This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
ADR Systems in Developing Countries and access to justice is a descriptive study based on qualitative, descriptive design, case studies, semi-structured interviews conducted with the participants based upon the theory of planned behavior and specific questions, aiming to provide much more details relevant to legal, traditional, cultural and religious mechanisms providing justice globally.
Successes of ADR systems in developed countries have motivated the developing countries to consider and practice the Alternative Dispute Resolution systems in their countries parallel to their existing legal systems due to its flexibility, cost effectiveness, and speedy working. Though definite differences exist in the legal systems and ADR systems but the risk-benefit ratios for success, implementation and public satisfaction have made it more favourite especially where there are financial disputes.
The purpose of the study is to explore the ADR systems in developing countries (conciliation, negotiation, mediation, arbitration, court annexed mediation, judicial settlement) which are integral part of society and culture for access to justice as well as to find the ratio of their awareness, success, barriers in enforcement of awards and role of public bodies in helping people to access to justice.
The critical review will focus on research objectives emerged, evolved and realised as well as review of the data and its appropriate interpretation and identification of outcomes, which the researcher claim in his proposal.
The results will help the researcher in identifying his progress and targets.
Keywords: ADR, developing countries, access to justice, barriers in access to justice, NGO's and access to justice, legal systems and ADR systems.
Keywords: ADR Systems, developing countries and ADR systems, enforcement of awards in developing countries, role of NGO's in ADR systems, barriers in access to justice.
Table of Contents
ADR systems success and acknowledgement in developed countries have motivated the developing countries to consider and adopt these systems parallel to their existing legal systems due to their flexibility, cost effectiveness, and speediness. Although it is recognised by experts that there is no definite differences in current existing legal systems and ADR systems but the ratio of benefits in their acknowledgement, implementation and success, public satisfaction and trust worthiness have made them more favourite especially in financial disputes.
"Until recently, the courts have been used as the main forum to resolve disputes. However, public dissatisfaction with an adversarial system, government recognition of experts other than judges, and an increased awareness of the impact of discretion on the administration of justice, especially how cultural differences affect the exercise of discretion, have all led to increased popularity and need for alternative dispute resolution processes (Bell, 2004:254)". 
There are several key elements within the research proposal which include a statement of the focus of research, aims and objectives of the research and, significance of the research design. This can be accomplished by placing critical study - within the title, aims and objectives, lliterature review, methodology adopted, data collection, results, discussion and interpretations, recommendations and conclusions.
"In this respect the process represents an exercise in critical research which Alvesson and Skoldberg (2000: 144) characterize as 'triple hermeneutic': interpretive social science with a critical interpretation of "unconscious processes, ideologies, power relations and other expressions of dominance that entail the privileging of certain interests over others".
In addressing these issues this critique represents a critically self-reflexive exercise; a process of 'double loop' learning (Argyris and Schon, 1974)". 
2.0 Critique, Methodology and Planning for research
Critique is an art as well as a science to dissert the decisions made early at planning and design stage, need to be reconsidered and modified as the program grows and thinking develops. It helps the researchers to evaluate not only the adequacy of research progress but also the research methodology. By critiquing objectively, a benchmark can be established against which standards of achievement and excellence, setbacks and deviations from original targets are set forth by the researcher and are measured enabling the researcher to carry out a comprehensive and conclusive research work.
Critical evaluation is defined as ''a systematic way of considering the truthfulness of a piece of research, the results and how relevant and applicable they are''.  It should be remembered that a critique will often be positive and
should not be seen as just negative. If negative, the implications of any weaknesses in the study need to be considered. 
There are number of criteria's to evaluate researches regarding ADR systems based on planning, designing and working of the researcher's own discretion. This can be formative or summative. "Formative evaluation is typically conducted during the development to validate or ensure that goals are being achieved and to improve by means of identification and subsequent remediation of problematic aspects." (Fitzpatrick et al., 1997) while Summative Evaluation, on the other hand, looks more at learner's performance to see how well they did on a learning task that utilized specific learning materials and methods. In a sense, it lets the learner know "how they did," but more importantly, by looking at how the learner's did" (Joseph R. Matthew, 2007).
At the most basic critiquing is 'making a value judgement on what is reported'
(Parahoo 1998) and particular attention is paid to, aims of the research, methodology and findings and an unbiased and non-prejudiced consideration of these areas. Critiquing is not made only about description of research but also judgements and "the quality of the research is closely tied to the kinds of decisions the researcher makes in conceptualizing, designing, and executing the study and in interpreting and communicating the study results" (Polit and Hungler 1995), having the decisions which the researcher has considered to reveal the truth based on principals:
Be sure to comment on the study's strengths as well as it's weaknesses, be balanced;
Avoid vague generalisations, be specific;
Justify your criticism why should things have been different;
Be objective -don't be overly critical, e.g. if you don't like the topic or methodology;
Don't patronise, be sarcastic or be condescending. Be constructive, you might;
Be a researcher someday;
Practically, how might the researcher improve upon what has been done;
Evaluate all aspects of the study - substance, method, interpretation, ethics and presentation. (Polit and Hungler 1995)
"Traditional ADR program evaluation is a way to determine whether an ADR program is meeting its goals and objectives. Evaluation data are useful in finding out what works and what does not work and may be a critical factor in decisions to modify or expand a program". 
Polit and Hungler (1991:653) define a research design as the overall plan for collecting and analysing data including specifications for enhancing the internal and external validity of the study in terms of:
Methods of analysis explained and appropriate for type of data;
Appropriate statistical tests used and correctly performed;
Tables/graphs labelled and understandable;
Does qualitative data identify themes with narratives supporting emergent themes;
How was data validated, no evidence of bias.
"Research design refers to the overall plan of the research project devised to obtain answers to the research questions and encompasses the:
research aims, hypotheses/questions (stated in the proposal
rationale that underpins the method (why you did what you did);
data collection methods;
strategies used to analyse the data (stated in the research design
section of the research proposal following the review of the literature); 
There is no standard method or research design content to write about in the research proposal because every research design is unique. It is therefore necessary to actively decide what information will be provided in the research proposal and what will be left out."
"A good design will build upon an existing program structure and will establish an evaluation methodology for each program "core" area, core areas being defined by statute or initiative. Overall program effectiveness can then be determined by combining data from all function areas, with consideration being given to intangible benefits and consumer satisfaction. 
There are a number of forms of evaluation at planning and designing stage to get:
Outcome evaluation: How the research achieves its goals. It is an attempt to measure the performance or effectiveness of the information collected.
Process evaluation: This looks at what actually happened and what interventions took place, who was involved and what people thought about the process.
A comprehensive evaluation system measures tangible and intangible benefits including customer satisfaction, using both quantitative and qualitative data.
Development of an evaluation design might include the following steps:
Identification and Clarification of ADR Program Goals
Clear goals and objectives mean that useful conclusions can be drawn from the data collected.
Development of an Appropriate Evaluation Methodology
determine what is to be measured and how, what the sources of the data are, and how the data will be collected.
Development of an Analysis plan and Research Methodologies
based on experimental designs (time-cost benefit analysis) and provide statistically reliable results.
Collection Data Mechanisms, Status reports, case studies, time series collections, agency databases, logs, surveys, and evaluation forms are all sources of information, as are personal interviews.
How a program is implemented and what is its impact on its overall goals.
Best method for communicating the finding to audience in form of briefings and presentations, written reports, hold meetings with users, and/or prepare a written report. 
In 1995, RAND's Institute for Civil Justice produced a guide to evaluating alternative dispute resolution programs  . The guide suggests that evaluations are conducted to answer two fundamental questions:
Provide critical information up front. Get straight to the point;
Avoid statements that say what each section will provide (for example: 'this proposal will outline the literature and the research design');
Avoid statements of the obvious (for example: 'the research question arises from a review of the literature');
Avoid unnecessary detail (for example, interview transcription methods, standardised ethics procedures, the conduct of literature reviews);
Avoid repetition as much as possible (although some repetition is ok in the introductory sections of the proposal);
Place critical information at the beginning and ending of major sections.
Do not write anything not directly linked to your research (such as general descriptions of literature, methods or theoretical approaches);
The researcher can select from a number of research design alternatives e.g., focus groups, individual depth interviews and in-person or web based surveys.
The researcher has determined to conduct an exploratory study and has selected to focus on interviews in addition to quantitative study in the selected developing countries where access to resources is easy. To contact focus groups is also in plans as they "help in illuminating how the target audience thinks about and make decisions about the subject of interest. These studies are useful in understanding why people do and what they do. Focus groups give us insight into the motivations that drive actions". 
The researcher had not listed the key stakeholders or enterprises to be studied neither has the researcher mentioned the criteria for selecting the persons to be studied.
3.0 Evidence of Clear aims and Objectives of the Research Project
The aims and objectives of a critique link closely with the goals and objectives of the research proposal and needs and interests of those who have been asked to critique the research:
To find out whether the research program is on its course or not including a proposed program of further work with a timetable for the remainder of the research;
To determine whether the research program is meeting its aims and objectives and are clear and consistent with the purpose of research
To assess the adequacy of research progress, the research methodology, and its suitability for the doctoral research or other intended purposes;
To discuss how research objectives emerged, evolved, or reasons for modification to original objectives;
To review the data analysis and interpretation techniques, the researcher has adopted;
To discuss the novelty of the research project and researcher's contribution to knowledge in his field;
There are a number of criterions to consider when critiquing a research project based on clarity of concept, evidence collected, literature review, justification of research method, transitioning and consistency of chapters, conclusions/recommendation derived, references and referencing, research design, and implementation plan but the basic theme is that aims and objectives of critique report should match closely with the objectives of the evaluated research without undermining the objectivity of critique.
While evaluating a project, we need to gather some different types of evidence e.g. quantitative evidence and qualitative evidence.
Quantitative evidence may be obtained using research tools such as administrative records or survey questionnaires or local area statistics while
evidence based on quantitative data gives the impression of being objective and
qualitative data, is non numerical and base upon observations, opinions, interpretations, and impressions, seem to be more subjective, but in fact it is descriptive e.g. participant comments; observations of activities of workers or staff involved; solo interviews; focus groups; questionnaires (the research tools) to investigate observations; attitudes and experiences of community groups etc which helps in the interpretation of quantitative data.
For a research project, these two types of evidences are gathered, on both impacts and processes.
4.0 Critical review of relevant literature
"A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers' and 'a piece of discursive prose, not a list describing or summarizing one piece of literature after another' and 'lets to gain and demonstrate skills in two areas;
information seeking: the ability to scan the literature efficiently, using manual or computerized methods, to identify a set of useful articles and books;
critical appraisal: the ability to apply principles of analysis to identify unbiased and valid studies." 
The review can be information in a particular subject area, or scattered in different forms, a simple summary of the sources, or any organized pattern having an argument.
At the stage of preparing a protocol for literature review, "a more extensive and critical review of the existing knowledge about the research
problem is essential. One must find out whether or not others have investigated the same or a similar problem. This is important because:
It helps further understanding the problem proposed for the research and may lead to improving on the "statement of the problem";
Study variables can be better understood and their relationship conceptualized;
A research hypothesis can be formulated;
It helps in finding out what others have reported on the issue. Taking this into account will help in designing the research protocol." 
By reviewing literature, a researcher can find models in the area of interest or discipline; can narrow the research topic limiting the number of sources; consider the age of sources using evidence and interpretation of available sources being selective, using quotes sparingly, keeping own voice and using causation when paragraphing while consulting other works. A competitive literature review must do these things:
be organized around and related directly to the thesis or research question you are developing;
synthesize results into a summary of what is and is not known;
identify areas of controversy in the literature;
formulate questions that need further research;
Have I critically analysed the literature following through a set of concepts and questions, comparing items to each other in the ways they deal with them? Instead of just listing and summarizing items, do I assess them, discussing strengths and weaknesses?
Will the reader find my literature review relevant, appropriate, and useful?
4.1 Relevance of literature and researcher's work
Measuring conceptual clarity is a science as well as an art and a mindset. During the evaluation, it depends on the evaluator how he understand the mind and opinion of the researcher and the stage where he makes an opinion that either researcher concept is clear or not and is he following his aims and objectives as set out and is within the limits of his research.
Conceptual clarity will help to extend knowledge about circumstances and conditions under which particular approaches are likely to be effective, meaningful and appropriate. (David et al, 2005)
Evaluation of relevant literature is a way of ascertaining the extent of lucidity and understanding of the subject of discourse. Conceptual clarity involves not just learning the essential attributes of the concept and ensuring that all essential attributes are present, but also avoiding going down misleading and trivial paths (Harvey et al,. 2007).
The researcher has collected references and relevant data after literature reviews related to his research and topics under research from libraries and internet but he consider it to be evidenced by quantitative and qualitative research using data collection and interpretation techniques.
5.0 How research objectives emerged, evolve and reasons for
modification to original objectives and Research Progress
The other aspect of critique is evaluating the adequacy of research progress, the research methodology which is suitable for research.
In the research proposal, the researcher suggests to apply survey model describing quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection.
A quantitative survey model will be used to find the answer of questions related to the aims of the research in developing countries from different sects of the society.
A qualitative survey - a selection of leaders, politicians, judges, policy makers, religious leader, social workers, NGO's and media anchors will be interviewed in person or some friend or interested person in promoting ADR mechanisms, in that country will be asked to further probe pertinent issues, collecting data by interviewing individual and analyzing responses about their insight on ADR systems.
To arrange interviews through net is another way which will be arranged after correspondence / emails on showing interest from the persons as mentioned above.
It is obvious that "Several writers have attempted to draw together the outcomes of ADR research, especially mediation research, and to suggest priorities for future research",  and they now argue that it is important to go beyond the general questions and focus on questions such as:
"What specific interventions work when, with whom, at what point in time, especially in dealing with power imbalances?
Factors (i.e. criteria) which indicate the suitability of different forms of ADR for different parties and disputes;
How to adapt ADR processes to the needs of different racial, ethnic and socio-economic groups;
How the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of ADR is affected by contextual factors (e.g. jurisdictional 'culture', the role of insurers and other key players as well as organisational policies);
These research priorities require more sophisticated statistical processes which can track many variables over time, the collection of highly specific information on parties and processes, and the integration of qualitative and quantitative data (i.e. mixed methodology)". 
and researcher have the intention to follow these researchers experience.
There appears to be a discrepancy between the research concept - which is cultural, traditional, religious and interpretive - and the research method - which is primarily empirical but the researcher can change the research concept if required, adopting an interpretive/ethnographic, ethnographic method; observation and interview would further probe the pertinent issues and more insight into the subject under investigation.
The researcher has made a change in data gathering, diverting attention from questionnaires to interviews on the basis of some experience in getting answers on trial basis which did not get response from the expected focus group. The researcher understands that only results from interviews will be more effective in data collection but questionnaires will not be abandoned and will be used where required.
It can be evaluated that the research is progressing quite well so far, and the programme for further work is adequate. The timetable has been updated to accommodate some changes and modifications to original plan. According to this plan, as soon as the ethical committee approves the questionnaires, the researcher will contact the members of the focused group and will try to get times for interviews as search the interested persons who can help the researcher. The researcher plans to attend 2-3 conferences during this year in Turkey, India and South Africa while an article "ADR Systems in Developing Countries and access to justice" has been sent by email to the editor of "Arbitrator" for publishing, already submitted to supervisor for comments.
Normally one equates an idea with a new species, but in fact every time a child is born, that's actually a new idea incarnating. It is reinventing the notion of "human being which changes constantly. It is constantly computing its future state from its current state. It's constantly computing its own time-evolution (Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic, 2007).
For humans are as a tiny subset of the universe, a part of the new ideas comes as the result of the re-configuration and reshaping of already existing elements and another part comes from the outside as a consequence of openness and interactivity of the system.
"The research objectives emerged from the researcher's literature review and discussion with members of different societies who explained their traditional dispute resolution systems. The researcher developed curiosity while reviewing literature and found some contradictions between oral and literal versions of the members of the community in some developing countries - particularly the traditional practices and enforcement of awards. This curiosity would further evolve into a research thesis whose objectives was not to draw a comparison line between oral versus literal history or traditional versus modern practices, but to integrated them into a hybrid model. Further stepping into the research, it emerged that culture impacts have dominant power in traditional use to the behavioral construct, and practices by the community or religious leaders. " 
6.0 Review of data analysis and interpretation
6.1 Data collection
While planning data collection, it is basic and necessary to think the kind of information or data you are willing to gather and include in your research but the question is how you will get the relevant information and what kind of analysis you are looking for and how it will be counted for as an evidence in answering the research question.
Burns and Grove (1999:272) point out those questionnaires tend to be used in descriptive studies designed to gather a broad spectrum of information from subjects.
Data in the phase of the study is under the process of collection by using a structured questionnaire with both open-ended questions that required written responses and closed-ended questions providing pre-determined options. The structured approach will allow the researcher to compute exact percentages. Data that is to be subjected to statistical analysis (Polit & Hungler 1999:311) must be gathered in such a way that it can be quantified. Structured data collection generally produces data that are easily quantified and validated.
Validity is the ability of an instrument to measure what it is supposed to measure. According to De Vos et al (2002:166), the definition of validity has two parts, namely whether the instrument actually measures the concept in question and whether the concept is measured accurately. Validity refers to the degree to which an instrument is doing what it is intended to do and evidence of validity is provided by several sources. Validity of the research instrument was evaluated for face, content and construct validity.
There are various ways in which qualitative researchers try to show that their findings are reliable (Coolican, 1994). Probably the most satisfactory approach is to see whether the findings obtained from a qualitative analysis can be replicated. This can be done by comparing the findings from an interview study with those from an observational study. As Coolican (1994) pointed out, there are various skills that interviewers need in order to obtain valuable data. These skills involve establishing a good understanding with the person being interviewed, adopting a non-judgmental approach, and developing effective listening skills.
"Qualitative researchers may use different approaches in collecting data, such as the grounded theory practice, narratology, storytelling, classical ethnography, or shadowing.  "Qualitative research often categorizes data into patterns as the primary basis for organizing and reporting results. Qualitative researchers typically rely on the following methods for gathering information: Participant Observation, Non-participant Observation, Field Notes, Reflexive Journals, Structured Interview, Unstructured Interview, Analysis of documents and materials  .
"Some distinctive qualitative methods are the use of focus groups and key informant interviews. The focus group technique involves a moderator facilitating a small group discussion between selected individuals on a particular topic. This is a particularly popular method in market research and testing new initiatives with users/workers." 
Creswell (1998) suggests that the tradition of qualitative inquiry selected by a researcher can shape the design of the study. He carefully provides text and tables comparing five major qualitative traditions: biography, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, and case study in six phases of research design (1998). We have found Creswell's approach to be highly beneficial and included several aspects of it in our own instruction of qualitative design.
Analysis of data
"Data analysis is an important stage of the research process. This programme includes a summary of that process and explores specific areas of data analysis that might be applicable to learners studying at undergraduate and post graduate levels". 
It aims to provide a definition of qualitative and quantitative data analysis and opportunities to explore photographic, video, textual and numerical data analysis through providing worked examples and further opportunities for learners to develop knowledge and skills in data analysis. The programme also aims to support the development of critical appraisal skills, thorough considering the critical review of research papers. The aims are achieved through captialising on the interactive opportunities of on-line learning.
Describing how the data will be analysed to answer the research question and contribute to the action aim, what instruments, methods and tools are to be used, clearing the logical connections between the data and how it will processed and presented answering the research question, is a technique, the researcher has to follow in data analysis.
In completing all these components, the following should be the outcomes:
"An awareness of the situation of qualitative data analysis within the
An awareness of the situation of quantitative data analysis within the
Skills in critically appraising the data analysis component of research
An appreciation of the different approaches to qualitative data analysis;
An appreciation of the different approaches to quantitative data analysis;
Skills in undertaking basic qualitative and quantitative data analysis"  . "Analyses must use theory and methods justifiable by reference to statistical literature (provided below in "Related Information") or by mathematical derivation.
Use appropriate analysis methods for complex sample, time series, and geospatial data, or variance estimates may be seriously biased.
If extensive seasonality, irregularities, known special causes, or variation in trends are present in the data, take those into account in the trend analysis.
Use robust methods if in doubt about the quality of the data (i.e., the quality of the data cleaning) or about the suitability of the data for analysis by standard parametric methods." 
Brink (2000:178) refers to data analysis as describing the data in meaningful terms. Data analysis requires researchers to be comfortable with developing categories and making comparisons. Researchers must be open to the possibility of seeing contradictory or alternative explanations. The recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed according to Creswell s (1994:155) eight-step descriptive method.
Evaluation that is based on data involves the interpretation of data in order to make decisions in relation to programs or schemes and can focus on the performance of individual organisations or practitioners.
Sequencing of the activities: Source of information and it collection in a planned manner involving the stake holders as early as possible help in the plan more eagerly.
Information and key data: It is critical to have complete information
Of legal system of each country's traditional ADR mechanisms, NGOs working in this sector so it can be later used to track improvements.
Data to be captured: Evaluators should attempt to capture and analyze in a timely manner the following information:
a. Validity and Reliability of Data: The methodologies adopted should be workable, valid and reliable so results obtained can be compared with other alternates or previous existing research.
b. Presentation of Data: The research should present a realistic, accurate and complete picture of the results.
c. Use of Data: ADR study cases can be summarized and publicized to foster a culture where a layman can get awareness and benefit when in need. The identified areas of improvement can be used to enhance the ADR program.
6.3 Critique on Data analysis and interpretation techniques
The researcher suggests in his proposal, an ethnographical method whose primary data collection and interpretation method is by interviews and observation. The researcher will observe how dispute resolver conduct the day-to-day resolution of cases by observing how they set the direction (isolationist or participative), conduct meetings (routine or impromptu), make decisions (unilateral or consensual), communicate (Top-down and down-up), orientation (task or people oriented or both), and regulating distress. The researcher will then be acquainted with the resolvers styles practiced by community leaders or judiciary, who were born and educated in the same country and are now part of that community and culture.
According to Brockopp and Hastings-Tolsma (1995:255), there are several common steps suggested by researchers in the process of data analysis in qualitative research. These include identification of themes, verifying the selected themes through reflection on the data and discussion with other researchers or experts in the area, categorising the themes and recording of support data for the categories.
It has been decided to construct an organising system from the data and not from the theoretical framework that guide the study. Different authors have different views on the construction of an organising system. According to Tesch (1990:119), interpretive qualitative researchers rarely use the theoretical framework to construct an organising system, while Miles and Huberman (1994:55 ) assert that conceptual frameworks and research questions are good for preventing overload. In order to work with the data, that will be coded and organised in the categories where they belonged. This assembling is referred to as re-contextualisation . The organising system will be then refined. Some topics have been organised together and given new names, while others will be identified as subcategories. The entire body of available data has been coded in this way. After completion of the process of coding and organising into subcategories and categories, the researcher has identified specific themes. The decision to conduct the analysis by hand was influenced by the researcher's knowledge of the process and by the number of participants in the study. The intimacy with the data gained by this process (Webb 1999:329) gave valuable insights into the factors that contributed to nurses decisions to emigrate.
The discussion of the findings will be presented according to the themes identified from the data provided in response to each question. Thereafter the findings will be related to the theoretical framework for this study, namely Maslow s Hierarchy of Needs Theory.
6.4 Documentation Content
"The data analysis report must contain details of the methods used during the data analysis, including a description of software used, a discussion of the data analysis assumptions, and key information relevant to obtaining the data analysis results.
Document all methods, assumptions, diagnostics, and robustness checks. Provide references to support the methods used in the data analysis, or a derivation of the theory supporting the method used in the report.
Include a statement of the limitations of the data analysis, including coverage and response limitations and statistical variation.
Archive the data and models used in the data analysis so the estimates can be reproduced.
Archive supporting technical documentation, such as standard error and significance test calculations, that help ensure transparency and reproducibility.
For recurring reports, consider producing a methodological report.
7.0 Concluding remarks, expected outcomes and results
Having considered all the information available to this research, the evaluation came to the following key conclusions:
The ADR Program enjoys varying levels of support amongst stakeholders. The information provided by them will be a valuable source for this research.
There is concern that public interest and views have not been defined how it can be judged that the thinking or opinions of that country's professionals or scholars present the views of their own.
ADR has the potential to improve an appellant's access to justice but it does not always do so. The research has disclosed some ways to access and barriers to access. The ways to access to justice have been defined as ADR mechanisms but if they fail and cannot provide relief then what the other may be?
The subject of proposal covers a number of countries. Although it seems too difficult to discuss the objectives of this research of each developing country. It may be the researcher cannot get all information and replies of questionnaire from all focused groups and persons. It is advised he should include in his research only those countries from where he can access all information related to his research.