ s nearly decade-long longitudinal ethnographic fieldwork reflects recent developments in Chinese charity law, with particular reference to the silent, and at times invisible, uphill struggle of non-governmental gu ’ er welfare providers in China.
{"title":"Book Discussion: Non-Governmental Orphan Relief in China: Law, Policy and Practice, by Anna High: Comments by Zheng Xu and Shahla Ali","authors":"Zheng Xu, Shahla Ali","doi":"10.1017/als.2022.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.14","url":null,"abstract":"Anna High ’ s masterful and thoughtful book, Non-Governmental Orphan Relief in China: Law, Policy and Practice , examines the interplay between non-governmental and governmental orphan relief efforts in Mainland China. Both specialist and non-specialist readers will appreciate the humanitarian value of this work, focusing as it does on issues of child rights in the context of China ’ s most disadvantaged children — gu ’ er , otherwise known as “ the lonely orphans. ” High ’ s book is the result of in-depth socio-legal case-based research published by the Routledge Contemporary China Series focusing on the legal grey zone of non-state orga-nized gu ’ er relief in contemporary China. It draws on a multi-year process participant observation and semi-structured interviews with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and private caregivers across rural and urban China to shed light on the ambiguous role of law in child welfare. The author ’ s nearly decade-long longitudinal ethnographic fieldwork reflects recent developments in Chinese charity law, with particular reference to the silent, and at times invisible, uphill struggle of non-governmental gu ’ er welfare providers in China.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"9 1","pages":"523 - 525"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43942584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
global view that still manages to do justice to important context-specific nuances. The chapters relating to arbitration in particular are significant, as the literature on arbitration in China is comparatively sparse and Gu is already a recognized expert on the subject. Third, this book brings to light a variety of empirical metrics about caseloads and providers (some of which are difficult to access by non-Chinese-speaking audiences), thereby providing valuable insights about what is happening on the ground. Finally, this book contextualizes China’s civil justice reforms in the past decade, both within broader legal, sociopolitical, and market developments, as well as within existing debates in the scholarly literature relating to dispute resolution and law and development. It skilfully draws out implications of the author’s research for a number of conversations of interest to law and society scholars, comparativists, China experts, proceduralists, and scholars of arbitration and ADR. The book raises many more interesting questions that the limits of space prevent me from considering in a meaningful way. For example, to what extent are private, informal processes such as mediation appropriate for disputes involving large numbers of plaintiffs or sensitive issues of a public nature, as they have been in China through the use of Partyled “grand mediation” in complex product liability and land seizure matters? Ever since Owen Fiss’s Against Settlement, a dominant strand of scholarship holds that civil disputes with a “public policy dimension” belong in public courts rather than in ADR1—even though scholars have recently begun documenting the ways that informal dispute resolution are increasingly being preferred for certain divisive social conflicts.2 US disputeresolution scholars in particular will find Gu’s comparative study a refreshing perspective on these issues.
{"title":"Rule of Law with Chinese Characteristics","authors":"Yi Zhao","doi":"10.1017/als.2021.43","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2021.43","url":null,"abstract":"global view that still manages to do justice to important context-specific nuances. The chapters relating to arbitration in particular are significant, as the literature on arbitration in China is comparatively sparse and Gu is already a recognized expert on the subject. Third, this book brings to light a variety of empirical metrics about caseloads and providers (some of which are difficult to access by non-Chinese-speaking audiences), thereby providing valuable insights about what is happening on the ground. Finally, this book contextualizes China’s civil justice reforms in the past decade, both within broader legal, sociopolitical, and market developments, as well as within existing debates in the scholarly literature relating to dispute resolution and law and development. It skilfully draws out implications of the author’s research for a number of conversations of interest to law and society scholars, comparativists, China experts, proceduralists, and scholars of arbitration and ADR. The book raises many more interesting questions that the limits of space prevent me from considering in a meaningful way. For example, to what extent are private, informal processes such as mediation appropriate for disputes involving large numbers of plaintiffs or sensitive issues of a public nature, as they have been in China through the use of Partyled “grand mediation” in complex product liability and land seizure matters? Ever since Owen Fiss’s Against Settlement, a dominant strand of scholarship holds that civil disputes with a “public policy dimension” belong in public courts rather than in ADR1—even though scholars have recently begun documenting the ways that informal dispute resolution are increasingly being preferred for certain divisive social conflicts.2 US disputeresolution scholars in particular will find Gu’s comparative study a refreshing perspective on these issues.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"9 1","pages":"341 - 344"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43211818","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Civil Justice Reform in Chinese Law and Society","authors":"Hiro N. Aragaki","doi":"10.1017/als.2022.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.10","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"9 1","pages":"339 - 341"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43802094","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Chinese fintech, initially taking the form as “Internet finance,” is growing rapidly and poses great challenges to its financial regulatory authorities. Acclaimed as a new financial innovation, Internet finance was once accepted and even welcomed by the normally conservative Chinese financial regulators, who simultaneously adopted a wait-and-see strategy, to encourage such innovation and avoid overwhelming regulation. The benevolent regulation stance, however, bred rampant Ponzi schemes or fake financial innovation, resulting in tremendous monetary losses among lots of investors. To show a quick and active response, the central government popped into a whack-a-mole game, starting a four-year campaign of strict Internet finance regulation that has even cracked down on all the P2P lending platforms. This article analyzes the regulatory policy updates of Chinese Internet finance that is transforming to certain kinds of lawful fintech with difficulties, and that adaptive regulatory-organization restructure, regulatory-system optimization, and regulatory-model innovation would be more effective and constructive regulatory options.
{"title":"Wait-and-See or Whack-a-Mole: What Is the Best Way to Regulate Fintech in China?","authors":"Duoqi Xu, C. John Taylor, Yuanda Ren","doi":"10.1017/als.2022.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.7","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Chinese fintech, initially taking the form as “Internet finance,” is growing rapidly and poses great challenges to its financial regulatory authorities. Acclaimed as a new financial innovation, Internet finance was once accepted and even welcomed by the normally conservative Chinese financial regulators, who simultaneously adopted a wait-and-see strategy, to encourage such innovation and avoid overwhelming regulation. The benevolent regulation stance, however, bred rampant Ponzi schemes or fake financial innovation, resulting in tremendous monetary losses among lots of investors. To show a quick and active response, the central government popped into a whack-a-mole game, starting a four-year campaign of strict Internet finance regulation that has even cracked down on all the P2P lending platforms. This article analyzes the regulatory policy updates of Chinese Internet finance that is transforming to certain kinds of lawful fintech with difficulties, and that adaptive regulatory-organization restructure, regulatory-system optimization, and regulatory-model innovation would be more effective and constructive regulatory options.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47445294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In 2017, the Taiwanese Constitutional Court handed down Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 748, which was a ruling in favour of same-sex marriage. The Court also ordered the national legislature to amend the law within two years. Despite a significant backslide in the Taiwanese 2018 referendum, the legislature eventually followed the Court’s order and legalized gay marriage in 2019. This victory made Taiwan the first state to legalize same-sex marriage in Asia. Many legal scholars consider the same-sex marriage ruling a progressive decision in which the Court undertook a counter-majoritarian task of protecting a minority group. While we agree with the Court’s role in promoting marriage equality, we contend that most legal scholars overlook an important question in this dynamic: the legislature had had several chances to settle this issue over the past decades, so why did it refuse to draft gay-marriage legislation but later, in 2019, defer to the Court’s decision? In this paper, we explain the political foundations of an activist judiciary by using the case of the first gay-marriage legislation in Asia. We argue that the risk of position-taking on tough issues leads incentive-facing political elites to engage in position avoidance and to see the political value in deferring to a high court’s ruling. Using original data, we present evidence of how Taiwan’s diverse constituency relative to the same-sex marriage issue influenced legislators’ position-avoidance behaviour and led them to dodge political backfire by delegating policy-making authority to the Constitutional Court.
{"title":"A Court as a Means of Legislative Position Avoidance: Evidence from the Same-Sex Marriage Decision in Taiwan","authors":"Yu-Hsien Sung, Yi-Ching Hsu, Chin-shou Wang","doi":"10.1017/als.2022.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.8","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 2017, the Taiwanese Constitutional Court handed down Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 748, which was a ruling in favour of same-sex marriage. The Court also ordered the national legislature to amend the law within two years. Despite a significant backslide in the Taiwanese 2018 referendum, the legislature eventually followed the Court’s order and legalized gay marriage in 2019. This victory made Taiwan the first state to legalize same-sex marriage in Asia. Many legal scholars consider the same-sex marriage ruling a progressive decision in which the Court undertook a counter-majoritarian task of protecting a minority group. While we agree with the Court’s role in promoting marriage equality, we contend that most legal scholars overlook an important question in this dynamic: the legislature had had several chances to settle this issue over the past decades, so why did it refuse to draft gay-marriage legislation but later, in 2019, defer to the Court’s decision? In this paper, we explain the political foundations of an activist judiciary by using the case of the first gay-marriage legislation in Asia. We argue that the risk of position-taking on tough issues leads incentive-facing political elites to engage in position avoidance and to see the political value in deferring to a high court’s ruling. Using original data, we present evidence of how Taiwan’s diverse constituency relative to the same-sex marriage issue influenced legislators’ position-avoidance behaviour and led them to dodge political backfire by delegating policy-making authority to the Constitutional Court.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"5 1","pages":"107 - 130"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56964131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The world can no longer deny that the planet is on the verge of an Anthropocene catastrophe. As scientists from different fields and from around the globe are discussing the causes, impacts, challenges, and solutions to the arrival of this human-induced new geological time, the field of law cannot remain behind. Rights of Nature (RoN), granting legal personhood to nature and its elements such as rivers, is an emerging transnational legal framework fast gaining international traction among Euro-American legal scholars as a new tool to combat environmental destruction. Grounded in reflections derived from long-term collaborative ethnographic work among indigenous communities, this article aims to critically and empirically unpack several interrelated concerns and blind spots at this moment of the RoN snowballing effect around the globe related to claims that this new legal proposal is rooted in indigenous lifestyles and views about nature/the environment.
{"title":"Can Rights of Nature Save Us from the Anthropocene Catastrophe? Some Critical Reflections from the Field","authors":"L. Viaene","doi":"10.1017/als.2022.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.2","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The world can no longer deny that the planet is on the verge of an Anthropocene catastrophe. As scientists from different fields and from around the globe are discussing the causes, impacts, challenges, and solutions to the arrival of this human-induced new geological time, the field of law cannot remain behind. Rights of Nature (RoN), granting legal personhood to nature and its elements such as rivers, is an emerging transnational legal framework fast gaining international traction among Euro-American legal scholars as a new tool to combat environmental destruction. Grounded in reflections derived from long-term collaborative ethnographic work among indigenous communities, this article aims to critically and empirically unpack several interrelated concerns and blind spots at this moment of the RoN snowballing effect around the globe related to claims that this new legal proposal is rooted in indigenous lifestyles and views about nature/the environment.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"9 1","pages":"187 - 206"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45048416","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Literature on neighbourhood disputes has explored legal consciousness by focusing on identity, personal relationships, and community norms. However, it still remains unclear how affective factors and one’s sense of identity can influence the social practice of law and how the recursive relationship between law, emotion, and identity can influence life in particular communities. This study explores the dynamics of identity/alterity construction, and the role of emotion in shaping these dynamics during a neighbourhood conflict in Taipei, Taiwan. This dispute highlights how ordinary Taiwanese people’s legal consciousness is constituted through a culturally embedded sense of emotion (qíng) and belonging (zìjǐrén). Analysis of “The Noodle Shop Case” advances our understanding of the social presence and authority of law and the ways in which the role of law changes according to how individuals feel as they seek both mutual recognition and justice.
{"title":"Being One of Us: The Role of Mutual Recognition and Emotion in Shaping Legal Consciousness in a Taiwanese Neighbourhood Dispute","authors":"Hsiao-tan Wang","doi":"10.1017/als.2022.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.6","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Literature on neighbourhood disputes has explored legal consciousness by focusing on identity, personal relationships, and community norms. However, it still remains unclear how affective factors and one’s sense of identity can influence the social practice of law and how the recursive relationship between law, emotion, and identity can influence life in particular communities. This study explores the dynamics of identity/alterity construction, and the role of emotion in shaping these dynamics during a neighbourhood conflict in Taipei, Taiwan. This dispute highlights how ordinary Taiwanese people’s legal consciousness is constituted through a culturally embedded sense of emotion (qíng) and belonging (zìjǐrén). Analysis of “The Noodle Shop Case” advances our understanding of the social presence and authority of law and the ways in which the role of law changes according to how individuals feel as they seek both mutual recognition and justice.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"10 1","pages":"131 - 146"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43554769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract It will be familiar to many that the environmental emergency of our times generates a number of difficulties for our thinking of law and society. It is argued in this essay that the languages of place-making make some sense of these predicaments. The essay proceeds through the close reading of an Extinction Rebellion protest and two landmark judgments. The protests, and their policing, are keyed to specific places and their atmospheres. A first judgment concerns the destruction of habitat and the extinction of native wildlife species; a second concerns the impact of coal mining on greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. A sense of place emerges with the aesthetic reason of judgment. The emblems and topics of legal speech, it is argued, give form and technique to the writing of place. A renewed jurisprudence of topography makes legible the meeting places of law and the environmental emergency.
{"title":"A Sense of Place with Landmark Judgments: Anthropogenic Justice, Wildlife Extinction, and Climate Change","authors":"P. Rush","doi":"10.1017/als.2022.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.5","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract It will be familiar to many that the environmental emergency of our times generates a number of difficulties for our thinking of law and society. It is argued in this essay that the languages of place-making make some sense of these predicaments. The essay proceeds through the close reading of an Extinction Rebellion protest and two landmark judgments. The protests, and their policing, are keyed to specific places and their atmospheres. A first judgment concerns the destruction of habitat and the extinction of native wildlife species; a second concerns the impact of coal mining on greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. A sense of place emerges with the aesthetic reason of judgment. The emblems and topics of legal speech, it is argued, give form and technique to the writing of place. A renewed jurisprudence of topography makes legible the meeting places of law and the environmental emergency.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"9 1","pages":"228 - 254"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42980441","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article investigates the Bangladeshi garment industry that supplies ready-made garments for global brands and the corporate social responsibilities (CSRs) of the brands/multinational corporations (MNCs) towards their supply chains. Although outsourcing and global trade have boosted the living standards of many people in the Bangladeshi garment industry, there are some significant concerns regarding the working conditions and treatment of workers in these supply chains. This, in turn, cannot, and should not, be detached from the legal relationship between the Bangladeshi supply chains and the MNCs contracting with them. This article examines the impact of COVID-19, which has exposed the fragility and the pre-existing flaws in the relationship between the MNCs and their suppliers more clearly than at any other time in history. There is a huge governance gap between MNCs and supply chains that needs to be addressed urgently. This article assesses the legality of the cancellation of orders by the brands that invoked the force majeure clause. In doing so, this paper briefly deals with the responses of three American retail companies, namely Sears, Kohl’s, and the Arcadia Group, in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. It illustrates that the power asymmetry between the MNCs and their suppliers has put the supply chains in an unreasonably disadvantageous position, creating unfair and even unconscionable conduct by several MNCs. This article also looks at solutions for the existing problems, focusing, inter alia, on non-financial reporting requirements in the US and the EU to implement CSR in supply chains. However, disappointingly, the authors had to conclude that MNCs typically have the propensity to disregard CSR, whenever it is convenient for them and use CSR for mere “greenwashing” purposes for their strategic benefit only. It is a problem that requires constant attention and continuing research to find long-term solutions. The article employs doctrinal methodology and, by conducting a meta-analysis of literature and case-studies, it provides a comprehensive understanding of how the industry works.
{"title":"The Garment Industry in Bangladesh, Corporate Social Responsibility of Multinational Corporations, and The Impact of COVID-19","authors":"Ninia Reza, J. D. du Plessis","doi":"10.1017/als.2022.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.9","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article investigates the Bangladeshi garment industry that supplies ready-made garments for global brands and the corporate social responsibilities (CSRs) of the brands/multinational corporations (MNCs) towards their supply chains. Although outsourcing and global trade have boosted the living standards of many people in the Bangladeshi garment industry, there are some significant concerns regarding the working conditions and treatment of workers in these supply chains. This, in turn, cannot, and should not, be detached from the legal relationship between the Bangladeshi supply chains and the MNCs contracting with them. This article examines the impact of COVID-19, which has exposed the fragility and the pre-existing flaws in the relationship between the MNCs and their suppliers more clearly than at any other time in history. There is a huge governance gap between MNCs and supply chains that needs to be addressed urgently. This article assesses the legality of the cancellation of orders by the brands that invoked the force majeure clause. In doing so, this paper briefly deals with the responses of three American retail companies, namely Sears, Kohl’s, and the Arcadia Group, in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. It illustrates that the power asymmetry between the MNCs and their suppliers has put the supply chains in an unreasonably disadvantageous position, creating unfair and even unconscionable conduct by several MNCs. This article also looks at solutions for the existing problems, focusing, inter alia, on non-financial reporting requirements in the US and the EU to implement CSR in supply chains. However, disappointingly, the authors had to conclude that MNCs typically have the propensity to disregard CSR, whenever it is convenient for them and use CSR for mere “greenwashing” purposes for their strategic benefit only. It is a problem that requires constant attention and continuing research to find long-term solutions. The article employs doctrinal methodology and, by conducting a meta-analysis of literature and case-studies, it provides a comprehensive understanding of how the industry works.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"9 1","pages":"255 - 285"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44688045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Since 2017, Japan has rapidly developed its hard and soft infrastructure to accelerate the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in Japan, such as establishing the Japan International Dispute Resolution Center and the Japan International Mediation Center, Kyoto, as well as amending the Foreign Lawyers Act. The legislative process to amend the Japanese Arbitration Act is underway and discussions to accede to the Singapore Convention are ongoing. Mediation and settlement discussions involving judges during the litigation process are traditionally common in Japanese court practices, which would have some implications for investor–state mediation, which is a recent hot topic in the field of investor–state dispute settlement. Numerous means of further improving the efficiency and effectiveness of ADR proceedings have been discussed globally, including mid-stream conferences, Calderbank offers, the use of mediation in complex disputes, and the advanced use of Arb-Med-Arb proceedings utilizing party-appointed arbitrators.
{"title":"Exploring the future of commercial dispute resolution in Asia: Accelerating efficiency and effectiveness in ADR","authors":"Hiroyuki Tezuka, Mihiro Koeda","doi":"10.1017/als.2021.32","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2021.32","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Since 2017, Japan has rapidly developed its hard and soft infrastructure to accelerate the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in Japan, such as establishing the Japan International Dispute Resolution Center and the Japan International Mediation Center, Kyoto, as well as amending the Foreign Lawyers Act. The legislative process to amend the Japanese Arbitration Act is underway and discussions to accede to the Singapore Convention are ongoing. Mediation and settlement discussions involving judges during the litigation process are traditionally common in Japanese court practices, which would have some implications for investor–state mediation, which is a recent hot topic in the field of investor–state dispute settlement. Numerous means of further improving the efficiency and effectiveness of ADR proceedings have been discussed globally, including mid-stream conferences, Calderbank offers, the use of mediation in complex disputes, and the advanced use of Arb-Med-Arb proceedings utilizing party-appointed arbitrators.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"10 1","pages":"165 - 182"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44420759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：