Sociology and Anthropology Vol. 2(2), pp. 46 - 58
DOI: 10.13189/sa.2014.020204
Reprint (PDF) (988Kb)


The Brics Countries between Justice and Economy Methodological Challenges on Constitutional Comparison


Michele Carducci , Anna Silvia Bruno *
Department of History, Society and Human Studies, University of Salento, Cittadella della Ricerca, Brindisi, Italy

ABSTRACT

The paper wants to underline why the BRICS as a legal network represents a new challenge for the European Union. The state of the art on the BRICS theme can be resumed in few thematic profiles: on which parameters are the relationships of the BRICS countries with the other world players, from the European Union to Italy, observed and judged; what convergences of constitutional significance do the BRICS countries present; what theories and methods of comparison are Legal Scholars using to study the BRICS phenomenon; what conditional convergences do the BRICS countries produce within their own “network of transfer” for practices and policies; what is the role of national Constitutions as conditional factors in the BRICS economic relationships and what competitive benefit do the BRICS countries have on the global market. But all these points leave the new geography drawn by the BRICS countries out of consideration and the fact that it operates as a legal network and network to transfer practices and policies is neglected. The paper tries to sketch a critical outline of this new international and atypical subject.

KEYWORDS
Horizon 2020, BRICS, Legal Network, Constitutional Borrowing, Policy Transfer

Cite This Paper in IEEE or APA Citation Styles
(a). IEEE Format:
[1] Michele Carducci , Anna Silvia Bruno , "The Brics Countries between Justice and Economy Methodological Challenges on Constitutional Comparison," Sociology and Anthropology, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 46 - 58, 2014. DOI: 10.13189/sa.2014.020204.

(b). APA Format:
Michele Carducci , Anna Silvia Bruno (2014). The Brics Countries between Justice and Economy Methodological Challenges on Constitutional Comparison. Sociology and Anthropology, 2(2), 46 - 58. DOI: 10.13189/sa.2014.020204.