This annex sets out the full range of topics included in the more than 50 surveys set out in Table 1.1 and Table 1.2. Some surveys addressed only a few topics, others many. No survey has addressed or could be expected to address all the topics detailed.
Legal Needs Surveys and Access to Justice
![](/adobe/dynamicmedia/deliver/dm-aid--fbb0d916-cc7d-4cb4-a872-38156bd6d522/g2g9a36c-en.jpg?quality=80&preferwebp=true)
Annex C. Topics included in Legal Needs Surveys to date
Abstract
Attitudes (general)
Attitude towards justice system (lawyers, courts, traditional dispute resolution, etc.)
Accessibility (including cost, etc.)
“Interpersonal justice” (including respect, etc.)
“Procedural justice”/fairness (including neutrality, manipulability, etc.)
“Informational justice” (including transparency, clarity, etc.)
Effectiveness (including timeliness, whether solves problems, etc.)
What is most effective means to solve problems today
What is most common means to solve problems today
Attitudes (to processes used)
Fairness of process
In general
“Interpersonal justice”
“Procedural justice”
“Informational justice”
Whether costs reasonable
Influence on process
Emotional response to process
Physical state of institutions (accessibility, location, cleanliness, facilities, etc.)
Capability/empowerment
Awareness of law – Reported problem
at time problem commenced
at later date
reasons for change
Hypothetical (see “Hypothetical scenarios”)
Awareness of legal services - General (open question/list)
Reported problem (open question/list)
Defined problem (see “Hypothetical scenarios”)
Proximity
Most accessible
Legal aid/free legal services (general/specific services/specific problems)
Legal aid eligibility
Legal Aid reform
Cost of legal services
Awareness of processes/institutions
Subjective legal empowerment
Perceived character of reported problem (including whether seen as “legal” / whether considered a problem that should be dealt with using legal mechanisms)
Whether aware of legal implications of problem
Whether equipped to deal with experienced problem at outset (general, understanding, knowledge, etc.)
Ability to meet cost, time, etc., of acting (see also “Cost of problem resolution”)
Causes and consequences (of identified justiciable problems)
Links between reported problems
Whether reported problems contributed to or followed on from one another
General impact on life
Details of broader causes of problems
Personal
Social
Economic
Health
Environmental
Details of broader impact of problems
Personal (fear, loss of confidence, substance abuse, etc.)
Social (damage to relationships, child behaviour, etc.)
Economic (lost employment, income, home, etc.)
Health (mental, physical, etc.)
Environmental (property damage, etc.)
Duration/cost of period of lost income
Duration/value of period of welfare receipt
Use (and type/extent of use) of public services (e.g. health services)
Other costs of problem impact
Was any of loss insured/how much recovered through insurance
Choice of advisor
How found out about advisor
Whether (in seeking assistance) information sought on:
Available services
Recommendations
Expertise/timeliness
Costs of services
Regulation of services (and if not, why not)
Difficulty of obtaining advice
Whether respondent knew what sort of assistance required
Factors in choice (e.g. distance, cost, reputation, ethnicity, etc.)
Cost of problem resolution
Fees paid by respondent
Information/documentation/advice/representation
Courts and other processes
Fees met by third parties
Information/documentation/advice/representation
Courts and other processes
Itemisation of fees
Global
Itemised (to whom, for what, etc.)
Where payments made by respondent, source of funds (e.g. savings, loan, etc.)
Form of fees (fixed, hourly billing, etc.)
If not fixed fees, whether and what estimate provided at outset (and form of communication)
Explanation of higher fee than estimate
Whether any negotiation on fees, and if successful
Legal aid
Whether Legal Aid applied for
Whether Legal Aid received
If refused Legal Aid, why
What Legal Aid covered
Details of other third parties meeting fees (e.g. Legal Aid, insurance company, etc.)
Other monetary costs borne by respondent (e.g. travel, communication, evidence gathering, babysitting etc.) (global, itemised)
Whether bribes required to be paid as part of problem resolution process, how much and to who
Other monetary impacts (e.g. lost income (associated with time needed to resolve problem), etc.)
Proportionality of costs
What would be an acceptable amount to pay
How much would have been willing to pay
Time spent resolving problem (globally/by activity)
Other (non-money/time) impact of resolution (e.g. stress, damage to relationships)
Cost as an obstacle to action (see also “Reasons”)
Whether
Which aspect of dispute resolution
Whether/where information about costs obtained
Why information about costs not obtained
Courts/tribunals (see also “Processes used”)
Whether court/tribunal contacted
Whether formal process issued
Which court/tribunal
Whether hearing occurred
Whether respondent attended
Tasks undertaken by respondent
Whether referred to mediation/conciliation
Whether pressed to give particular testimony
Whether respondent (and other party) represented, and by who
Attitude/nature of experience (see “Attitude to processes used”)
Outcome (see also “Outcome”)
Demographics
Household characteristics
Personal characteristics
Experience of justiciable problems
(open question/presentation of categories/ presentation of detailed problem types) (single or multiple reference periods)
Number of problems experienced
Nature of problems experienced (see “Nature of identified justiciable problems”)
Formal assistance (from independent “advisors”)
Details of advisor(s)
Whether friend/relative
Whether advisor(s) were trained lawyer(s)
Independence of advisor(s)
Who appointed/chose lawyer(s)
Demographics of advisor(s)
Number of advisors
Ordering of advisors
Date of first contact with advisor(s)
Links between use of different advisors (e.g. signposting, referral, etc.)
Why particular advisor(s) chosen (see “Choice of advisor”)
Nature of assistance (see “Nature of assistance provided by advisors”)
Form of communication/mode of contact (see “Mode of contact”)
Distance of advisor(s)
Mode/duration of travel (see “Cost of problem resolution”)
Number of times advisor(s) contacted
Duration of contact (see “Cost of problem resolution”)
Obstacles/barriers to access (e.g. opening hours, distance, cost, language, etc.)
Whether assistance obtained through an intermediary
Whether respondent had to pay (see “Cost of problem resolution”)
Satisfaction with assistance obtained
Global
Communication
Honesty
Timeliness
Action
Reasons for satisfaction/dissatisfaction
Response to being dissatisfied (complaint, advice, etc.)
Use/satisfaction with response of regulator
Consequences of response (apology, fee reduction, etc.)
Utility of assistance obtained
Relative utility (where multiple advisors) of advisors
Timeliness of assistance
Which was “main” advisor (or most useful)
Impact of assistance from advisors on social, health, and economic circumstances
Historical use of legal services/processes
Whether/when services used
Whether/when processes used
Hypothetical scenarios
Vignettes
Awareness of law (see “Capability/empowerment”)
Awareness of legal services (see “Capability/ empowerment”)
Predicted problem resolution strategy (global and elements (e.g. use of advisors))
Reasons for choice
Future experience of similar problems (to those reported)
Whether different problem resolution strategy likely (global and elements (e.g. use of advisors))
Predicted problem resolution strategy (global and elements (e.g. use of advisors))
Reasons for choice
If somebody else experienced same problem
Would recommend same strategy/advisor(s)
Generic
Predicted problem resolution strategy (global and elements (e.g. use of advisors, processes, etc.))
Who would not discuss with
Information (excluding information about advisors)
What type of information sought
What type of information obtained
Where information obtained from (see also “Use of Internet”)
Reason for obtaining information from identified source(s)
Utility of information
Mediation, conciliation and arbitration (see also “Processes used”)
Whether mediation, conciliation or arbitration organised (and which)
How many
What role respondent had
Whether respondent (and other party) represented
Attitude/nature of experience (see “Attitude to processes used”)
Outcome (see also “Outcome”)
Mode of contact (with advisors)
Global/individual
Ever
First
Predominant
Preferred
Available
Nature of assistance provided by advisors
What assistance was wanted (general)
What assistance was sought (e.g. moral support, information/advice, practical support)
What assistance was obtained
What information was provided about assistance to be given (on instruction, first meeting)
Degree of delegation
Whether prior agreement on what assistance was to be provided
Whether respondent got all assistance needed
Character of assistance obtained (e.g. emotional support, legal, practical, etc.)
Whether advisor provided other services to respondent also
Whether advisor tried to sell respondent other services
Nature of identified justiciable problems
Brief description (open text)
Perceived character of problem (see “Capability/empowerment”)
What problem about (e.g. money, property, changing behaviour, apology, etc.)(see also “Objectives”)
Whether personal or business
Whether shared (within household)
Nature of other party/parties (including demographics)
Relationship with other party/parties
Whether claimant or defendant / Who considered to be in the right/responsible
Existence and extent of disagreement
Problem duration (see “Problem duration”)
Whether ongoing (see ‘Problem duration’)
Seriousness (see “Problem seriousness”)
Links to other identified justiciable problems (see “Causes and consequences”)
Whether problem involved discrimination
Objectives (in trying to resolve problem)
Nature of objective (monetary, non-monetary, etc.)
Value (of matter problem concerned)
Relative importance (where multiple objectives)
Whether objectives achieved (e.g. fully, in part, etc.)
Outcome
Brief description (open text)
Whether concluded (see “Problem duration”)
Means disagreement/problem concluded (e.g., through a court decision, negotiation, etc., including “putting up with” problem)
Satisfaction/happiness with outcome (all parties)
Favourableness of outcome
Fairness of outcome (all parties)
In general
“Distributive justice”
“Restorative justice”
Timeliness of outcome
Finality of outcome/whether outcome implemented
Whether respondent complied
Whether other party complied
Enforcement mechanisms
Sufficiency of explanations provided for outcome/“Transparency” of outcome
Understanding of outcome
Problem duration
How long problem lasted/has lasted to date
Problem start date
Problem end date
Whether problem ongoing
Whether disagreement ongoing
Whether problem ongoing
Whether ongoing problem will conclude
When ongoing problem will conclude
Problem seriousness
Relative seriousness
Most serious
Scaled seriousness (seriousness, importance of resolution, etc.)
Impact on life (time spent worrying, ability to live normally, etc.)
Impact (specific) (see “Causes and consequences”)
Has situation improved/deteriorated
Seriousness to others
Problem resolution strategy
Brief description (open text)
Overall strategy (single questions for determining basic approach)
Whether thought problem would be sorted out without action
How difficult it was thought it would be/it turned out to be to sort out problem
Relative difficulty of resolving (multiple) problems
Capability to resolve problem (see “Capability”)
Whether any action taken
Obstacles to action (cost, time, social implications, etc.) (see also “Capability”)
When first action taken
Whether previous experience influenced strategy
Whether information obtained (see “Information”)
Whether any information/advice suggested respondent would not obtain objectives (in seeking to resolve problem)
Contact/negotiation with other party
Whether
Form of communication
What aiming to achieve
What achieved
Obstacles to contact
Unsuccessful attempts to communicate (either way)
Contact through an intermediary
Use of Internet (see “Use of Internet”)
Use of written materials
Whether
About what
Produced by
How helpful
Whether assistance sought/obtained from family/friends (“informal assistance”)
Whether
Who
Why
What sought
What obtained
How useful
Whether expert
Sources of formal assistance (see “Formal assistance’”
Unsuccessful attempts to obtain information (see “Unsuccessful attempts to obtain information/assistance”)
Unsuccessful attempts to obtain formal assistance (see “Unsuccessful attempts to obtain information/assistance”)
Consideration of formal assistance
Processes used (see “Processes used”)
Consideration of processes
Third party involvement in sorting out problem (see also “Processes used”)
Whether/by who solicited
Type of involvement
Other actions to try to resolve problem (e.g. thinking about options, collecting evidence, etc.)
Whether withdrew claim/defence
Ordering of elements of strategy
Reasons for strategy choices (see “Reasons”)
Processes used
Formal processes used
Nature
Court/tribunal (see “Court/tribunal proceedings”)
Formal mediation, conciliation or arbitration (see “Mediation, conciliation and arbitration”)
Ombudsman
Police
Tribal/social
Religious
Other
Informal processes used
Nature (e.g. negotiation, use of intermediaries)
Party initiating process(es)
Cost of process(es) (see “Cost of problem resolution”)
Whether process(es) concluded problem (see “Outcome”)
Reason for choice of process
Duration of process(es)
Ordering of processes
Whether any documentation needed to be signed, and whether documentation understood
Language process used
Availability of interpreter
Ability to monitor/communication concerning progress of process
Whether suffered any abuse/discrimination as part of process (including bribes) (see also “Cost of problem resolution”)
Whether suffered any threats or physical violence
Details of any detention experienced
Satisfaction with process(es) used
Utility of processes
Relative utility (where multiple processes) of processes
Attitude to processes used (see “Attitude to Processes used”)
Reasons
For inaction
For not doing more
For handling a problem alone
For not obtaining independent advice or other assistance
For not obtaining legal advice
For not obtaining help from lawyer
For obtaining (or considering) help from lawyer
For obtaining (or considering) help from other source
For not using formal process
For withdrawing claim/defence
Regrets (regarding how problem handled)
Whether regrets about how problem handled
What wish had done
What wish had known
Would assistance have led to a better outcome
What assistance would have improved outcome
Traditional dispute resolution mechanisms (see also “Processes used”)
Whether traditional dispute resolution mechanism used
Which traditional dispute resolution mechanism
Attitude/nature of experience (see “Attitude to processes used”)
Outcome (see also “Outcome”)
Unsuccessful attempts to obtain information/formal assistance (from independent “advisors”)
Details of advisor(s)
Why unable to obtain information
Why unable to obtain assistance
Use of Internet
(general use/access dealt with separately through demographic questions)
Whether used
What looked for/hoped to achieve (e.g. locate help, obtain information, etc.)
What found/achieved
Websites visited
How websites identified/located
Utility of Internet