Network analysis and comparative migration law: examples from the European Court of Human Rights

Abstract

International migration law (IML) is famously fragmented, which provides fertile ground for comparative inquiry. However, this task is inhibited the heterodox nature of IML as it draws on a composite body of law that is expressed in different concepts, interpretations and languages. This paper presents network analysis as one useful methodology for navigating IML's normative architecture and empirically mapping case law and its interrelations. Part I introduces network analysis as a data driven method for representing the relationship between variables in a legal network. Part II exemplifies its empirical purchase in the European Court of Human Rights' migration case law. Part III suggests the further added value that arises for a comparative migration law by bringing into scope authoritative judicial practice across wider data sets. Part IV concludes reflexively by asking what unravelling the web of IML might reveal for a field always caught between universalist and relativist theoretical narratives.

Data-Driven Futures of International Refugee Law

“…Kjaerum 2020;Thomas et al 2019), and similar inroads are being 5 made in refugee law research (see e.g. Rehaag 2019;Byrne, Gammeltoft-Hansen et al 2022;Ghezelbash et al (forthcoming), Chen and Eagel 2017). However, the wider benefits of computational methods in refugee law research arguably still remains underexplored and is rarely reflected in more mainstream refugee law scholarship.…”

Back to the Future? The Evolution of European Social Citizenship through the Lens of Citations

“…The data was used to construct two citation networks using the software Gephi, 18 connecting a judgment (node) to all the judgments it cites (edges) and mapping the various interconnections. Gephi visualises citations as figurative models, flashing out how a single case is linked to other cases in the network and singling out judgments that are central to this network (Byrne, Gammeltoft-Hansen, and Olsen 2023). According to Šadl and Olsen, by studying the incoming citations, cases which are central to the structure can be identified in a systematic manner as they accumulate a higher importance score (Šadl and Olsen 2017).…”

“…A mixed methods approach is selected to optimise the accuracy of the findings. On the one hand, the use of network analysis contains the selection bias in determining the importance of cases which is inherent in doctrinal approaches (Byrne, Gammeltoft-Hansen, and Olsen 2023;Šadl and Olsen 2017). The strengths of the citation network analysis rest in the ability to "ensure the reproducibility, generalizability, and empirical validity of doctrinal studies" (Šadl and Olsen 2017, 330) and to unearth hidden patterns (Byrne, Gammeltoft-Hansen, and Olsen 2023).…”

“…On the one hand, the use of network analysis contains the selection bias in determining the importance of cases which is inherent in doctrinal approaches (Byrne, Gammeltoft-Hansen, and Olsen 2023;Šadl and Olsen 2017). The strengths of the citation network analysis rest in the ability to "ensure the reproducibility, generalizability, and empirical validity of doctrinal studies" (Šadl and Olsen 2017, 330) and to unearth hidden patterns (Byrne, Gammeltoft-Hansen, and Olsen 2023). On the other hand, the doctrinal analysis is relied upon to counter the limitations of the network approach, namely the fact that all citations are treated equally, without distinguishing whether the case was cited as an authority or was overruled (Šadl and Olsen 2017).…”

Lives on Pause?

“…The UNHCR, founded in 1950, is mandated to cater to the welfare of IDPs, refugees, stateless people and returned refugees, and work on durable solutions for refugees. Host nations are required to follow the non-refoulement principle and provide protection and support to refugees who have fled their country of origin due to political, religious or social violence, and find it unsafe to return to that country (Byrne et al, 2023).…”