RUDN Journal of LawRUDN Journal of LawВестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Юридические науки2313-23372408-9001Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba (RUDN University)5100410.22363/2313-2337-2026-30-2-274-288DEXDFDLEGAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGYМЕТОДОЛОГИЯ ПРАВОВЫХ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЙResearch ArticleMethodological Issues in Socio-Legal Research on the Rule of LawПроблемы методологии социально-правовых исследований в области верховенства праваhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-0334-68624109-5931AllalyevRuslan M.АллалыевРуслан Мурадович

Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Theory of Law and State, Law Institute, RUDN University; Associate Professor of the Department of Public and International Legal Support for National Security, Faculty of Fuel and Energy Complex Integrated Security, Russian State University of Oil and Gas (National Research University) named after I.M. Gubkin

кандидат юридических наук, доцент кафедры теории права и государства, юридический институт, Российский университет дружбы народов; доцент кафедры публичного и международно-правового обеспечения национальной безопасности, факультет комплексной безопасности ТЭК, Российский государственный университет нефти и газа (национальный исследовательский университет) имени И.М. Губкина

allalyev-rm@rudn.ruRUDN UniversityРоссийский университет дружбы народовRussian State University of Oil and Gas (National Research University) named after I.M. GubkinРоссийский государственный университет нефти и газа (национальный исследовательский университет) имени И.М. Губкина3006202630227428803072026Copyright ©; 2026, Allalyev R.M.Copyright ©; 2026, Аллалыев Р.М.2026Allalyev R.M.Аллалыев Р.М.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0https://journals.rudn.ru/law/article/view/51004

The global debate on the rule of law is undergoing a methodological crisis in empirical research, manifested in problems of operationalization, cultural bias in indices, and a persistent gap between formal institutions and actual practices. This article aims to trace the evolution of approaches to the rule of law in legal sociology, identify the methodological limitations of three successive “generations” of studies, and outline prospects for synthetic methodology. The analysis draws on key works in socio-legal studies (R. Abel, M. Galanter, M. Hertogh, N. Cheesman, T. Ginsburg) and on a critical reading of global index methodologies (World Justice Project, Worldwide Governance Indicators). Methodologically, it employs historical-sociological and comparative-legal approaches. The first generation of empirical research - classic “gap studies” - demonstrated the systemic failure of legal reforms that ignore the social context, revealing the divergence between official legal norms and everyday normative orders. The second generation, centered on quantitative indices, made the rule of law measurable across countries but produced new difficulties, including expert dependence, data endogeneity, and the risk that governments use indicators to simulate reform rather than constrain power. The third generation, associated with ethnography and studies of legal consciousness, demonstrated the cultural embeddedness and plurality of legal meanings, while also exposing the challenges of aggregating and generalizing qualitative findings for comparative assessment. Overcoming the current methodological impasse requires a multi-dimensional research design that integrates quantitative assessment of institutions, qualitative analysis of legal consciousness, and everyday legality, and sustained theoretical reflections on law’s relationship to power. Such an interdisciplinary program should focus not on abstract rankings, but on the concrete ways in which arbitrary power is constrained (or legitimated) within specific socio-political contexts.

В условиях глобальной дискуссии о верховенстве права наблюдается методологический кризис эмпирических исследований, связанный с проблемой операционализации понятия, культурной предвзятостью индексов и разрывом между формальными институтами и реальными практиками. Цель работы - проанализировать эволюцию подходов к изучению верховенства права в социологии права, выявить методологические ограничения каждого из трех поколений исследований и определить перспективы синтеза методов. Исследование основано на обзоре ключевых работ в области социально-правовых исследований (Р. Абель, М. Гэлантер, М. Хертог, Н. Чизман, Т. Гинзбург), а также анализе методологий глобальных индексов (WJP, WGI). Применен историко-социологический и сравнительно-правовой анализ. В ходе исследования установлено, что первое поколение исследований («gap studies») выявило системную неэффективность правовых реформ без учета контекста. Второе поколение (индексы) столкнулось с зависимостью от экспертных оценок, эндогенностью данных и риском симуляции реформ. Третье поколение (этнография, правосознание) продемонстрировало культурную обусловленность представлений о праве, но показало сложность обобщения качественных данных. Сделан вывод, что для преодоления методологического тупика необходима интеграция количественных, качественных и теоретических подходов в рамках единой междисциплинарной программы, ориентированной на ограничение произвола в конкретных социополитических контекстах.

empirical studieslegitimationpolitical ideologyethnographylegal criticismэмпирические исследованиялегитимацияполитическая идеологияэтнографиякритика праваAbel, R. (1973) Law books and books about law. Stanford Law Review. 26, 188.Abel, R. (1980) Redirecting social studies of law. Law & Society Review. 14 (3), 805-829.Albiston, C.R. & Sandefur, R.L. (2013) Expanding the empirical study of access to justice. Wisconsin Law Review. (1), 101-120.Bedner, A. (2018) The promise of a thick view. In: May, C. & Winchester, A. (eds.) Handbook on the Rule of Law. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 34-47. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786432445.00008Botero, J.C., Nelson, R.L., & Pratt, C.S. (2011) Indices and Indicators of Justice, Governance, and the Rule of Law: An Overview. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law. 3 (2), 153-169. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1876404511200010 EDN: ZRYLPA.Botero, J. & Ponce, A. (2011) Measuring the rule of law. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1966257Buyse, A., Fortin, K., McGonigle Leyh, B. & Fraser, J. (2021) The rule of law from below - a concept under development. Utrecht Law Review. 17 (2), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.36633/ulr.771 EDN: KVGBHU.Campbell, D.T. (1979) Assessing the impact of planned social change. Evaluation and Program Planning. 2 (1), 67-90.Carlin, R.E. (2010) Rule of law profiles in contemporary polities. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1669493Carothers, T. (2003) The problem of knowledge. In: Carothers, T. (ed.) Promoting the Rule of Law Abroad: In Search of Knowledge. Washington, DC, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Publ., pp. 15-28.Cass, R.A. (2001) The Rule of Law in America. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.Cheesman, N. (2018) Rule-of-law ethnography. Annual Review of Law and Social Science. 14, 167-184. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-030900Davis, K.E. (2014) Legal indicators: The power of quantitative measures of law. Annual Review of Law and Social Science. 10, 37-52. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110413-030857Deflem, M. (2002) Policing World Society: Historical Foundations of International Police Cooperation. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Dougherty, A., Gryskiewicz, A. & Ponce, A. (2018) Measuring the rule of law: The World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index. In: Malito, D., Umbach, G. & Bhuta, N. (eds.) The Palgrave Handbook of Indicators in Global Governance. Cham, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 255-276. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62707-6_11Eyre, D.P. & Suchman, M.C. (1996) Status, norms, and the proliferation of conventional weapons: An institutional theory approach. In: Katzenstein, P.J. (ed.) The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York, Columbia University Press, pp. 79-113.Feeley, M. (1976) The concept of laws in social science: A critique and notes on an expanded view. Law & Society Review. 10, 497-523.Galanter, M. (1974) Why the haves come out ahead: Speculations on the limits of legal change. Law & Society Review. 9 (1), 95-160.Gibson, J.L. & Caldeira, G.A. (1996) The legal cultures of Europe. Law & Society Review. 30 (1), 55-86.Ginsburg, T. (2018) Difficulties with measuring the rule of law. In: May, C. & Winchester, A. (eds.) Handbook on the Rule of Law. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 48-56. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786432445.00009Gowder, P. (2016) The Rule of Law in the Real World. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Gutiérrez, C., Martinez, J., Ponce, A. & Solís, L. (2020) Measuring the rule of law in Mexico. In: Le Clercq, J. & Abreu Sacramento, J. (eds.) Rebuilding the State Institutions. Cham, Springer, pp. 57-77. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31314-2_4Hadfield, G.K. & Weingast, B.R. (2014) Microfoundations of the rule of law. Annual Review of Political Science. 17, 21-42. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135226Haggard, S., Macintyre, A.J. & Tiede, L.B. (2008) The rule of law and economic development. Annual Review of Political Science. 11, 205-234. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.081205.100244Halliday, T.C. & Carruthers, B.G. (2007) The recursivity of law: Global norm making and national lawmaking in the globalization of corporate insolvency regimes. American Journal of Sociology. 112 (4), 1135-1202.Hertogh, M. (2016) Your rule of law is not mine: Rethinking empirical approaches to EU rule of law promotion. Asia Europe Journal. 14, 43-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-015-0434-x EDN: TCQDXK.Hertogh, M. (2024) Empirical approaches to the rule of law: Contours and challenges of a social science that does not quite yet exist. Annual Review of Law and Social Science. 20, 35-51. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-041822-044308 EDN: JUJECX.Hironaka, A. (2009) Neverending Wars: The International Community, Weak States, and the Perpetuation of Civil War. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.Holzer, E. (2013) What happens to law in a refugee camp? Law & Society Review. 47 (4), 837-866. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12041Horák, F. & Lacko, D. (2023) Triangulation of theoretical and empirical conceptualizations related to the rule of law. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law. 15, 191-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-022-00181-x EDN: KIMOIP.Jakab, A. & Kirchmair, L. (2024) The rule of law in numbers: How to use indices to measure adherence by the Member States and the EU itself. In: Wouters, J. et al. (eds.) Upholding the Rule of Law in the EU. Oxford, Oxford University Press. (Forthcoming).Jensen, E.G. & Heller, T.C. (eds.) (2003) Beyond Common Knowledge: Empirical Approaches to the Rule of Law. Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press.Jepperson, R.L., Wendt, A. & Katzenstein, P.J. (1996) Norms, identity, and culture in national security. In: Katzenstein, P.J. (ed.) The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York, Columbia University Press, pp. 33-75.Joireman, S.F. (2004) Colonization and the rule of law: Comparing the effectiveness of common law and civil law countries. Constitutional Political Economy. 15 (4), 315-338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-004-7766-7 EDN: VDKMXA.Kim, Y.S., Jang, Y.S. & Hwang, H. (2002) Structural expansion and the cost of global isomorphism: A cross-national study of ministerial structure, 1950-1990. International Sociology. 17 (4), 481-503. EDN: JMVVWT.Knack, S. (2001) Aid dependence and the quality of governance: Cross-country empirical tests. Southern Economic Journal. 68 (2), 310-329. https://doi.org/10.2307/1061596 EDN: DSNQSJ.Lacko, D. et al. (2022) The necessity of testing measurement invariance in cross-cultural research: Potential bias in cross-cultural comparisons with individualism-collectivism self-report scales. Cross-Cultural Research. 56 (2-3), 228-267. https://doi.org/10.1177/10693971211068971 EDN: NJLKEP.Lewkowicz, J., Byler, J. & Litwiniuk, P. (2021) Economic and institutional determinants of the rule of law: A new empirical exploration. Studia Iuridica. 88, 237-254. https://doi.org/10.31338/2544-3135.si.2021-88.12 EDN: KMRGGU.Lindquist, S.A. (2003) Review of The Rule of Law in America by Ronald A. Cass. The Journal of Politics. 65 (2), 615-617. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2508.00652_16Méndez Reátegui, R. & Sumar Albujar, O. (2020) Rule of law versus soft rule of law. Revista de Derecho Político. 1 (109), 373-400. https://doi.org/10.5944/rdp.109.2020.29065 EDN: FYOWYG.Nardulli, P.F., Peyton, B. & Bajjalieh, J.W. (2013) Conceptualizing and measuring rule of law constructs, 1850-2010. Journal of Law and Courts. 1 (1), 139-192. https://doi.org/10.1086/668543Peerenboom, R. (2003) Varieties of rule of law: an introduction and provisional conclusion. In: Peerenboom, R. (ed.) Asian Discourses of Rule of Law. London, Routledge, pp. 1-53. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.445821Polzer, T. (2007) Adapting to changing legal frameworks: Mozambican refugees in South Africa. International Journal of Refugee Law. 19 (1), 22-50. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eem001 EDN: IYBCJZ.Rajan, R. & Subramanian, A. (2007) Does aid affect governance? American Economic Review. 97 (2), 322-327.Raz, J. (1979) The rule of law and its virtue. The Authority of Law. Oxford, Clarendon Press.Rhode, D.L. (2004) Access to Justice. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Sandefur, R.L. (2021) Access to justice. In: Talesh, S., Mertz, E. & Klug, H. (eds.) Research Handbook on Modern Legal Realism. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publ., pp. 324-335.Scheppele, K.L. (2013) The rule of law and the Frankenstate: Why governance checklists do not work. Governance. 26 (4), 559-562. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12049Shor, E. (2017) The spatial diffusion of counterterrorist legislation, 1970-2011. Social Problems. 64 (1), 106-132. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spw028Skaaning, S.-E. (2010) Measuring the rule of law. Political Research Quarterly. 63 (2), 449-460. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912909346745Suchman, M.C. & Eyre, D.P. (1992) Military procurement as rational myth: Notes on the social construction of weapons proliferation. Sociological Forum. 7 (1), 137-161. EDN: DIMVOT.Swiss, L. (2011) Security sector reform and development assistance: Explaining the diffusion of policy priorities among donor agencies. Qualitative Sociology. 34 (2), 371-393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-011-9194-0Taekema, S. (2021) Methodologies of rule of law research: Why legal philosophy needs empirical and doctrinal scholarship. Law and Philosophy. 40, 33-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-020-09388-1 EDN: RHMHVS.Urueña, R. (2015) Indicators and the law: A case study of the Rule of Law Index. In: Merry, S., Davis, K. & Kingsbury, B. (eds.) The Quiet Power of Indicators. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 75-102. https://doi.org/10.1007/9781139871532.003Versteeg, M. & Ginsburg, T. (2017) Measuring the rule of law: A comparison of indicators. Law & Social Inquiry. 42 (1), 100-137. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12175Wang, H., Wang, Zh., Chen, J., Chen, J., Guan, N. & Li, G. (2019) Development of rule of law index for state land and resources in China. Land Use Policy. 81, 276-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.10.053Young, A.T. & Sheehan, K.M. (2014) Foreign aid, institutional quality, and growth. European Journal of Political Economy. 36, 195-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2014.08.003