Thematic Lines

The different research groups are brought together under this unifying sign, which is branched out into three major thematic lines.
The first line embraces the topic Person and Law. It comprises groups more directly concerned with reflecting on how the human person is addressed in contemporary legal discourse, not only in the context of the permanent reinvention of the (methodological, philosophical, cultural and historical) status of law in culturally plural communities, but also as the object of special legal protection in  situations of vulnerability.
In turn, the line Law, Risk and Technical Society subsumes groups working on risk control in highly rationalized decision-making processes (both in the modelling of public policies and in the planning of private economic activity); on the new conflicts of interests triggered by utilities resulting from technological innovation and, hence, needing new legal mechanisms for their harmonisation; and on the specific legal treatment of SME with a view to fostering innovation, growth and well-being.
The third thematic line tackles the topic Transformation of the State and Globalisation and it aims at understanding the issues that challenge the discourse of public power – namely, global concerns, like scarcity, or the emergence of various bodies and agencies vested with public powers and /or regulatory competence –, both in their juridical-political (the crisis of the State and the new sources of legitimation) and juridical-economical (where the scrutiny of the global regulation of the financial system stands out) dimensions.
Counting over 50 integrated members, it is only natural that UCILeR does not follow a methodological monist approach: the large number of researchers is deemed as an opportunity toward a plural methodological stance.
Nevertheless, two features bring together the whole body of researchers and, at the same time, justify the creation of an autonomous institution with a “genetic code” of its own: the awareness that law is a practical task which requires a sound theoretical basis; and the deep-seated belief that the ultimate reference – the vanishing point – of the legal discourse is the eminent dignity of the human person.