CURRENTLY, THE MAIN BARRIERS TO ACCESS TO JUSTICE ARE ECONOMIC, GEOGRAPHIC, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL. COMPARATIVE STUDIES CONDUCTED BY THE ACCESS TO JUSTICE PROJECT STAFF HAVE IDENTIFIED MANY POSSIBLE REFORMS THAT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED TO IMPROVE THIS ACCESS. A GENERAL MODEL MODEL FOR THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS SUGGESTS THAT ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, BY WHICH THE THIRD PARTY DECIDES WHETHER IT WILL INTERVENE IN A DISPUTE, ARE CENTRAL TO THE ENTIRE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS. BASIC STRATEGIES AVAILABLE FOR IMPROVING ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN CIVIL CASES INCLUDE (1) ENCOURAGEMENT OF DIRECT TWO-PARTY SETTLEMENT THROUGH SPECIAL MEDIATION EFFORTS OR THE CREATION OF FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR SETTLEMENT; (2) AUTOMATIC RELIEF IN WHICH THIRD-PARTY INTERVENTION IS GRANTED AT THE REQUEST OF ONE PARTY; (3) SIMPLIFICATION OF ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA NECESSARY TO JUSTIFY THIRD-PARTY INTERVENTION; (4) SIMPLIFICATION OF SUCH PROCESSES AS FACT INVESTIGATION, CRITERIA ASCERTAINMENT, ISSUE PRESENTATION, AND DECISIONMAKING; (5) THE REDUCTION OF BOTH THE SCOPE OF ELIGIBILITY--DETERMINING TASKS AND THE RESOURCES NEEDED FOR SUCH TASKS; (6) THE SHIFTING OF TASKS TO THOSE BEST EQUIPPED TO DO THEM; AND (7) THE SHIFTING OF SOME OF THE COST EITHER TO THE GOVERNMENT OR TO MORE AFFLUENT INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS. THE DISPUTANTS' CONSENT IS CENTRAL TO THE CHOICE OF STRATEGY. SPECIFIC STRATEGIES SHOULD BE TAILORED TO SPECIFIC CATEGORIES OF DISPUTES. CASE EXAMPLES AND FOOTNOTES WITH REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (CFW)