基于网络的世界法律体系分类

M. Siems
{"title":"基于网络的世界法律体系分类","authors":"M. Siems","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2387584","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Legal scholars, economists and other social scientist often refer to the idea that countries can be classified into a number of “legal families” or “legal origins”. Yet, this research is unsatisfactory as regards the actual classifications of the legal systems of the world. Legal scholars often do not attempt to classify all countries: rather, in comparative law textbooks, the legal family taxonomy merely serves as a didactic device to outline some similarities and differences between selected countries. This paper also suggests that the legal origins taxonomy, popular with financial economists, is problematic, since, if one traces the source of this taxonomy, there are no substantive explanations why a particular country is considered as belonging to one of these categories. Thus, it is the aim of this paper to fill this gap and to develop a more robust taxonomy of legal systems. This taxonomy is based on a new dataset of 157 countries that is subsequently analysed with tools of network analysis. Applying tools of cluster optimisation, this paper finds that the world’s legal systems can be divided into the four clusters of the “Global Anglosphere”, the “Modern European Legal Culture”, the “Rule by Law or Religion”, and the “Weak Law in Transition”. It displays those clusters in a map, akin to the Inglehart-Welzel cultural map. Finally, it is suggested that identifying such clusters has important implications, not only for our understanding of the legal world, but also for the feasibility of legal transplants and harmonisation. Future research may also examine how these legal networks and clusters are related to economic and other data.A revised version of this paper, entitled \"Varieties of Legal Systems: Towards a New Global Taxonomy\", is available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2703292.","PeriodicalId":319905,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Treaties & Other Sources of International Law (Topic)","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Network-Based Taxonomy of the World's Legal Systems\",\"authors\":\"M. Siems\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2387584\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Legal scholars, economists and other social scientist often refer to the idea that countries can be classified into a number of “legal families” or “legal origins”. Yet, this research is unsatisfactory as regards the actual classifications of the legal systems of the world. Legal scholars often do not attempt to classify all countries: rather, in comparative law textbooks, the legal family taxonomy merely serves as a didactic device to outline some similarities and differences between selected countries. This paper also suggests that the legal origins taxonomy, popular with financial economists, is problematic, since, if one traces the source of this taxonomy, there are no substantive explanations why a particular country is considered as belonging to one of these categories. Thus, it is the aim of this paper to fill this gap and to develop a more robust taxonomy of legal systems. This taxonomy is based on a new dataset of 157 countries that is subsequently analysed with tools of network analysis. Applying tools of cluster optimisation, this paper finds that the world’s legal systems can be divided into the four clusters of the “Global Anglosphere”, the “Modern European Legal Culture”, the “Rule by Law or Religion”, and the “Weak Law in Transition”. It displays those clusters in a map, akin to the Inglehart-Welzel cultural map. Finally, it is suggested that identifying such clusters has important implications, not only for our understanding of the legal world, but also for the feasibility of legal transplants and harmonisation. Future research may also examine how these legal networks and clusters are related to economic and other data.A revised version of this paper, entitled \\\"Varieties of Legal Systems: Towards a New Global Taxonomy\\\", is available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2703292.\",\"PeriodicalId\":319905,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: Treaties & Other Sources of International Law (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: Treaties & Other Sources of International Law (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2387584\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Treaties & Other Sources of International Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2387584","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

法律学者、经济学家和其他社会科学家经常提到这样一种观点,即国家可以分为许多“法律家族”或“法律起源”。然而,就世界法律制度的实际分类而言,这项研究并不令人满意。法律学者通常不试图对所有国家进行分类:相反,在比较法教科书中,法律家族分类法只是作为一种教学手段,概述选定国家之间的一些相似之处和差异。本文还提出,金融经济学家普遍采用的法律起源分类法是有问题的,因为如果追溯这种分类法的来源,就会发现没有实质性的解释为什么一个特定的国家被认为属于这些类别之一。因此,本文的目的是填补这一空白,并制定一个更健全的法律制度分类学。该分类法基于157个国家的新数据集,随后使用网络分析工具对其进行分析。本文运用集群优化工具,将世界法律体系划分为“全球英语圈”、“现代欧洲法律文化”、“法治或宗教”和“转型中的弱法”四个集群。它将这些集群显示在地图上,类似于Inglehart-Welzel文化地图。最后,本文认为,识别这样的集群具有重要的意义,不仅对我们对法律世界的理解,而且对法律移植和协调的可行性。未来的研究还可能考察这些法律网络和集群如何与经济和其他数据相关。该文件的修订版题为“法律制度的多样性:走向新的全球分类法”,可在http://ssrn.com/abstract=2703292上找到。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Network-Based Taxonomy of the World's Legal Systems
Legal scholars, economists and other social scientist often refer to the idea that countries can be classified into a number of “legal families” or “legal origins”. Yet, this research is unsatisfactory as regards the actual classifications of the legal systems of the world. Legal scholars often do not attempt to classify all countries: rather, in comparative law textbooks, the legal family taxonomy merely serves as a didactic device to outline some similarities and differences between selected countries. This paper also suggests that the legal origins taxonomy, popular with financial economists, is problematic, since, if one traces the source of this taxonomy, there are no substantive explanations why a particular country is considered as belonging to one of these categories. Thus, it is the aim of this paper to fill this gap and to develop a more robust taxonomy of legal systems. This taxonomy is based on a new dataset of 157 countries that is subsequently analysed with tools of network analysis. Applying tools of cluster optimisation, this paper finds that the world’s legal systems can be divided into the four clusters of the “Global Anglosphere”, the “Modern European Legal Culture”, the “Rule by Law or Religion”, and the “Weak Law in Transition”. It displays those clusters in a map, akin to the Inglehart-Welzel cultural map. Finally, it is suggested that identifying such clusters has important implications, not only for our understanding of the legal world, but also for the feasibility of legal transplants and harmonisation. Future research may also examine how these legal networks and clusters are related to economic and other data.A revised version of this paper, entitled "Varieties of Legal Systems: Towards a New Global Taxonomy", is available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2703292.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Network-Based Taxonomy of the World's Legal Systems Law and Governance as Checks and Balances in Transatlantic Security: Rights, Redress, and Remedies in EU-US Passenger Name Records and the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program The Validity of International Sales Contracts: Irrelevance of the 'Validity Exception' in Article 4 Vienna Sales Convention and a Novel Approach to Determining the Convention's Scope Italy's Investment Treaty Practice and Case-Law: What Balance between Investors’ Protection and General Interests of States? US Public Education as a Form of Thick Injustice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1