We have introduced an array of Asian law and society research in the previous chapters and shown what is distinctive about this field of study - in particular, how it differs from the doctrinal scholarship of Asian legal academies.
One hallmark of law and society scholarship is that it is empirically grounded. The researcher conducts empirical research on the places and people in question to find answers to a research puzzle that has presented itself in the research process.
Often, scholars design their research to gather data in imaginative yet rigorous ways. In some cases, even when they do not conduct empirical research firsthand, their arguments and viewpoints originate from deep understandings of the context, in which they have been previously immersed or about which they have learned from the empirical insights of other scholars. The answers that law and society scholars produce for their research puzzles is thus informed by what they have learned from the data. Crucially, they do not begin their research with a fixed answer in mind or simply seek out data that support their preconceived arguments. They are open to being surprised by what they learn from the empirical research.Parmar (20r5), whose legal ethnography was featured in Legal Mobilization (Chapter 5), studied the dispute over a Coca-Cola bottling facility on Adivasi lands in India by conducting in-depth interviews, participant observation, and textual analysis. She wanted to find out how different parties experienced the dispute and made their claims, but she encountered a situation that exemplifies the distinctiveness of law and society scholarship:
One question that I have been asked several times during the course of this research and at conferences and other places by lawyers, officers of courts, law students, concerned friends, and others is about what specific “law” I meant to study or propose. Two social activists I interviewed were clearly disappointed that despite my legal training, I did not plan to use this opportunity to propose a new law. Although proposals for newer and better laws serve extremely useful purposes, questions such as the ones posed to me are often based on a narrow positivistic understanding of law and its separateness from other fields of knowledge [...] One conversation that I was most troubled and inspired by took place after I had presented my work in a law school. Three bright students [...] were confident that “we” know what the dispute is about.
In order to ensure justice for those who have suffered, we need to look at “the law,” and how it can be made better. That is undoubtedly a very important exercise. I failed, however, to convince them of the importance of a prior question that I was pursuing: Do we know what the dispute is about? I hope the stories I present here show the importance of paying attention to how we know, and in what ways in failing to doubt our knowledge we limit our abilities to listen and respond. These insights are essential for understanding both the potential and limits of law and formal legal processes.(2r-2, original emphasis by author)
This chapter is not a conventional how-to introduction to methods and methodology, whereby the student learns how to formulate a research question, design the project, carry out the data collection, and analyze the data. Many other books serve those purposes. Instead, we illustrate how Asian law and society scholars go about designing and executing their research projects, what type of challenges they commonly encounter, and how they address those challenges. Along the way, we highlight classic, tried and tested methods, and newer, creative ways of conducting grounded research as Asian law and society scholars respond to ever-changing political repression, legal restrictions, and technological developments.
Most of the readings in this chapter come from the same publications that were extracted in the earlier chapters or from the same research project. We strive for continuity because the substantive content of law and society research is inseparable from the research process. How do the authors we have read in earlier chapters arrive at their findings and conclusions? How do they know what they know? We hope that this chapter's behind-the-scenes look will offer further insights into Asian law and society scholarship.
See “Suggested Additional Readings” at the end of this chapter.