The Limits of Constitutional Convergence

Rosalind Dixon, E. Posner
{"title":"The Limits of Constitutional Convergence","authors":"Rosalind Dixon, E. Posner","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1677634","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Globalization, some legal scholars suggest, is a force that makes increasing convergence among different countries’ constitutions more or less inevitable. This Essay explores this hypothesis by analyzing both the logic – and potential limits – to four different mechanisms of constitutional convergence: first, changes in global “superstructure”; second, comparative learning; third, international coercion; and fourth, global competition. For each mechanism, it shows, quite special conditions will in fact be required before global convergence is likely even at the level of legal policy. At a constitutional level, it further suggests, it will be even rarer for these mechanisms to create wholesale convergence. This also has direct implications for ongoing debates over the desirability of constitutional decision-makers seeking to engage in global learning or borrowing.","PeriodicalId":87172,"journal":{"name":"Chicago journal of international law","volume":"46 1","pages":"399"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"54","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chicago journal of international law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1677634","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 54

Abstract

Globalization, some legal scholars suggest, is a force that makes increasing convergence among different countries’ constitutions more or less inevitable. This Essay explores this hypothesis by analyzing both the logic – and potential limits – to four different mechanisms of constitutional convergence: first, changes in global “superstructure”; second, comparative learning; third, international coercion; and fourth, global competition. For each mechanism, it shows, quite special conditions will in fact be required before global convergence is likely even at the level of legal policy. At a constitutional level, it further suggests, it will be even rarer for these mechanisms to create wholesale convergence. This also has direct implications for ongoing debates over the desirability of constitutional decision-makers seeking to engage in global learning or borrowing.
宪法趋同的极限
一些法律学者认为,全球化是一股力量,它使不同国家的宪法或多或少不可避免地日益趋同。本文通过分析四种不同宪政趋同机制的逻辑和潜在限制来探讨这一假设:第一,全球“上层建筑”的变化;第二,比较学习;第三,国际强制;第四,全球竞争。报告显示,对于每一种机制,实际上都需要相当特殊的条件,才能在法律政策层面实现全球趋同。报告进一步指出,在宪法层面上,这些机制更不可能产生大规模的趋同。这也对正在进行的关于宪法决策者寻求参与全球学习或借鉴的可取性的辩论产生了直接影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信