International comparison of legal aid provides few answers

The Ministry of Justice has published a study that compares the publicly-funded legal services and justice systems of England and Wales, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand and Sweden.
 
The data examined covered 2000/1 to 2006/7. Given the significant differences in the methodology and the reporting of data associated with justice systems, the report states that making comparisons is very difficult and that any conclusions should be treated with caution.
 
With this in mind, some of the findings are still of interest:

• The number of cases supported per capita in England and Wales was higher than for any of the other countries in respect of both criminal and non-criminal legal aid
• Spending per cases supported was higher in England and Wales than all other study countries for both types of work with the sole exception of criminal cases in the Netherlands
• Spending on running the courts in England and Wales was much lower than in comparable countries. Spending on public prosecution was also comparatively low.

Criminal
The most important single factor in driving the high cost per capita of legal aid in England and Wales was the comparatively high number of legally-aided criminal cases.
 
This seems to be explained by a combination of the high volume of crime in England and Wales, the high proportion of cases brought to court and the higher proportion of defendants in those cases receiving legal aid.
 
The report examines whether eligibility in England and Wales might be a driver for high volume of criminal legal aid cases, however, this did not seem to be a factor.
 
Civil
The number of non-criminal legal aid cases is higher in England and Wales than other countries but the differential is much smaller than for criminal. The average spending per case was 30% higher in England and Wales than in other countries.
 
The composition of expenditure had changed significantly between 2001 and 2007 with family matters accounting for less than half civil spending in 2001 and more than two thirds in 2007. This seems to have been driven by the number of divorces, the legislation applying to procedure and eligibility rules.
 
Commonwealth effect?
The ratio of the number of cases being brought to court relative to the crime rate was higher in the commonwealth countries than in the countries of continental Europe where a higher proportion of cases were resolved without a court hearing. This seems to have been the only important difference between the two groups of countries.
 
No quick fix
The report acknowledges that the scope for addressing high legal aid spending in England and Wales is limited. This is because it has multiple causes and because looking at legal aid expenditure in isolation risks missing important structural differences between justice systems. The report also makes it clear that it did not seek to offer judgements about the quality of the legal work delivered.
 
You can read the report here: International comparison of publicly funded legal services and justice systems