The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Global Legal Pluralism
Open accessAbstract
Some challenges of legal globalization closely resemble those formulated earlier for legal pluralism: the irreducible plurality of legal orders, the coexistence of domestic state law with other legal orders, the absence of a hierarchically superior position transcending the differences. This review discusses how legal pluralism engages with legal globalization and how legal globalization utilizes legal pluralism. It demonstrates how several international legal disciplines—comparative law, conflict of laws, public international law, and European Union law—have slowly begun to adopt some ideas of legal pluralism. It shows how traditional themes and questions of legal pluralism—the definition of law, the role of the state, of community, and of space—are altered under conditions of globalization. It addresses interrelations between different legal orders and various ways, both theoretical and practical, to deal with them. And it provides an outlook on the future of global legal pluralism as theory and practice of global law.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Griffiths, J. (1986) · The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law · doi:10.1080/07329113.1986.10756387 · Cited by 1,849
Human Rights and Gender Violence: Translating International Law into Local Justice
McGoldrick, S. K. (2007) · Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.1177/009430610703600159 · Cited by 1,582
Engle Merry, S. (1988) · Law & Society Review · doi:10.2307/3053638 · Cited by 1,296
Teubner, G. (1997) · Cited by 909
Law: A Map of Misreading. Toward a Postmodern Conception of Law
Santos, B. D. S. (1987) · Journal of Law and Society · doi:10.2307/1410186 · Cited by 879
Luhmann, N. (2004) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198262381.001.0001 · Cited by 861
Law, Custom and Social Order: The Colonial Experience in Malawi and Zambia
Vincent, J., & Chanock, M. (1986) · The International Journal of African Historical Studies · doi:10.2307/219141 · Cited by 761
MacCormick, N. (1999) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198268765.001.0001 · Cited by 737
Law and Borders: The Rise of Law in Cyberspace
Johnson, D. R., & Post, D. (1996) · Stanford Law Review · doi:10.2307/1229390 · Cited by 714
Savelsberg, J. J., & Teubner, G. (1994) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2075352 · Cited by 677
Cited by
Hsu, A., Höhne, N., Kuramochi, T., Vilariño, V., & Sovacool, B. K. (2020) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2020.101738 · Cited by 69
The Many Uses of Law: Interactional Law as a Bridge between Instrumentalism and Law’s Values
Taekema, S. (2017) · In Pursuit of Pluralist Jurisprudence · doi:10.1017/9781316875056.006 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Michaels, R.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Law and Social Science
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2009-12-01
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 243-262
- ISSN
- 1550-3585 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-3631
- OpenAlex
- W2163717926
- Cited by
- 363
- References
- 53
- FWCI
- 70.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Global Legal Pluralism. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.4.110707.172311
- The paper
- Michaels, R. (2009). Global Legal Pluralism. Annual Review of Law and Social Science. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.4.110707.172311
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
