{"title":"Some possible legal approaches about ‘efficacy’ as research category of alternative methods for conflict solution (AMCS)","authors":"M. Miranda, Jorge Eduardo Vásquez-Santamaría","doi":"10.29375/01208578.3527","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"By questioning the applicability of Alternative Methods for Conflict Solution (AMCS) in public contracts of working, consulting and concession in the Metropolitan Area of Valle de Aburrá in the light of Law 80 of 1993, itwas showed the absence of previous methodological construction on efcacy as analytical category of juridical setting and sociojuridical objects. So it is valid to ask which juridical approaches allow the category ‘efcacy’ tointermediate the object of some juridical research? This work is centered in showing some possible implications of efcacy as category for juridicalresearch, by a theoretical foundation of its methodological development,from contributions of Law General Theory and statements about efcacy as general principle in the practice of administrative function and public deals. From two proposed dimensions, in the conclusions is stated thatefcacy is a category that allows a particular research approach, resulting both in a defnite searching criterion and in the validation of juridical and sociojuridical objects, such as conflict resolution in public contracts.","PeriodicalId":32933,"journal":{"name":"Temas SocioJuridicos","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Temas SocioJuridicos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29375/01208578.3527","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
By questioning the applicability of Alternative Methods for Conflict Solution (AMCS) in public contracts of working, consulting and concession in the Metropolitan Area of Valle de Aburrá in the light of Law 80 of 1993, itwas showed the absence of previous methodological construction on efcacy as analytical category of juridical setting and sociojuridical objects. So it is valid to ask which juridical approaches allow the category ‘efcacy’ tointermediate the object of some juridical research? This work is centered in showing some possible implications of efcacy as category for juridicalresearch, by a theoretical foundation of its methodological development,from contributions of Law General Theory and statements about efcacy as general principle in the practice of administrative function and public deals. From two proposed dimensions, in the conclusions is stated thatefcacy is a category that allows a particular research approach, resulting both in a defnite searching criterion and in the validation of juridical and sociojuridical objects, such as conflict resolution in public contracts.
根据1993年第80号法律,对冲突解决替代方法(AMCS)在Valle de aburr大都市区的公共工作、咨询和特许合同中的适用性提出质疑,表明以前缺乏将有效性作为司法环境和社会司法对象的分析范畴的方法构建。因此,我们有理由提出这样一个问题:哪些司法方法允许“效力”这一范畴成为某些司法研究的中间对象?这项工作的重点是通过其方法论发展的理论基础,从法律通论的贡献和关于行政职能和公共交易实践中功效作为一般原则的陈述中,展示功效作为司法研究范畴的一些可能含义。从提出的两个维度来看,结论中指出,有效性是一个允许特定研究方法的类别,从而产生明确的搜索标准和对司法和社会司法对象的验证,例如公共合同中的冲突解决。