เปรียบเทียบวิธี
ดูวิธีที่เลือกเทียบกันแบบเคียงข้าง แถวที่ต่างกันจะถูกเน้นไว้
| การวิจัยกฎหมายตามหลักคำสอนเชิงวิพากษ์× | การวิเคราะห์เปรียบเทียบกฎหมาย× | |
|---|---|---|
| สาขาวิชา | วิธีการภาคสนาม | วิธีการภาคสนาม |
| ตระกูล | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| ปีกำเนิด≠ | 1970s–1980s (Critical Legal Studies movement; applied to doctrinal method from 1980s onward) | Late 19th century; formalised 1900 |
| ผู้ริเริ่ม≠ | Synthesized from Traditional Doctrinal Legal Research and Critical Legal Studies (Roberto Unger, Duncan Kennedy, and others) | Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (early conceptualisation); Raymond Saleilles and Édouard Lambert (modern discipline, 1900 Paris Congress) |
| ประเภท≠ | Qualitative legal research approach | Qualitative legal research method |
| แหล่งต้นตำรับ≠ | Hutchinson, T. (2013). Doctrinal Research: Researching the Law. In D. Watkins & M. Burton (Eds.), Research Methods in Law. Routledge. link ↗ | Zweigert, K., & Kötz, H. (1998). An Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd ed., T. Weir, Trans.). Oxford University Press. ISBN: 978-0198268598 |
| ชื่อเรียกอื่น | critical legal doctrinal analysis, critical black-letter research, critical legal doctrine, CLS-informed doctrinal research | comparative law, legal comparison, comparative jurisprudence, CLA |
| ที่เกี่ยวข้อง | 6 | 6 |
| สรุป≠ | Critical doctrinal legal research combines traditional black-letter legal analysis — systematically mapping the rules, principles, and doctrines found in statutes and case law — with the evaluative lens of critical legal theory. Rather than treating legal doctrine as a neutral or self-contained system, it interrogates the ideological assumptions, power relations, and social consequences embedded in legal rules, asking not only what the law says but whose interests it serves and what alternatives it forecloses. | Comparative legal analysis is a structured research method that examines how two or more legal systems — whether national, regional, or supranational — address a common legal problem. By placing rules, doctrines, and judicial decisions side by side, researchers identify convergences, divergences, and the underlying societal, historical, and political forces that shape legal solutions. The method is foundational to law reform, harmonisation efforts, treaty drafting, and academic legal scholarship. |
| ScholarGateชุดข้อมูล ↗ |
|
|