Comparative Methodology and Pluralism in Legal Comparison in a Global Age

Abstract

This article grew to look deeper into the relationship between different methodological tools in comparative law enquiries. There are several factors that currently affect these enquiries, such as the emergence of new spheres of normativity and transnational actors determining a new configuration of the relationship between centre and periphery. Different forms and visions of legal pluralism could characterise a cultural tradition and different ways, in which existing nations, which have a pluralistic legal system, interact. Furthermore, one might add the consideration that the presence of different forms of pluralism—a pluralism of pluralisms—implies a constant and urgent need to reconsider the adequacy of the methodologies in comparative law. Hence, we can use different approaches because there are different purposes that the comparison pursues. Though the horizontal comparison is certainly a widespread tendency for comparative analyses, from a methodological point of view, we need to consider the importance of forms of vertical comparison, both a top-down and bottom-up approach

Migrants and Refugees in Europe

“…The chapter uses primarily the methodology of comparative law, favouring an approach open to other sciences and consistent with the 'methodological pluralism' (Scarciglia, 2015), which implies an integration of different research methods (functional, structural, systematic and critical method) in connection with the research question (Frankenberg, 2012). Consistently with the dynamic nature of the object, a multifactor analysis is proposed, carried out with a necessarily interdisciplinary methodological approach not only in the context of legal fields but also with other complementary social sciences (Hirschl, 2014).…”

Implementasi Media Boneka Jari Melalui Kegiatan Bercerita Dalam Mengembangkan Kemampuan Berbicara Anak Usia Dini

“…Meskipun bahasa anak bervariasi, balita mudah menerima (mendengarkan) kosakata, menurut Griffiths dalam (Scarciglia, 2015) pada usia dua tahun anak hanya belajar bagaimana berkomunikasi dan biasanya tidak memperpanjang percakapan berulang-ulang dan jangan mempertahankan topik yang sudah lama. Bayi-bayi secara efektif mengeluarkan suara sejak ia dilahirkan.…”

Challenges in Comparative Constitutional Law Studies: Between Globalization and Constitutional Tradition.

“…'the comparison between systems, or legal institutions not belonging to the same level' (Scarciglia 2015) under a twofold perspective: a topdown approach, investigating the influence of international law at the domestic level, and a bottomup approach dealing with the transposi tion of domestic law at the international level. This approach to comparative constitutional law may combine 'the dynamic pro files of legal traditions with the transition from the traditional study of nation states to that of epistemic communities' (Scarciglia 2015). In such a way, vertical comparison enables the comparatist to identify what Scarciglia has defined as the 'common zone of impact', the evergrowing intersection between the local and the global (rules, formants and institutions common to both sets and their respective influence).…”