Using the comparative method to bridge law and geography: Comparison of Australia’s and China’s management of scientific activities in Antarctica

• Main Authors: Jiang, M, Pearson, SG
• Format: Conference Object
• Language: unknown
• Published: 2015
• Subjects: Antarctic; The Antarctic; Antarc*; Antarctica
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/1959.4/unsworks_38904; https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/bitstreams/8b40801b-0282-4244-894a-7097bd2f54b9/download; https://doi.org/10.26190/unsworks/25829

In the emerging discipline of legal geography there is an opportunity for more sophisticated articulation of its research methods, in order to make the discipline more exploratory and explanatory. This paper suggests that it may be an optimal choice to employ the comparative method in the legal geography of the Antarctic areas. This paper will firstly define the comparative method from the perspective of legal geography. Secondly, this paper seeks to apply legal geography to the global commons and shared spaces, analysing what is it about two nations and two scientific research communities working in the same place on essentially similar projects that can be used to understand how risk of scientific activities is managed in Antarctica. This section will illuminate that the comparative method could facilitate the interaction of law and geography. Finally, an analysis tool will be used to analyse strengthens, weakness, opportunities, and threats of applying the comparative method in legal geography.