On 27–28 May 2025, the second Approaches to Legal Research course was held at Harnack House in Berlin. Thirty-one researchers from across the Max Planck Law network came together for two days of intensive teaching and discussion on key methodological practices in legal scholarship.
Teaching was delivered by senior scholars from both within and beyond the network. Dr Alexandra Mercescu (University of Timișoara) opened with a session on interdisciplinary research, followed by Dr Maximilian Lukas Schmitt (MPI-Freiburg) on law and economics. Law and anthropology was co-taught by Dr Luisa Piart and Dr Farrah Raza (both MPI-Halle), and Dr Christian Boulanger (MPI-Frankfurt) led the session on socio-legal studies. The evening session on the Legal Research Methods Initiative was presented by Dr Randall Stephenson (MPI-Freiburg).
On the second day, Dr Julie Rocheton (MPI-Frankfurt) introduced legal history, Dr Mercescu returned with a session on comparative law, followed by Dr Simon Gansinger (MPI-Freiburg) with a session on critical perspectives.
Dr Mercescu’s sessions were singled out for praise in participant feedback, particularly her thoughtful framing of interdisciplinarity—drawn from her award-winning PhD thesis at Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne—and her ability to connect theoretical concerns with practical research choices. Her contributions exemplified the broader objective of the course: to encourage critical self-reflection and methodological openness in legal scholarship.
A highlight from a final panel discussion was the emphasis on methodological overlap and the fluidity of disciplinary boundaries. Participants shared examples of research that straddles multiple approaches, such as both qualitative and quantitative methods in comparative legal studies. As one speaker observed, ‘we have a tendency to think about what we do in terms of almost waterproof fields, but … not only is there a lot to learn from each other, we actually have a lot of intersectional points’. It was generally agreed that legal research often benefits from methodological hybridity rather than strict adherence to a single tradition.
Feedback was uniformly positive. One participant described the course as ‘inspiring’, another as ‘enriching and intellectually stimulating’. A more advanced participant noted that they wished such a course had been available earlier in their academic journey. In total, 93.2% of participants reported being very or extremely satisfied. Dr Stephenson’s after-dinner session was also warmly received for its combination of entertainment and thought-provoking content.
There is no doubt that Approaches to Legal Research 2025 achieved its aim of expanding scholarly horizons and cultivating a shared space for methodological inquiry within the Max Planck Law network.
See the full 2025 programme here.