This article explores three different methodological approaches to the UN 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees—and international refugee law (IRL) more broadly. These are termed the internal, external and dialectical approaches. It is argued that the dialectical approach, which combines elements of the internal and external approaches using a materialist postcolonial perspective helps make out in the light of changing conditions a more persuasive case for liberal interpretation and reform of the 1951 Convention. Put differently, the article is about the limitations and failings of mainstream IRL scholarship, which essentially pursues an internal approach to the 1951 Convention. It is equally about the need to decolonize and transform the pedagogy and research of IRL. This article concludes with some suggestions to advance refugee rights that would allow the 1951 Convention to respond more effectively to the protection needs of refugees around the world.

中文翻译：

---

1951 年公约的三种方法：辩证方法的案例

本文探讨了 1951 年《联合国难民地位公约》以及更广泛的国际难民法 (IRL) 的三种不同方法。这些方法被称为内部方法、外部方法和辩证方法。有人认为，辩证方法利用唯物主义后殖民视角将内部和外部方法的要素结合起来，有助于根据不断变化的条件为 1951 年公约的自由主义解释和改革提供更有说服力的案例。换句话说，这篇文章是关于主流 IRL 学术的局限性和失败的，它本质上追求的是 1951 年公约的内部方法。同样，需要去殖民化并改变现实生活中的教学和研究。本文最后提出了一些促进难民权利的建议，使 1951 年公约能够更有效地满足世界各地难民的保护需求。