1.6 Nature and Position of Comparative Law in the Era of

Globalization The nature's question: the comparative law as the science, the method, or the discipline? (the method's mainstream); its relations with the other disciplines: the jurisprudence (the theory's partner), the legal history (the diachronic comparative), the sociology of law (the law-in-action's comparative), the international law (the unification's companion). The globalisation's era: (i) the convergence's pressure (the trade-and-investment regimes' harmonisation — the "creeping uniformity"); (ii) the legal transplants' boom (the transition-states' law reforms — the massive borrowing era); (iii) the comparative lawyer's centrality (the global practice's need — the "law without borders" craft); (iv) the counter-currents (the legal culture's resistance; the vernacularisation — the borrowed law's local adaptation); (v) the new frontiers (the digital-law's comparison; the AI-and-algorithmic regulation's models; the climate law's diffusion). Nepal's position (the paper's bridge): the globalisation-era borrower (the model-laws' reception: Unit 4's Nepali story — the codes-and-technical-statutes' comparative genealogy; the transplantation's successes-and-failures as the course's running case).