Abstract
The doctrine of proportionality has received sustained attention from comparative constitutional scholars. Yet it is an area where courts, and scholars, have made limited use of empirical or inter-disciplinary approaches to constitutional comparison. The article calls for a change in this practice as part of a broader call for greater dialogue between scholars and practitioners of conceptual and more empirical forms of constitutional comparison.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks Vicki Jackson, David Landau, Rivka Weill, and the editors of the Journal for extremely helpful comments on previous versions of the article, and Melissa Vogt for outstanding research assistance. Thanks are also due to the HSF Law & Economics Initiative at UNSW for research support.
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
