Comparative studies of interpreting provision in various countries show a spectrum of response, ranging from those countries that deny the existence of multilingual communication issues, to reliance on ad hoc services, to generic language services, to fully comprehensive responses. Some countries have adopted a legalistic stance towards the provision of interpreters, guided by constitutional or legal imperatives. Using international data, the paper examines the various factors that constrain or propel nations into one or another place along this spectrum. Three essential factors are identified as constituting a comprehensive approach: provision of language services, training and accreditation. Even when these criteria are satisfied, however, shortcomings can still be identified particularly in the development of a coherent interpreting profession. Unlike conference interpreting, which basically grew as a profession-driven field, liaison interpreting has grown as essentially an institution-driven field, with important consequences for status and professional issues.