UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB

UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY PROJECT REPORT

”TYPES OF LEGAL RESEARCH”

SUBMITTED TO SUBMITTED BY

PROF. GULSHAN KUMAR ANANYA KALIA

UILS, SECTION-D
PANJAB UNIVERSITY, ROLL NO. 192/20
CHANDIGARH B.COM LLB(HONS.)

1|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The success and final outcome of this project required a lot of guidance
and assistance from many people and I am extremely fortunate to have got
this all along the completion of my project report. Whatever I have done is
only due to such guidance and I would never forget to thank them.

I take this opportunity to record deep sense of gratitude to my teacher,

Prof Gulshan, University Institute of Legal Studies, Chandigarh for his
incontestably perfectly unmatched guidance, encouragement, valuable
suggestions and efforts made during the preparation of this project and
during his lectures which enabled me to complete this project successfully.

I owe my regards to the entire faculty of the Department of University

Institute of Legal Studies, from where I have learnt the basics of law and
whose informal discussions, intellectual support helped me in the entire
duration of this work.

2|Page
 INDEX

S.NO TOPIC PAGE

NO.
1. INTRODUCTION 4

2 DESCRIPTIVE LEGAL RESEARCH 6

3. COMPARATIVE LEGAL RESEARCH 8

4. EXPERIMENTAL LEGAL RESEARCH 11

5. EVALUATIVE LEGAL RESEARCH 13

6. INTERDISCIPLINARY LEGAL RESEARCH 15

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY 18

3|Page
 INTRODUCTION

RESEARCH

According to the Webster’s International Dictionary, ‘research’ is ‘a careful,

critical inquiry or explanation in seeking facts or principles; diligent
investigation in order to ascertain something’. The term ‘research’ has
received a number of varied meanings and explanations. In its ordinary
sense, the term refers to a search for knowledge. It can be defined as
‘systematic investigation towards increasing the sum of human knowledge’
and as a ‘process’ of identifying and investigating a ‘fact’ or a ‘problem’
with a view to acquiring an insight into it or finding an apt solution
therefore. It is, in short, ‘systematic search’ in ‘pursuit of knowledge’ of the
researcher. Mere aimless, unrecorded, unchecked search is not research
which can never lead to valid conclusions. Research involves identification
of a research problem, the ascertainment of facts, their logical ordering and
classification, the use of (inductive and deductive) logic to interpret the
collected and classified facts and the assertion of conclusions premised
on, and supported by, the collected information. The prefix ‘re’ in the word
‘research’, according to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, means ‘repeated,
frequent or intensive’. ‘Research’, therefore, implies a continued
‘frequentative’ ‘intensive’ ‘search’ for truth and/or an inquiry for the
verification of a fresh theory or for supplementing a prevailing theory.
Research is, thus, a continuum.

‘Law without social content or significance is law without flesh, blood or

b bowels’.

LEGAL RESEARCH

‘Legal research’ may be defined as ‘systematic investigation towards

increasing the sum of knowledge of law’. It takes into its ambit ‘a
systematic finding’ or ‘ascertaining’ law’ on the identified topic or in the

4|Page
given area as well as ‘an inquiry’ into ‘law’ with a view to making
advancement in the science of law.
Law reflects social values, attitudes and behaviour. Societal values and
norms, directly or indirectly, influence law. Law also endeavours to mould
and control these values, attitudes and behavioural patterns so that they
flow in a proper channel. It attempts either to support the social system or
to change the prevalent social situation or relationship by its formal
processes. Law has acquired a paramount significance in a modern
welfare state as an effective instrumentality of socio-economic
transformation. It indeed operates as a catalyst for such a transformation.
A systematic investigation into these aspects of law helps in knowing the
existing and emerging legislative policies, laws, and their social relevance.
It also enables to assess efficacy of law as an instrument of socioeconomic
changes and to identify bottlenecks, if any.
Finding law on a particular subject, as stated earlier, is not an easy task.
There may be a number of statutes (as well as statutory provisions
scattered in different statutes) with frequent amendments on the subject
under inquiry. Similarly, one (particularly in the common law jurisdictions)
requires to look for pouring judicial pronouncements of the higher judicial
institutions interpreting these provisions for finding ‘true’ meaning and
ambit of the legal provisions. A quest for making advancement in the
science of law requires a legal researcher to systematically probe into
underlying ‘principles’ of, and ‘reasons’ for, ‘law’. Thus, legal research has
a very wide scope as it, in ultimate analysis, involves an inquiry into one or
the other dimension or aspect of ‘law’.

TYPES OF LEGAL RESEARCH

The types of research which are explained below are:

(a) Descriptive Research

(b) Comparative Research

5|Page
(c) Experimental Research

(d) Evaluative Research

(e) Interdisciplinary Research

DESCRIPTIVE LEGAL RESEARCH

Meaning
Descriptive research is defined as a research method that describes the
characteristics of the population or phenomenon studied. This methodology
focuses more on the “what” of the research subject than the “why” of the
research subject. The descriptive research method primarily focuses on
describing the nature of a demographic segment, without focusing on “why”
a particular phenomenon occurs. In other words, it “describes” the subject
of the research, without covering “why” it happens.

A major aim of descriptive studies is to describe and document a

phenomenon of interest. They can define the scope and nature of a
research problem by describing the characteristics of persons,
organisations, settings, phenomena and events. Typical research
questions of descriptive research designs are: What is happening? How is
something happening? What has happened? Descriptive studies can be
either cross-sectional or longitudinal. The former provides a snapshot of
the variables included in the study and collects these data at a given time
whereas the latter measures each of the variables with the same sample or
different sample population over two or more time periods. The reason for
repeated measurement of the same variables from the same people or
subjects in a descriptive longitudinal study is to measure any change in
variables over time. For instance, in order to measure the changing
attitudes and confidence levels of the public towards the criminal justice
system, opinion or community surveys may be conducted once every five
years.

For example, if a researcher wants to understand the illiteracy rate among

poor people in particular area like Chandigarh, he will conduct a
demographic survey of this region, gather population data and then

6|Page
conduct descriptive research on this demographic segment. The research
will then give us the details on “what is literacy rate among poor people in
Chandigarh?”, but not cover any investigative details on “why” illiteracy
exists. Because for the researcher trying to understand the illiteracy rates,
for them, understanding the nature of their illiteracy is the objective of the
study.

Methods

1. Observational method: There is use of both the observations such as

qualitative and quantitative observations. Quantitative observation focuses
on numbers and values whereas Qualitative observation focuses on
subjective characteristics.
2. Case Study method: It involves in depth research of study of
individuals or groups
3. Survey Research method: Under this method, researcher answers
through questionnaires or polls.

Advantages of Descriptive Legal research

1. Diverse Information: It gives variety of aspects of the subject of
research. Holistic information about the subject.
2. Collection of Data: Different methods are used for collection of wide
variety of data, which provides a lot of information
3. Natural environment: it allows for the research to be conducted in
respondent’s natural environment, which ensures high quality data and
honest data collection
4. Quick to perform and cheap: As the sample size is generally large in
descriptive research, the data collection is quick to conduct and is
inexpensive

Disadvantages of Descriptive Research

Descriptive research has the following disadvantages:
1. Statistical verification: Descriptive studies cannot test or verify the
research problem statistically.

7|Page
2. Biasness: Research results may reflect certain level of bias due to
the absence of statistical tests.
3. Repetition: The majority of descriptive studies are not ‘repeatable’
due to their observational nature.
4. Causal relationship: Descriptive studies are not helpful in identifying
cause behind described phenomenon.

COMPARATIVE LEGAL RESEARCH

Introduction
Comparison is a Logical and inductive method of reasoning that enables
objective identification of the merits and demerits of any norm, practice,
system, procedure, or institution as compared to those of others. The
relevance of comparative study in legal research is that it helps in
comparative evaluation of human experience occurring in legal domains of
different situations and jurisdictions. Comparison of different rules, legal
systems has been continuing since time immemorial. Nils
Jansen writes, ‘Comparison is the construction of relations of similarity or
dissimilarity between different matters of fact.’ Specific Factor or criterion
has to be taken for comparison between two objects.2

Meaning of Comparative Legal Research

Comparative legal research is a systematic exposition of rules, institutions,
and procedures or their application prevalent in one or more legal systems
or their subsystems with a comparative evaluation after an objective
estimation of their similarities and differences and their implications. In the
course of CLR, the researcher resorts to not mere juxtaposed presentation
of information, but seeks insight about the process of growth, functioning,
and habits of thoughts; and evaluating the social purpose of law. By
understanding different legal systems, it augments knowledge by
discovering different models for preventing or resolving social conflicts. It
widens the dimensions of critical legal research by comparing and
contrasting, exposing researcher to larger social experiences about law
and legal system. According to Wigmore, CLR operates in three forms:
comparative nomo-scopy—description of other systems of law;

8|Page
comparative nomo2 Journal of the Indian Law Institute, Comparative
Method Of Legal Research : Nature, Process and Potentiality, P. Ishwara
Bhat, Volume 57 ethics—assessment of relative merit; comparative nomo-
genetics—study of development of the system of law in relation to one
another.
In India, legal research has grown with comparative study from the days of
enactment of the Indian Penal Code. The Law Commission’s extensive
deliberation on different models and policies relating to criminal liability in
common law, the continent, and American states in addition to existing
indigenous law during the formulation of the Code is a pioneering example
of CLR.

Aims And Purposes

• Firstly, it provides clarification of the perspectives, conditions and
alternatives for all communities for securing and enhancing democratic
values. It aims to know how universally the premises of justice and other
values are shared, cultural traditions, historical experiences etc.
• Secondly, by pooling of a variety of experiences and best
contemporary wisdom, CLR can promote critical understanding of one’s
own legal system.
• Thirdly, It enables promotion of understanding between different
communities and nations with a view to reduce world’s tension.
• Fourthly, harmonization of laws and bringing uniformity or reducing
the differences among them will be possible through CLR.
• Fifthly, when the domestic courts apply foreign laws or foreign
judgments, study of foreign law becomes inevitable.
• Finally, CLR facilitates choice between legal systems. The regulatory
regime governing property, environment, tax, investment, and the
procedural laws of different legal systems are often compared before
invoking the jurisdiction of the most convenient system or before launching
a new venture.

9|Page
Methods and Steps of Comparative Legal Research
There are various methods for comparative legal research and it is not
possible to follow these methods or steps in order. Some of them are
mentioned below:
Statement of the Problem: The researcher has to state the problem and
must be very clear about his or her research question, once he or she
clears about the comparison, he can streamline subsequent steps such as
define the basis of comparison, select comparative elements etc.
Selection of comparative elements: The selection of laws, countries, or
legal systems for comparison is a crucial step in CLR. While the presence
of minimum similarity avoids absurdity in comparison, prevalence of
differences avoids monotony and repetition. Hence, the choice should
accommodate diversity of features amidst systems having at least some
common traits or dealing with the same or similar problem.
Functionalist Study: Linking comparison with the function of legal system
enlarges the dimensions of CLR, as it brings sociological discourse into
action. Cultural Immersion: As law is embedded in culture, understanding
of it will be effective only if the scholar has a kind of ‘immersion’ in culture.
Macro Comparison: This involves the study of legal families or engagement
in grand systems debate. The examples of legal family are: civil law,
common law, religion-based laws (Hindu Law, Islamic Law, Talmudic law),
and regional laws (Japanese law, African law, and Chinese Law).
Differences prevail amidst legal families, whereas similarities prevail amidst
member legal systems of each legal family.

Scope and Potentiality

CLR thrives in the context of diversities. Three sources of diversities can be
identified here. First, diversity may lie within the country. Federalism
produces diverse legal systems at the level of federating units and hence
provides a vast scope for comparison. Land laws, agrarian laws, local
variation of central laws under concurrent list with the president’s assent,
laws on local self-governance, service conditions of state employees, laws
on registered societies and cooperative societies, laws on charities, trusts,
and endowments vary from state to state.

10 | P a g e
Second, diversity of approaches amidst various countries, whether free
democratic nations or otherwise, gives scope for CLR
Third, experiences and positions of domestic legal systems can be
compared to international standards and benchmarks set by the
international law.

EMPERICAL OR EXPERIMENTAL LEGAL RESEARCH

According to Peter Cane and Herbert Kritzer, ‘Empirical research involves
systematic collection of information (data) and its analysis according to
some generally accepted method. Of central importance is the systematic
nature of the process, both of collecting and analysing the information.’ For
data collection, it uses tools such as survey, observation, interview, case
study, questionnaire, experiments, documents, decisions, and events.
Mandy Burton views ELR as the study of law, legal process, and legal
phenomena using social science research methods, such as interviews,
observations, or questionnaires.
The second component of ELR is analysis. The analysis shall lead to
interpretation of data and answering of research questions objectively.
Empirical legal research may focus on actors of the legal profession or its
consumers and beneficiaries. It may comprehend both visible and invisible
aspects of law’s functioning. It engages in social interactions and
systematically gathers, classifies and analyzes the data and interprets
them.
Features
Interdisciplinarity of ELR: Empirical legal research has compelled legal
researchers to equip themselves with the skill of using social science
research techniques, statistics, and multiple methods of analysis. Empirical
legal research opened a gateway for the entry of scholars in sociology,
economics, criminology, anthropology, political science, and philosophy
and enabled them to enrich the study of law.
Serving the Consumers of Legal Service: Empirical legal research greatly
recognizes the voice of the consumers of legal service. Instead of looking
at litigants, witnesses, victims, and defendants as mere participants in the
legal process, studying them from a consumer perspective, mapping their
difficulties and expectations, and providing useful correction to rule-based
accounts and functioning of legal practitioners has been found to be
11 | P a g e
socially more rewarding. Suitability on various objects of Research: Most
objects of legal research, be it exploration, explanation, description,
prediction, or remediation—are within the orbit of ELR’s competence. When
customary law is to be identified amidst the participant community; or when
new policy is to be explored through interaction with people; or when a
specific social phenomenon attached to law and policy is to be explained,
ELR comes to the help of the researcher. Policy research and action
research are the two prominent methods which ELR nourishes through
involvement with the participative community.
Suitability for Policy and Action: Policymakers, activists, government
advisory bodies, and the judiciary have recently realized the potentiality of
ELR in helping policy research and action research. ELR reveals gaps in
the working of current law and challenges the assumptions about the
effectiveness of law as a regulatory tool. The response to this
unsatisfactory position emerges in the form of suggestion for policy reform.
Researcher’s involvement of the victim or community for improving the
situation of injustice or human rights violation in order to remediate the
grievance is another type of response fruitful to the society. Empirical legal
research has the competence to achieve both.

Advantages of Experimental Research 1. It highlights the ‘gap’ between

‘legislative goals’ and ‘social reality’ and thereby ‘depicts’ a ‘true picture’ of
‘law-in-action’
2. It carries significance in the modern welfare state, which envisages
socioeconomic transformation through law and thereby perceives law as
means of achieving socioeconomic justice and parity.
3. It provides an ‘expert advice’ in different matters to the policy makers
or judges etc.

Limitations of Environmental Research

1. Costly: Experimental method is time consuming and costly as it
requires a lot of time for collecting the information
2. Complex data collection: It requires certain skill and knowledge to
record the data which is bridled with difficulties

12 | P a g e
3. Bias: There are various factors which affect the collection of data
such as political, economical factors etc. which led to prejudice in the
results.

EVALUATIVE LEGAL RESEARCH

Evaluators are dissecting the backgrounds, processes and effects (a.k.a.
‘impacts’) of ‘tools’ of ‘interventions’ of governments and other (public)
organizations. These ‘tools’ refer to legislation, regulation, covenants, and
contracts, but also to subsidies and grants, contracts and (penal) sanctions
like ‘naming and shaming’, and fines. Dissecting not only includes the
description and explanation of processes to implement interventions, but
also focuses on analyzing the assumptions (‘rationale’, ‘theory’) underlying
their application and the effects and side-effects that they have on persons,
organizations and society.
Designing and implementing interventions like laws, sanctions, contracts
and treaties do not guarantee that they have the desired or expected
impact (on behaviour). It is an empirical question to what extent they do so.
To measure their impact, one has to take into account that the interventions
operate at different levels and often involve multiple parties; some regard
individuals as end-users (e.g.
taxpayers, students or farmers), others operate at a more macro level
(state officials, international institutions etc.). Some are directed at only one
or a few actors, while others focus on chains of activities and organizations.
To dissect how the implementation processes operate and to what extent
the expected impact has been realized is food for thought for evaluators.
• A first activity of evaluators is to predict what the consequences of
policies, rules, legislation and other ‘tools of governments’ will be once they
are implemented. This is often referred to as ‘ex ante’ evaluations or
‘prospective evaluations’. Evaluators do this by unravelling the behavioural,
social and institutional assumptions that underlie the policy, law or
programme to be implemented. To put it a little differently: by articulating
the ‘theory’ underlying the intervention, they try to get hold of what is to be
expected when it is implemented. The more evidence-based this so-called
‘policy or intervention theory’ is, the larger the likelihood that the policy will
make a difference. Questions that in practice have recently been
addressed by evaluators are the following: –

13 | P a g e
– Why is it believed that a new and more solid covenant between the
government and internet service providers will help to prevent and reduce
cybercrime?
– What are the conditions under which a multimedia mass
communication campaign focused on a safe(r) use of the internet will be
effective in modifying unsafe surf behaviour?
• A second type of work which evaluators are doing is to find out to
what extent policies, programmes, regulations and other types of measures
have been implemented as agreed. This type of work is usually called
‘process evaluations’ and is descriptive in nature. Here evaluators
investigate the execution of (court) orders, including sanctions, behaviour
modification programmes and financial penalties. The central question is
the following: are the policies and laws and other (legal) arrangements
executed as intended, respectively as was formally agreed upon?
• A third type of work which evaluators carry out is to find out to what
extent the goals of a policy, intervention, law, subsidy, levy and other ‘tools’
have been attained and to what extent this has been caused by the
intervention under investigation. This type of work is called impact
evaluations or effectiveness evaluations. Examples of questions are the
following: To what extent are naming and shaming campaigns and policies
able to prevent reoffending among released sex offenders? Impact
evaluations not only describe to what extent changes in behaviour, or in
other dependent variables, have taken place, but they also address the
attribution question: are these changes causally linked to the policy,
programme, intervention, law, levy, inspection or any type and combination
of interventions and arrangements under review?
• The fourth type of work which evaluators are doing is to evaluate
organizations, how they operate, how they monitor themselves, and how
they interact with professional fields and the surrounding environment.
Evaluations of the functioning of hospitals, higher education organizations,
prisons, schools, and companies are carried out by using benchmarks that
utilize the results from performance monitoring and auditing and that make
it possible to compare the performance of (similar) organizations.
Sometimes, case studies are preferred. Courts, prisons, offices of the
public prosecutor, organizations of notaries, lawyers and bailiffs and many
others are being evaluated in terms of their (decisionmaking) activities,
time management, efficiency and effectiveness.

14 | P a g e
So, a purely legal critique can involve the following types of evaluations:
• Comparison/contrast of legislative principles within or across different
States, indicating differences and issues/problems
• Comparison/contrast of case law principles/outcomes within or
across different States, indicating differences and issues/problems
• Comparative international legal analysis, indicating differences and
issues/problems
• Use of international law as a measure against which to evaluate
domestic law • New legal analysis of an unexplored issue/phenomenon (ie
exploring how existing legal principles may apply to a new situation: eg
how might principles of negligence apply to the situation where a baby is
born affected by maternal prenatal drug use?)

INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
Interdisciplinary legal studies requires that the researcher generates
knowledge from the social world. Law can no longer afford to function as an
autonomous discipline because of the emergence of disciplines that clearly
augment the discipline of law. Under this method, the researcher will study
‘Micro legal question’ i.e. study of specific concepts of law ‘Macro Legal
Question’ i.e. study of general concepts of law.
With a view to overcoming some of the limitations of quasi-disciplinary legal
research, scholars from different disciplines may join hands in making an
inquiry into a legal fact. This type of legal research, as stated earlier, is
known as interdisciplinary legal research.102 Interdisciplinary legal
research, thus, is the research done by a legal scholar in close association
with scholars from other disciplines related with law, such as sociology,
anthropology, political science, history, philosophy, psychology, and
economics. It is a sort of concerted or cooperative effort by several
scholars belonging to different disciplines to integrate their disciplinary
insights, and to apply integrated insight to the study of legal problems. An
inter-disciplinary legal research, compared to mono-disciplinary and
quasidisciplinary legal research, leads to better insight into the legal fact
under investigation. It also results into offering more sound and
sophisticated solutions to problems than can be suggested with the aid of
mono-disciplinary and quasidisciplinary legal research.

15 | P a g e
Advantages of Interdisciplinary Legal Research
1. Develops Knowledge: There is broad understanding of the issue
which is to be investigated by this method.
2. Accuracy: Mixing of the various methods will help to attain accuracy
in the results
3. Integration of conflicting insights from alternative discipline: A host of
disciplines attempt to understand the same or related problems, but each
discipline adopts different mechanisms of analysis and approaches to
evaluating the viability of their insights.
Limitations of interdisciplinary Research
However, inter-disciplinary legal research suffers from some operational
difficulties. A few prominent among them are:
1. The question regarding what and how many disciplines should be
combined in the research endeavor may sometimes become difficult to
resolve. It requires a lot of planning and decision making.
2. Priorities and interests of research in different disciplines vary;
therefore, the lack of consensus upon the ‘issues to be resolved’ may
create operational difficulties in a cooperative research.
3. Sometimes it becomes difficult to develop ‘communication’ between
the research partners belonging to different disciplines. Each discipline has
its own concepts. It may take considerable time for the participants to
understand different ‘language’ (i.e. content expression) spoken by them.
For example, the languages of law and social sciences differ. The
language of law is essentially directive and normative, whereas the
language of sociology is descriptive, revealing or explanatory. It may even
be an inhibiting barrier between a legal scholar and a non-lawyer to join
hands for a cooperative legal research.
4. Every discipline has its own research tools, techniques and methods.
They vary from discipline to discipline. Therefore, some times integration of
these tools, methods and techniques in an inter-disciplinary legal research
becomes difficult.
5. A sort of ‘tension’ among the participants may arise as they proceed
with research. Each participant, consciously or unconsciously, may be
tempted to see that his discipline dominates the other in the research
endeavour.

16 | P a g e
6. A cooperative legal research requires compatible habits of the
scholars involved therein and a working atmosphere that puts every one at
ease. Lack of either of these two may deter individual researchers from
taking an initiative in the research. The hitherto tradition of mono-
disciplinary research has inculcated some peculiar habits in the
researchers, which they might find difficult to deviate from. Scholars who
have joined hands to undertake and carry out a co-operative legal research
have to be cautious that none of the above-mentioned limitations surfaces
in their concerted efforts

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books Referred:

17 | P a g e
• Meyani, S.R., “Legal Research Methodology” (2012), Faridabad Law
Agency

• Kothari,C.R., “Research Methodology”, New Age International (P)

Limited, Publishers

• Vibhute,
Khushal, “Legal Research Methods”, prepared by Justice and
Legal System Research Institute, 2009

• Bhatt,
P.Ishwara, “Idea and Methods of Legal Research”, Oxford
Publications, 2020

Articles/Journals Referred:

• Mathias, M,Siems, “The taxonomy of Interdisciplinary Legal Research:

Finding the way out of The
Desert”, Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal education, 2009

• Bukhari, Syed Aftab Hassan, “What is Comparative study?”

18 | P a g e