Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Series Title
      Series Title
      Clear All
      Series Title
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Content Type
    • Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Country Of Publication
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Target Audience
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
60,756 result(s) for "LEGAL RESEARCH"
Sort by:
Empirical Legal Research and Scholarship in Nigeria: Issues, Challenges and Prospects
Methodology remains a problematic aspect of legal research and scholarship, especially in developing countries. The sciences are readily adapted to the empirical method. It is doubtful whether the same can be said of law and legal research and scholarship, particularly in Nigeria. The doctrinal method appears to be the home of legal research in Nigeria. Comparatively, fewer published legal research outputs are based on empirical studies than doctrinal studies. Therefore, this paper uses the administrative records analysis to explore the main issues, challenges, and prospects of empirical legal research in Nigeria. This paper believes that if law is to fulfil its role as an instrument of social engineering, then it is time to give as much attention to the doctrinal approach as to empirical legal research in Nigeria.
Analyzing the law qualitatively
PurposeThis article develops a methodological framework to support qualitative analyses of legal texts. Scholars across the social sciences and humanities use qualitative methods to study legal phenomena but often overlook formal legal texts as productive sites for analysis. Moreover, when qualitative researchers do analyze legal texts, they rarely discuss the methodological underpinnings that support their approach. A thorough consideration of the methodological underpinnings of qualitative approaches to legal analysis is therefore warranted.Design/methodology/approachBy bringing critical legal theory into conversation with qualitative methodology, this article outlines a set of key principles to inform qualitative approaches to reading the law.FindingsTo construct this methodological framework, this article first distinguishes between qualitative approaches to textual analysis and the doctrinal approaches undertaken in legal practice and formal legal scholarship. It then considers how this qualitative approach might be applied to one particular genre of legal text: namely, judicial opinions, otherwise known as reasons for judgment. In doing so, it argues that robust qualitative analyses of legal texts must consider the unique characteristics of those texts, such as their distinct form, voice, rhetorical structure, and performative capabilities.Originality/valueThe methodological framework outlined here should encourage qualitative researchers to approach legal texts more readily and challenge the hegemony of doctrinal approaches to legal interpretation in social science research.
Challenges for the Implementation of the Rights of Nature
The recognition of the rights of nature is currently being debated in the juridical, sociological, and ethical fields. In Ecuador and Bolivia the recognition of the rights of Pachamama (Mother Earth) began in the context of constitutional and legal amendments more than a decade ago. This process was articulated with proposals presented as alternatives to global capitalism related to the indigenous worldviews known as buen vivir or vivir bien. An exploration of these processes identifies a number of challenges to sociolegal research and points to the increasing acknowledgment of the rights of nature in various countries in Latin America and other parts of the world. Actualmente se debate el reconocimiento de los derechos de la naturaleza en los ámbitos jurídico, sociológico y ético. En Ecuador y Bolivia el reconocimiento de los derechos de la Pachamama (Madre Tierra) comenzó en el contexto de las enmiendas constitucionales y legales hace más de una década. Este proceso se articuló con propuestas presentadas como alternativas al capitalismo global y relacionadas con las cosmovisiones indígenas conocidas como buen vivir o vivir bien. Una exploración de estos procesos identifica una serie de desafíos a la investigación socio-legal y apunta al creciente reconocimiento de los derechos de la naturaleza en varios países de América Latina, así como otras partes del mundo.
Genetic resources, justice, and reconciliation : Canada and global access and benefit sharing
\"When the oral history of a medicinal plant as a genetic resource is used to develop a blockbuster drug, how is the contribution of indigenous peoples recognized in research and commercialization? What other ethical, legal, and policy issues come into play? Is it accurate for countries to self-identify as users or providers of genetic resources? This edited collection, which focuses on Canada, is the result of research conducted in partnership with indigenous peoples in that country, where melting permafrost and new sea lanes have opened the region's biodiversity, underscoring Canada's status as a user and provider of genetic resources and associated indigenous knowledge\"-- Provided by publisher.
Qualitative Methods for Law Review Writing
Typical law review articles not only clarify what the law is, but also examine the history of the current rules, assess the status quo, and present reform proposals. To make theoretical arguments more plausible, legal scholars frequently use examples: they draw on cases, statutes, political debates, and other sources. But legal scholars often pick their examples unsystematically and explore them armed with only the tools for doctrinal analysis. Unsystematically chosen examples can help develop plausible theories, but they rarely suffice to convince readers that these theories are true, especially when plausible alternative explanations exist. This project presents methodological insights from multiple social science disciplines and from history that could strengthen legal scholarship by improving research design, case selection, and case analysis. We describe qualitative techniques rarely found in law review writing, such as process tracing, theoretically informed sampling, and most similar case design, among others. We provide examples of best practice and illustrate how each technique can be adapted for legal sources and arguments.
Conducting Socio-Legal Research in a Conflict Area during a Pandemic: Reflections and Lessons for Future Researchers
A “sink or swim” approach has been considered the only way to learn how to conduct empirical research; this should not be the case. Empirical research can be challenging for methodological, practical and ethical reasons; thus there should be detailed and systematic reporting on the methodology adopted. The absence of studies documenting the experiences of researching law implies that important lessons gained by one cohort are not readily accessible in a systematic way for the next. This article presents the methodology of research that was conducted in a conflict area in Nigeria during the pandemic; it aims to provide detailed reporting on the research and highlight the challenges. It offers lessons to future researchers undertaking socio-legal research in a conflict zone, during a pandemic or both. It contributes to the body of knowledge that presents not just what is being done in legal research but how, in order to develop “robust and cumulative scholarly traditions”.