Project description
Rethinking legal agency and challenging norms
In the realm of law, the dichotomy between agents and non-agents shapes our understanding of decision-making and accountability. Rooted in 19th-century liberal tradition, the prevailing concept of liberal agency excludes those deemed less rational including persons with disabilities, artificial intelligence, and/or nonhuman animals. However, the perception of legal agency has evolved to take into account changes in society, and many challenge this narrow view. For example, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities mandates treating persons with disabilities as agents. The ERC-funded LEGACY project aims to comprehensively reassess legal agency by investigating contemporary challenges and proposing a unifying theory. In short, LEGACY seeks to unveil the historical context of liberal agency, analyse current debates, and formulate a holistic theory to navigate the evolving landscape of legal agency.
Objective
The distinction between agents and non-agents is central in law: only agents can decide about their affairs, enter contracts or be held responsible for their actions. Western law has since the 19th century relied on an understanding of agency that has developed in the liberal tradition of thought. According to this Liberal Agency, agents are highly rational human individuals. Persons with cognitive disabilities, artificial intelligences, and nonhuman animals are therefore not agents because of their lack of rationality or humanity. This view of agency is deeply embedded in Western legal systems.
Liberal Agency has recently come under increasing criticism and challenges. Many now argue that persons with disabilities, artificial intelligences and/or nonhuman animals could in fact be treated as agents. However, these criticisms have been narrow in scope, and the debate is overall highly fragmented.
LEGACY, situated within legal philosophy and history, will offer a comprehensive reappraisal of legal agency. It will investigate three main questions: First, how did Liberal Agency become the dominant understanding of agency in law? Second, what challenges confront Liberal Agency today? And finally, what kind of a theory can best explain the evolving notion of agency in law?
The objectives of the project are to deliver:
(1) a systematic understanding of the historical background and context of Liberal Agency, its spread in Western legal thought, and its challengers;
(2) an in-depth analysis of contemporary agency accounts that incorporates and conceptualizes the historical insights with a systematic understanding of the contemporary debates; and
(3) a theory of agency that provides an overall synthesis of the accounts and can explain, reconcile and/or solve the outlined contemporary challenges.
The project will thus develop a historically informed, comprehensive and rigorous understanding of legal agency, based on a broad synthesis of legal and philosophical thought.
Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
- humanities history and archaeology history
- social sciences law
- humanities philosophy, ethics and religion philosophy
You need to log in or register to use this function
We are sorry... an unexpected error occurred during execution.
You need to be authenticated. Your session might have expired.
Thank you for your feedback. You will soon receive an email to confirm the submission. If you have selected to be notified about the reporting status, you will also be contacted when the reporting status will change.
Keywords
Project’s keywords as indicated by the project coordinator. Not to be confused with the EuroSciVoc taxonomy (Fields of science)
Project’s keywords as indicated by the project coordinator. Not to be confused with the EuroSciVoc taxonomy (Fields of science)
Programme(s)
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
-
HORIZON.1.1 - European Research Council (ERC)
MAIN PROGRAMME
See all projects funded under this programme
Topic(s)
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Funding Scheme
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
HORIZON-ERC - HORIZON ERC Grants
See all projects funded under this funding scheme
Call for proposal
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
(opens in new window) ERC-2023-STG
See all projects funded under this callHost institution
Net EU financial contribution. The sum of money that the participant receives, deducted by the EU contribution to its linked third party. It considers the distribution of the EU financial contribution between direct beneficiaries of the project and other types of participants, like third-party participants.
00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
Finland
The total costs incurred by this organisation to participate in the project, including direct and indirect costs. This amount is a subset of the overall project budget.