Building up a constructive relationship between law and the social sciences to investigate the “CRPD-in-action”: experiences from a descriptive study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1358Keywords:
Voting, disability, disability legal scholarship, social science and disability, New Legal RealismAbstract
Voting rights of persons with disabilities must be ensured by States Parties to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The CRPD sets out legal obligations of States Parties to ensure de jure and de facto realisation of the right to vote by persons with disabilities. How can a disability researcher analyse compliance by States Parties with the CRPD? The present article argues that for achieving a fully developed disability legal scholarship, legal studies about the implementation of the CRPD need to combine the perspectives of jurisprudence and social sciences. Based on the author’s experience in carrying out the ongoing study “Voting Matters”, this article examines an innovative theoretical and methodological framework to understand how the CRPD is implemented through law and policy, and “in practice”. This means to investigate the “CRPD-in-action”. It concludes that this is a challenging task that can be accomplished through an evidence-based approach and a mixed-research design.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads:
12_6_Caballero_OSLS 164
XML_12_6_Caballero_OSLS 25
References
Ahearn, L., 2000. Agency. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 9(1–2), 12–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1999.9.1-2.12
Arksey, H., and O’Malley, L., 2005. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
Augsberg, I., 2015. Some Realism About New Legal Realism: What’s New, What’s Legal, What’s Real?. Leiden Journal of International Law [online], 28(3), 457–467. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156515000229 [Accessed 28 October 2022]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156515000229
Benhabib, S., 2004. On hospitality: rereading Kant’s cosmopolitan right. In: S. Benhabib, The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents, and Citizens. Cambridge University Press, 25–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790799.003
Berger, R.J., 2008. Agency, Structure, and The Transition to Disability: A Case Study with Implications for Life History Research. The Sociological Quarterly, 49(2), 309–333. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2008.00117.x
Cacchione, P., 2016. The Evolving Methodology of Scoping Reviews. Clinical Nursing Research [online], 25(2), 115–119. Available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1054773816637493
doi/pdf/10.1177/1054773816637493 [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Carrington, P., 1995. Hail! Langdell! Law & Social Inquiry [online], 20(3), 691–760. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.1995.tb00784.x [Accessed 28 October 2022]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/492518
Dagan, H. and Kreitner, R., 2018. The New Legal Realism and The Realist View of Law. Law & Social Inquiry [online], 43(2), 528–553. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12319 [Accessed 28 October 2022]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12319
Day Ashley, L., 2010. The use of structuration theory to conceptualize alternative practice in education: the case of private school outreach in India. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 31(3), 337–351. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01425691003700599
Durkheim, É., 1952. Suicide: A study in sociology. 1st English ed. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Ehrlich, E., 1917. Judicial Freedom of Decision: its Principles and Objects. In: E. Bruncken and L. Register, eds., Science of Legal Method. Select Essays by various authors. The Boston Book Company, 47–84.
Emirbayer, M., and Mische, A., 1998. What is Agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 962–1023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/231294
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), 2013. The right to political participation of persons with mental health problems and persons with intellectual disabilities [online]. Vienna: FRA. Available from: https://fra.europa.eu/en/
publication/2010/right-political-participation-persons-mental-health-problems-and-persons [Accessed 28 October 2022].
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), 2019. Who Will (Not) Get to Vote in the 2019 European Parliament Elections? Developments in the Right to Vote of People Deprived of Legal Capacity in EU Member States [online]. Vienna: FRA. Available from: https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2019-right-vote-ep-elections-legal-capacity_en.pdf [Accessed 19 July 2019].
Ferdoush, A., 2018. Seeing Borders Through the Lens of Structuration: A Theoretical Framework. Geopolitics, 23(1), 180–200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2017.1341406
Fiala-Butora, J., Stein, M.A., and Lord, J.E., 2014. The Democratic Life of the Union: Toward Equal Voting Participation for Europeans with Disabilities. Harvard International Law Review, 55(1), 71–104.
Gardiner, R., 2008. Treaty Interpretation. Oxford University Press.
Garth, B., and Mertz, E., 2016. Introduction: New Legal Realism at Ten Years and Beyond. UC Irvine Law Review [online], 6(1), 122–136. Available from: https://scholarship.law.uci.edu/ucilr/vol6/iss2/3 [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Giddens, A., 1976. New rules of sociological method. New York: Basic Books.
Giddens, A., 1979. Central Problems in Social Theory. London: Palgrave. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-16161-4
Giddens, A., 1987. Structuralism, post-structuralism and the production of culture. In: A. Giddens, Social Theory Today. Stanford University Press, 195–223.
Giddens, A., 1989. A reply to my critics. In: D. Held and J. Thompson, eds., Social Theory of Modern Societies: Anthony Giddens and his critics. Cambridge University Press, 249–305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511557699.013
Giddens, A., 2003. The time-space constitution of social systems. In: P. Kivisto, ed., Social Theory: Roots and Branches. Los Angeles: Roxbury, 455–461.
Giddens, A.,1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. 1st ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gilflores, J., and Alonso, C., 1995. Using focus groups in educational research: Exploring teachers’ perspectives on educational change. Evaluation Review, 19(1), 84–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X9501900104
Goodley, D., 1997. Locating Self-Advocacy in Models of Disability: Understanding Disability in Support of Self-Advocates with Learning Difficulties. Disability & Society, 12(3), 367–379. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599727227
Goodley, D., 2010. Disability Studies: An Interdisciplinary Introduction. 1st ed. London: Sage.
Goodley, D., et al., 2019. Provocations for Critical Disability Studies. Disability & Society [online], 34(6), 972–997. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2019.1566889
1566889 [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Grant, M.J., and Booth, A., 2009. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(1), 91–108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
Grobelaar Du Plessis, I., and Njau, J., 2018. Art. 29 Participation in Political and Public Life. In: I. Bantekas, M.A. Stein and D. Anastasiou, eds., The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: A commentary. Oxford University Press, 834–862. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198810667.003.0030
Guzmán, A., and Caballero, A., 2021. Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Political Life. A Content Analysis of Recent Literature (1997–2019). Revista Estudios Políticos [online], 61(1), 154–177. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.espo.n61a07 [Accessed 28 October 2022]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.espo.n61a07
Hage, J., 2011. The Method of a Truly Normative Legal Science. In: M. Van Hoecke, ed., Methodologies Of Legal Research: Which Kind of Method for What Kind Discipline? 1st ed. Oxford: Hart, 19–44.
Harris, J., et al., 2005. Outcomes for Disabled Service Users, Department of Health Final Report [online]. Social Policy Research Unit, University of York. Available from: https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/61838/ [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Hoffman, M.F., and Cowan, R.L., 2010. Be Careful What You Ask For: Structuration Theory and Work/Life Accommodation. Communication Studies, 61(2), 205–223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10510971003604026
Horwitz, M., 1992. The Transformation of American Law, 1870–1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195070248.001.0001
Huneeus, A., 2015. Human Rights between Jurisprudence and Social Science. Leiden Journal of International Law [online], 28(2), 255–266. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156515000060 [Accessed 28 October 2022]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156515000060
Hvinden, B., 2017. Is public policy in Europe promoting the Active Citizenship of persons with disabilities? In: R. Halvorsen et al., eds., The Changing Disability Policy System. Active Citizenship and Disability in Europe (Volume 1). New York: Routledge, 1–11.
Imrie, R., and Kumar, M., 1998. Focusing on disability and access in the built environment. Disability & Society, 13(3), 357–374. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599826687
International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), 2018. Election Access Observation Toolkit [online]. Arlington: IFES. Available from: http://themimu.info/sites/
themimu.info/files/documents/Guide_Election_Access_Observation_Toolkit_IFES_Sep2018_ENG.pdf [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Kayess, R., and French, P., 2008. Out of Darkness into Light? Introducing the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Human Rights Law Review [online], 8(1), 1–34. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngm044 [Accessed 28 October 2022]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngm044
Kroll, T., Barbour, R., and Harris, J., 2007. Using Focus Groups in Disability Research. Qualitative Health Research, 17(5), 690–698. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732307301488
Linderfalk, U., 2015. Is Treaty Interpretation an Art or a Science? European Journal of International Law [online], 26(1), 169. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chv008
ejil/chv008 [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Lister, R., 2007. Inclusive Citizenship: Realizing the Potential. Journal Citizenship Studies, 11(1), 49–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13621020601099856
Lo Giacco, L., 2019. Citting Matters: An Analysis of the Use of Judicial Decisions in International Criminal Law Adjudication through the Lens of Law-Making. PhD Thesis. 18 March. Lund University Press.
Marx, K., and Engels, F., 1848. Manifesto of the Communist Party [online]. 1st ed. Moscow: Progress. Available from: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/
download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Mays, N., Roberts, E., and Popay, J., 2001. Synthesising research evidence. In: N. Fulop et al., eds., Studying the organisation and delivery of health services: research methods. London: Routledge, 188–220.
Mechlem, K., 2009. Treaty Bodies and the Interpretation of Human Rights. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law [online], 42(3), 905–947. Available from: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vjtl/vol42/iss3/4 [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Meekosha, H., and Dowse, L., 1997. Enabling Citizenship: Gender, Disability and Citizenship in Australia. Feminist Review, 57(1), 49–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/014177897339650
Meekosha, H., and Shuttleworth, R., 2009. What’s so “critical” about critical disability studies? Australian Journal of Human Rights, 15(1), 47–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2009.11910861
Mertz, E., 2016. Introduction New Legal Realism: Law and Social Science in the New Millennium. In: E. Mertz, S. Macaulay and T.W. Mitchell, eds., The New Legal Realism: Translating Law-and-Society for Today’s Legal Practice. Cambridge University Press, 1–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107762336.002
Minichiello, V., et al., 1992. In-depth Interviewing: Researching People. Milton Park: Taylor & Francis Books.
Morgan, D., 2011. Focus Groups As A Qualitative Method. 3rd ed. London: Sage Research Methods. Online Publications.
Morris, J., 2005. Citizenship and disabled people: A scoping paper prepared for the Disability Rights Commission [online]. London: UK Disability Rights Commission. Available from: https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/morris-Citizenship-and-disabled-people.pdf [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Nhunzvi, C., et al., 2019. Occupational justice and social inclusion in mental illness and HIV: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open [online], 9(1), 1–6. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024049 [Accessed 28 October 2022]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024049
Ogden, D., and Rose, R.A., 2005. Using Giddens’s Structuration Theory to Examine the Waning Participation of African Americans in Baseball. Journal of Black Studies, 35(4), 225–245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934704266091
Orlikowski, W.J., 2000. Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations. Organizational Science, 11(4), 404–428. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600
OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), 2017. Handbook on Observing and Promoting the Electoral Participation of Persons with Disabilities [online]. Warsaw: ODIHR. Available from: https://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/
handbook-observing-people-with-disabilities [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Quinn, G., and Degener, T., 2002. The current use and future potential of United Nations human rights instruments in the context of disability [online]. Geneva/New York: United Nations. Available from: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/
Publications/HRDisabilityen.pdf [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Reckwitz, A., 2002. Toward a Theory of Social Practices. A Development in Culturalist Theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310222225432
Romero, D., Kwan, A., and Suchman, L., 2019. Methodologic approach to sampling and field-based data collection for a large-scale in-depth interview study: The Social Position and Family Formation (SPAFF) project. PLoS ONE [online], 14(1), e0210776, 1-18. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210776 [Accessed 27 June 2019] DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210776
Schriner, K., and Ochs, L., 2000. No Right is More Precious: Voting Rights and People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities [online]. Policy Research Brief. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Research & Training Center on Community Living. Available from: https://ici.umn.edu/products/prb/111/
default.html [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Schutz, A. (with M. Natanson, ed.), 1962. Collected Papers I: The Problem of Social Reality. 1st ed. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Seymour, J., et al., 2002. Using Focus Groups to Explore Older People’s Attitudes to End of Life Care. Ageing & Society, 22(4), 517–526. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X02008796
Shaffer, G., 2015. The New Legal Realist Approach to International Law. Leiden Journal of International Law [online], 28(2), 189–210. Available from: https://doi.org/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156515000035
1017/S0922156515000035 [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Sofaer, S., 1999. Qualitative methods: What are they and why use them? Health Services Research, 34(5 Pt 2), 1101–1118.
UN General Assembly, 2006. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) [online]. New York, 13 December 2006. Available from: https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html [Accessed 28 October 2022].
UN General Assembly, 2011. Human Rights Council, Thematic study by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on participation in political and public life by persons with disabilities (A/HRC/19/36) [online]. 21 December. Available from: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/
RegularSession/Session19/A-HRC-19-36_en.pdf [Accessed 30 September 2021].
Van Hoecke, M., 2011. Methodologies of Legal Research: Which Kind of Method for What Kind of Disciplines? 1st ed. Oxford: Hart.
Walsham, G., 2002. Cross-Cultural Software Production and Use: A Structurational Analysis. MIS Quarterly, 26(4), 359–380. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/4132313
Yablon, C.M., 1985. The Indeterminacy of the Law: Critical Legal Studies and the Problem of Legal Explanation. Cardozo Law Review [online], 6(1), 917–945. Available from: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-articles/207? [Accessed 28 October 2022].
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Adriana Caballero Pérez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
