Our objective is to improve the science of constitutional design by developing a comprehensive dataset that records the characteristics of constitutions, both contemporary and historical, across most independent states. No systematic data exist on the content, provisions, and structure of constitutional documents. Such a lacuna impedes scholars' understanding of the origins and consequences of constitutions and limits practitioners involved in constitutional drafting exercises. Our particular theoretical interest lies in addressing three sets of questions: (1) Constitutional origins: diffusion and process of constitutional design. We are interested in understanding the constitutional process and, in particular, how, and to what extent, constitutional designers incorporate foreign constitutions as models. That constitutional actors engage with and utilize material from foreign sources at some level is a fundamental assumption of theories of diffusion, an enduring theoretical concern for both authors. Our data will allow us to develop measures of similarity between constitutions across the world and across time. Matching these similarities with relational data (e.g., geographic, cultural, economic, and political ties) will allow us to test hypotheses about the spread of institutional form. (2) Implementation: De Jure versus De Facto Constitutional Law. The fidelity of constitutional commitments to actual practice has important implications for the performance of democracy. Through the comparison of our data on the formal characteristics of the law with data on its practice, we intend to assess the degree to which constitutional provisions constrain the behavior of governments. (3) Constitutional Duration. The stability of constitutions has potentially significant effects on the effectiveness of institutions. In producing the sampling plan for our data, we have developed a chronology of constitutional changes (i.e., replacements, amendments, suspensions, or reinstatements). This chronology, together with actual data we gather on the content of constitutions, allows us to test hypotheses about the kinds of institutional arrangements that lead to more or less stable constitutional systems.
Apart from these research questions, the dataset we propose promises to pay significant dividends with respect to the conceptualization and description of constitutional structures. We envision that such a contribution will be an invaluable resource for both research and teaching in two important ways. First, the constitutional characteristics that we will record will allow for the refinement and elaboration of many of central features of governing institutions. Such refinement will allow for the more reliable test of important institutional theories that invoke constructs such as executive-legislative relations, federalism, and judicial review. Second, the dataset will dramatically enhance our understanding of how constitutional texts vary over time and across regions, cultures, and political systems. Finally, we are committed to ensuring that our data assists those engaged in constitutional design. In general, constitutional reform tends to proceed with the help of carefully selected experts, who in the best of circumstances have broad comparative knowledge and experience. But without a central resource documenting the various options taken by other countries, design processes are inefficient. In addition to the micro-data that we will make available to researchers, we will also provide a user-friendly version of the data for non-technical users.
