Abstract
Legal innovations rarely occur spontaneously. They are most often the result of the implementation of a methodology. This chapter presents two methods of innovation, namely that outlined by the Hiil organisation, which is primarily aimed at policy makers, and the one that is best-known today, namely legal design.
A version of this contribution was previously published in French in Bouthinon-Dumas and Masson (2018).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Initial Coin Offering is a type of funding using cryptocurrencies.
- 2.
Hague Institute for Innovation of Law website: http://www.hiil.org/.
- 3.
Visual representation of ideas and information with a central subject.
- 4.
See below the work of Margaret Hagan, Stanford University, California.
- 5.
See Brangier and Barcenilla (2003).
- 6.
Law Guru website: https://www.lawguru.com/.
- 7.
United Nations (2012), pp. 6–8.
- 8.
Deputy Director of the Winkler Institute for Dispute Resolution at Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto, Canada and Executive Director of the Canadian Forum on Civil Justice.
- 9.
Professor of Law at the University of Puerto Rico.
- 10.
Herzog-Evans (2011), p. 3016.
- 11.
Wexler (2015).
- 12.
- 13.
“Ability, art of making a discovery, especially a scientific one, by chance”, dictionary Le Larousse. In the case of Post-it, the discovery of this glue with particular properties is a pure coincidence, since the researcher was working on the development of a super-adhesive glue.
- 14.
Assogna (2013).
- 15.
Law By Design, accessible sur http://www.lawbydesign.co/en/home/.
- 16.
See design thinking methodology freely accessible in Creative Commons BY-NC-SA at: https://dschool-old.stanford.edu/sandbox/groups/designresources/wiki/31fbd/attachments/acf2a/METHODCARDS_FRENCH_March_2014_m.pdf?sessionID=a51dac0dcfe8d3f994e73499a3648e1197932249.
- 17.
See Bakos et al. (2014).
- 18.
See Arnold et al. (2015), p. 199.
- 19.
See Marotta-Wurgler (2015).
- 20.
See the work of his laboratory at: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-lawyer/articles/legal-design-lab-consumer-contracts/.
- 21.
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32016R0679.
- 22.
Digi.me company website https://digi.me/.
- 23.
Meeco company website https://meeco.me/.
- 24.
CosyCloud company website https://cozy.io/fr/.
- 25.
Fair&Smart company website http://www.fairandsmart.com/.
References
Arnold R, Hillebrand A, Waldburger M (2015) Personal data and privacy, Final report, a report for Ofcom by WIK-Consult, p 199, https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0029/67088/personal_data_and_privacy.pdf
Assogna P (2013) Innovation through Cross-fertilization. In: NGEBIS Short Papers, pp 12–17, http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1006/paper3.pdf
Bakos Y, Marotta-Wurgler F, Trossen DR (2014) Does anyone read the fine print? Consumer attention to standard form contracts. J Legal Stud 43(1):1–35
Bouthinon-Dumas H, Masson A (2018) L’innovation juridique et judiciaire. Larcier, Bruxelles
Brangier E, Barcenilla J (2003) Concevoir un produit facile à utiliser. Editions d’organisation, Paris
Herzog-Evans M (2011) Révolutionner la pratique judiciaire. S’inspirer de l’inventivité américaine. Recueil Dalloz 44:3016
Marotta-Wurgler F (2015) Understanding privacy policies: content, self-regulation, and market forces. NYU Law and Economics Research Paper Series, Working Paper No. 16-18, https://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/marotta-wurgler_understanding_privacy_policies.pdf
United Nations (2012) Delivering justice: program of action to strengthen the rule of law at the national and international levels, Report of the Secretary-General 2, (Mar. 16), http://regnet.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/files/ROL/A-66-749%20-%20UNSG%20Report%20-%20Delivering%20Justice%20%282012%29.pdf
Wexler DB (2015) The HiiL innovating justice forum, therapeutic jurisprudence, and legal education: new opportunities (March 5, 2015). 3 Suffolk University Law Review Online 45 (2015); Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 13–52, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2353906
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Annex
Annex
The six pillars of legal innovation according to Hiil
-
Define litigant’s needs
-
Think differently
-
Evaluate the ideas generated in relation to the identified objective
-
Think in terms of legal and social acceptability
-
Conceive legal innovation as an ecosystem
-
Learning in real time
The three pillars of Legal Innovation according to Mr. Hagan
-
Being User-Centered by studying their needs, but without being restricted to them
-
Be a tester, open-minded, who knows how to take advantage of his experiments
-
Be an attentive and aware innovator of the research process
The five stages of legal innovation according to Mr. Hagan
-
Discover and understand the field
-
Synthesize and identify the blocking points encountered by users
-
Generate ideas (brainstorming)
-
Test, Iterate and Scale (Prototype solutions to verify the relevance of ideas)
-
Scaling, Evolving, Implementing
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Imbert, F., Martin-Forissier, C. (2021). What Methods for Legal Innovation?. In: Masson, A., Robinson, G. (eds) Mapping Legal Innovation . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47447-8_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47447-8_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-47446-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-47447-8
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)