Adaptive constitutionalism in the context of migration-driven transformation: challenges to national identity and institutional adaptation strategies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Contemporary migration processes represent not merely a demographic phenomenon but a fundamental challenge to traditional constitutional paradigms, which have long been predicated on the assumption of a homogeneous national legal and cultural space. Globalization, armed conflicts, economic instability, and climate crises generate unprecedented population movements that transform not only the social and ethnic composition of host states but also the very understanding of sovereignty, citizenship, and the legal status of the individual. In this context, growing tension emerges between the universal norms of international law—enshrining migrants’ rights as an integral part of human rights—and national constitutional frameworks oriented toward protecting historically established values, identity, and public order. Consequently, the constitution ceases to function solely as an internal state act and enters into dialogue with transnational legal realities, necessitating a rethinking of its role as an instrument not only of legitimizing power but also of managing social complexity. This dilemma is particularly acute in states with recently formed or reconstructed constitutional systems, where the process of constitutionally articulating national identity remains incomplete while migration exerts direct pressure on political stability and legal culture. The methodological foundation of the study is an interdisciplinary approach combining constitutional legal analysis, comparative legal methodology, elements of sociological research on legal consciousness, and doctrinal interpretation. Additionally, the research employs analysis of international and regional migration standards, including the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (1990), the European Agenda on Migration, and regional agreements within the CIS framework. This comprehensive methodology enables the identification of general trends while accounting for the specificity of legal cultures—a crucial consideration when addressing issues concerning national identity and sovereignty. The scientific novelty of this study lies in the systematic development—within both Russian and international constitutional legal doctrine—of the concept of “adaptive constitutionalism” as a theoretical and normative response to challenges posed, among others, by migratory transformation. Unlike traditional approaches that view the constitution as a static document fixing a once-and-for-all social contract, adaptive constitutionalism is understood as a dynamic model capable of institutional and substantive evolution in response to internal and external factors, including migration flows. The study contributes to the theory of legal identity by integrating it with migration law and constitutional theory—an especially relevant endeavor for the post-Soviet space, where nation-building and constitutional identity formation occur alongside intense migratory exchanges. Comparative analysis reveals that the most effective strategies combine inclusivity with clear legal boundaries, as exemplified by the Canadian model of multiculturalism or the German model of constitutional patriotism. In the Russian context, however, mechanisms for genuine integration remain underdeveloped, and there is a risk of instrumentalizing constitutional identity to legitimize restrictive migration policies. The article concludes that adaptive constitutionalism does not weaken but rather strengthens the constitutional order by enhancing its legitimacy, inclusivity, and capacity for reflexive self-transformation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».