MEASURING IMPROVEMENTS IN ACCESS TO JUSTICE

NORMALIZING USE OF EMPIRICAL RESEARCH AND CRITICAL SELF-REFLECTION FOR ONGOING DEVELOPMENT OF A PERSON-CENTRED JUSTICE SYSTEM

Abstract

Despite a dire need, the justice sector lacks empirical research that evaluates system improvement initiatives. Over a decade has passed since the Canadian Bar Association’s Reaching Equal Justice Report (2013) and Action Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters’ Roadmap for Change (2013) called for such research to inform the development of a “person-centered” Canadian justice system. Uptake of coordinated empirical research could advance a culture shift towards normalizing—and embracing—learning from “failure” in justice system design. In Part 1 of this article, we revisit Dr. Jennifer Leitch’s (2013) recommendation that scholars conduct quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods empirical research on access to justice (A2J) initiatives. In Part 2, we share a summary of various evaluation models and examples of A2J scholars conducting such work. We conclude in Part 3 by critically reflecting on the methodological rigour of a recent Saskatchewan-led initiative on how to effectively communicate legal information to newcomers. We add to the literature on this topic critical reflection in legal research for improvements to A2J in the hope that others will learn from, and not shy away from, research and critical self-reflection in advancing research. Our aspiration is that other justice stakeholders will follow the same critical reflections of their work to embrace the idea that empirical research need not be perfect to be valuable in this underdeveloped area.