Institutional Hybrids and the Rule of Law as a Regulatory Project

Jayasuriya, Kanishka

doi:10.1017/cbo9781139094597.013

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the one hand, this tendency represents the important role of the "Rule of the Law" and signals to the existence of a functioning legal infrastructure that governs private and public interactions. On the other hand, the increasing dominance of the law brings to what is also referred to as (over) legalization of society (Jayasuriya, 2012;Teubner, 1986), where almost every aspect of life is regulated by the law. Regardless of what one thinks about this tendency, it is clear that the law in contemporary societies governs domains that were previously the focus of social (rather than legal) discourse.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Law and moral order: The influence of legal outcomes on moral judgment.

Mentovich¹,

Zeev‐Wolf²

2018

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current project explores a surprisingly overlooked question regarding the influence of legal outcomes on people's personal morality. In 4 studies utilizing different scenarios of ethically questionable behavior, we compared the influence of 4 potential legal outcomes: indictment, conviction, exoneration, and closing the case without charges (Studies 1-4); we also examined the influence of these outcomes against the benchmark of people's default moral positions in the absence of legal information (Studies 3-4), and looked at the role of legitimacy as a potential moderator (Studies 2-3). Results revealed that, as expected, legal outcomes affected people's personal moral judgments. More specifically, we found that: (a) exoneration and closing the case increased the moral permissibility of the conduct at stake relative to conviction and indictment (Studies 1-4); (b) there was largely no impact of judicial versus nonjudicial outcomes, such that no differences were found between closing the case without charges and exoneration, or between indictment and conviction (Studies 1-3); (c) the impact of the specific legal outcome compared with people's default moral judgments was dependent on the issue at stake (Studies 3-4); and (d) legitimacy did not moderate the results, such that legal outcomes influenced moral judgment whether or not people held the legal system as legitimate. Taken together, this research suggests that both judicial and nonjudicial legal outcomes play an important role in influencing people's moral judgments, which has not been previously recognized.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Law and moral order: The influence of legal outcomes on moral judgment.

Mentovich¹,

Zeev‐Wolf²

2018

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within the legal pluralism scholarship, Kanishka Jayasuriya and Paul S. Berman, for example, have discussed legal hybridity as an avenue beyond legal centrism (Jayasuriya) or legal separatism (Berman), thus bridging the concepts of legal pluralism and hybridity to a theoretical level. 25 But, the hybridity scholarship has yet to be applied distinctly and empirically to particular cases. This article aims to link the ideas of legal pluralism to those of legal hybridity in a gendered context.…”

Section: Some Previous Research On Land Reformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Pluralism, Gendered Discourses, and Hybridity in Land‐titling Practices in Cambodia

Baaz

Lilja

Östlund

2017

Journal of Law and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes and analyses the tensions, ambivalence, and hybridity that prevail in the nexus between discourses of gender and the legal pluralism of the new, formalized, and customary ways of handling land titles. Based on empirical research in Cambodia, it reveals a number of mechanisms, challenges, and inconsistencies in the practice of land‐titling. Foremost, the practice of titling seems to be highly informed by local discourses of marriage, family, gender, and age, which all affect to whom land is assigned; this leaves a hybrid construction in the nexus between statutory law and customary practices. The article departs from this observation and adds three contributions – on a theoretical level – to existing research: by incorporating the dimensions of discourse analysis and legal hybridity, by linking the concept of legal pluralism to the process of hybridization, and by introducing the notion of hybridity of implementation as a supplement to hybridity of law.

show abstract

“…Over the next decades, L&D started to embrace pluralist notions on several dimensions: the notion of law as a homogenous product created, implemented and enforced exclusively by the state as well as the emancipatory potential of law for economic and social purposes were questioned (Faundez, 2012;Jayasuriya, 2012;Tan, 2019). At the same time, the concept of 'development' was no longer equated exclusively with theories of modernisation and economic growth, but also acknowledged social and cultural factors shaping different understandings of what 'development' can mean for different kinds of actors and institutions (Esteva, 2009;Babb, 2013;Escobar, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite using the terminology, the authors do not engage with existing discussions on whether L&D has become an academic field and thus more than a corpus of ideas and theories (Tan, 2019) or an area of investment (Tamanaha, 2011). The authors are of the opinion, however, that plurality as a characteristic does not necessarily preclude the existence of an academic 'field '. Over the next decades, L&D started to embrace pluralist notions on several dimensions: the notion of law as a homogenous product created, implemented and enforced exclusively by the state as well as the emancipatory potential of law for economic and social purposes were questioned (Faundez, 2012;Jayasuriya, 2012;Tan, 2019). At the same time, the concept of 'development' was no longer equated exclusively with theories of modernisation and economic growth, but also acknowledged social and cultural factors shaping different understandings of what 'development' can mean for different kinds of actors and institutions (Esteva, 2009;Babb, 2013;Escobar, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The teaching of Law and Development: towards inclusiveness and reflexivity across time zones

Souza

Dollmaier²

2021

International Journal of Law in Context

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An exploratory qualitative analysis of Law and Development (L&D) course descriptions reveals plurality and heterodoxy across time zones through the way in which they approach ‘law’ and ‘development’. We see this contestedness as a manifestation of the inherent power asymmetries of the field and offer the notion of time zones to better describe plural and contested forms of L&D knowledge. We seek to explore teaching as an important arena where knowledge is created and argue that the characteristics of substantive complexity and methodological heterodoxy of L&D provide promising conditions for making teaching more inclusive and reflexive. In this way, teaching can help in further provincialising the field. Additionally, inclusiveness and reflexivity can also have an impact on the epistemological trajectory of L&D more broadly by giving voice to a diversity of narratives, concepts and values.

show abstract

Institutional Hybrids and the Rule of Law as a Regulatory Project

Cited by 10 publications

References 19 publications

Law and moral order: The influence of legal outcomes on moral judgment.

Law and moral order: The influence of legal outcomes on moral judgment.

Legal Pluralism, Gendered Discourses, and Hybridity in Land‐titling Practices in Cambodia

The teaching of Law and Development: towards inclusiveness and reflexivity across time zones

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About