No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
Let us think a bit about the purposes of research in international arbitration. Why do we do research in this field? What are we trying to achieve? How good are we at doing that? How has all that changed, if it has, over the last 30 years? Let me start with general things. In general, it is said that the purpose of any academic discipline, be it within hard sciences, social sciences or humanities, is to articulate propositions. These propositions together form a system of thought. And this system of thought creates knowledge that is susceptible, if not of verification (think ‘empirical studies’), then at least of rational assent, of rational approval. In other words, it seeks to improve our understanding of what has happened and what is likely to happen. Of course, in law generally, much of what is published in law reviews does not try to do that. It does not really try to produce knowledge. It has more of an advocacy spin. It tries to produce opinion. It is something closer to religion than to social sciences (notice the connotation of the word ‘doctrine’). This type of scholarship identifies itself with the work of an appellate court, chastising or complimenting the lower court. It tries to be part of the substance of the law, to shape doctrines, to offer solutions to judges, arbitrators and legislators.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.