1932

Abstract

Scholars of law and social science have challenged conventional wisdom that law and courts in authoritarian states are, at best, the tools of dictators and that law fails to matter in places riven by violence or warfare. Less discussed is how this expansive body of research is being carried out in conflict zones and authoritarian states. This article takes on that challenge: to describe the state of the study of field research on law by paying close attention to those unlikely places—conflict-affected and authoritarian states—that illuminate law's power in unexpected ways and to those close-to-the-ground methods—ethnographic, interview-based, and archival—that generate new hypotheses for law and social science research.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110615-084918
2016-10-27
2024-04-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/12/1/annurev-lawsocsci-110615-084918.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110615-084918&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abel RL. 2010. Law and society: project and practice. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 6:1–23 [Google Scholar]
  2. Abel RL, Lewis PSC. 1996. Lawyers in Society: An Overview Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
  3. Abusharaf RM. 2009. Transforming Displaced Women in Sudan: Politics and the Body in a Squatter Settlement Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  4. Amar P. 2013. The Security Archipelago: Human-Security States, Sexuality Politics, and the End of Neoliberalism Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press
  5. Baldwin J, Davis G. 2005. Empirical research in law. The Oxford Handbook of Legal Studies M Tushnet, P Cane 880–900 Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  6. Bartels BL, Bonneau CW. 2015. Making Law and Courts Research Relevant: The Normative Implications of Empirical Research New York: Routledge
  7. Blanck PD. 1987. The “process” of field research in the courtroom: a descriptive analysis. Law Hum. Behav. 11:4337–58 [Google Scholar]
  8. Blatmann C. 2015. Political scientists are debating a new initiative to make research more trustworthy. Here's why I'm skeptical. Washington Post Monkey Cage Blog Nov. 9. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/11/09/political-scientists-are-debating-a-new-initiative-to-make-research-more-trustworthy-heres-why-im-skeptical/
  9. Bleich E, Pekkanan R. 2013. How to report interview data. Interview Research in Political Science L Mosley 84–108 Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  10. Boittin ML. 2013. New perspectives from the oldest profession: abuse and the legal consciousness of sex workers in China. Law Soc. Rev. 47:2245–78 [Google Scholar]
  11. Borneman J, Hammoudi A. 2009. Being There: The Fieldwork Encounter and the Making of Truth Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
  12. Bradney A. 2010. The place of empirical legal research in the law school curriculum. See Cane & Kritzer 2010 1025–43
  13. Brady HE, Collier D. 2010. Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2nd ed..
  14. Branch A. 2011. Displacing Human Rights: War and Intervention in Northern Uganda Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
  15. Brinks DM. 2008. The Judicial Response to Police Killings in Latin America: Inequality and the Rule of Law Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  16. Brisbin RA Jr. 2010. Resistance to legality. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 6:25–44 [Google Scholar]
  17. Cane P, Kritzer HM. 2010. The Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Research Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
  18. Carbado DW, Roithmayr D. 2014. Critical race theory meets social science. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 10:149–67 [Google Scholar]
  19. Cassell J. 1978. Risk and benefit to subjects of fieldwork. Am. Sociol. 13:3134–43 [Google Scholar]
  20. Chakravarty A. 2012. “Partially trusting” field relationships opportunities and constraints of fieldwork in Rwanda's postconflict setting. Field Methods 24:3251–71 [Google Scholar]
  21. Cheesman N. 2015. Opposing the Rule of Law: How Myanmar's Courts Make Law and Order Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  22. Christodulou Family 2016. Artemis Christodulou http://www.socialentrepreneurship-book.com/beneficiaries/artemis-christodulou/
  23. Chua LJ. 2012. Pragmatic resistance, law, and social movements in authoritarian states: the case of gay collective action in Singapore. Law Soc. Rev. 46:4713–48 [Google Scholar]
  24. Chua LJ. 2014a. Mobilizing Gay Singapore: Rights and Resistance in an Authoritarian State Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press
  25. Chua LJ. 2014b. Rights mobilization and the campaign to decriminalize homosexuality in Singapore. Asian J. Law Soc. 1:1205–28 [Google Scholar]
  26. Clark JN. 2012. Fieldwork and its ethical challenges: reflections from research in Bosnia. Hum. Rights Q. 34:3823–39 [Google Scholar]
  27. Clifford J. 1983. On ethnographic authority. Representations 1:2118–46 [Google Scholar]
  28. Clifford J, Marcus GE. 1986. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
  29. Cohen N, Arieli T. 2011. Field research in conflict environments: methodological challenges and snowball sampling. J. Peace Res. 48:4423–35 [Google Scholar]
  30. Cramer C, Johnston D, Oya C, Sender J. 2016. Research note: mistakes, crises, and research independence: the perils of fieldwork as a form of evidence. Afr. Aff. 115:458145–60 [Google Scholar]
  31. de Sousa Santos B. 1981. Science and politics: doing research in Rio's squatter settlements. Law and Social Enquiry: Case Studies of Research R Luckham 261–89 Uppsala, Swed: Scand. Inst. Afr. Stud. Int. Cent. Law Dev. [Google Scholar]
  32. Dezalay Y, Garth BG. 1996. Dealing in Virtue: International Commercial Arbitration and the Construction of a Transnational Legal Order Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  33. Dezalay Y, Garth BG. 2002. The Internationalization of Palace Wars: Lawyers, Economists, and the Contest to Transform Latin American States Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  34. Dezalay Y, Garth BG. 2010. Asian Legal Revivals: Lawyers in the Shadow of Empire Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  35. Diamond SS, Mueller P. 2010. Empirical legal scholarship in law reviews. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 6:581–99 [Google Scholar]
  36. Ellett RL. 2011. Stuck in-between: interviewing judges and other legal elites in Africa. Law Court 21:113–18 [Google Scholar]
  37. Ellett RL. 2016. Interviewing African judges: reflections on fieldwork and data collection in comparative judicial politics Presented at Am. Polit. Sci. Assoc. Annu. Meet., Sept 3–6 San Francisco, CA:
  38. Ellett R, Massoud MF. 2016. Not all law is public: reflections on data transparency for law and courts research in Africa. Afr. Polit. Conf. Group Newsl. 12:28–10 [Google Scholar]
  39. Englund H. 2004. Towards a critique of rights talk in new democracies: the case of legal aid in Malawi. Discourse Soc 15:5527–51 [Google Scholar]
  40. Englund H. 2006. Prisoners of Freedom: Human Rights and the African Poor Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
  41. Epstein L, King G. 2002. The rules of inference. Univ. Chicago Law Rev. 69:11–93 [Google Scholar]
  42. Epstein L, Martin AD. 2010. Quantitative approaches to empirical legal research. See Cane & Kritzer 2010 901–25
  43. Erie MS. 2015. Muslim Mandarins in Chinese courts: dispute resolution, Islamic law, and the secular state in northwest China. Law Soc. Inq. 40:41001–30 [Google Scholar]
  44. Erie MS. 2016. China and Islam: The Prophet, The Party, and Law Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  45. Esbrook L. 2015. Field research on Turkish judicial reform. Politics and Law in Law Turkey Blog https://politicsandlawinturkey.wordpress.com/publications/talking-about-research/hosgeldin-welcome-and-goodbye-field-research-on-turkish-judicial-reform/
  46. Felstiner WLF, Abel RL, Sarat A. 1980. The emergence and transformation of disputes: naming, blaming, claiming. Law Soc. Rev. 15:3/4631–54 [Google Scholar]
  47. Fluehr-Lobban C. 1987. Islamic Law and Society in the Sudan London: Frank Cass
  48. Ford N, Mills EJ, Zachariah R, Upshur R. 2009. Ethics of conducting research in conflict settings. Confl. Health 3:71–9 [Google Scholar]
  49. Fuller LL. 1969. The Morality of Law New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press, Rev. ed..
  50. Furman KC, Lake M. 2015. Ethics abroad: field research in fragile states Presented at Am. Polit. Sci. Assoc. Annu. Meet., Sept 3–6 San Francisco, CA:
  51. Galligan DJ. 2010. Legal theory and empirical research. See Cane & Kritzer 2010 976–1001
  52. Galtung J. 1969. Violence, peace, and peace research. J. Peace Res. 6:3167–91 [Google Scholar]
  53. Galtung J. 1990. Cultural violence. J. Peace Res. 27:3291–305 [Google Scholar]
  54. Gans-Morse J. 2012. Threats to property rights in Russia: from private coercion to state aggression. Post-Soviet Aff 28:3263–95 [Google Scholar]
  55. Gentile M. 2013. Meeting the “organs”: the tacit dilemma of field research in authoritarian states. Area 45:4426–32 [Google Scholar]
  56. Geraghty TF. 1970. Field research in Ethiopian law. J. Leg. Plur. Unoff. Law 2:317–22 [Google Scholar]
  57. Goffman A. 2014. On the Run: Fugitive Life in an American City Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  58. Golder M, Golder SN. 2016. Letter from the editors: symposium on DA-RT. Comp. Polit. Newsl. 26:11–9 [Google Scholar]
  59. Goodale M, Merry SE. 2007. The Practice of Human Rights Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  60. Green DP, Thorley DR. 2014. Field experimentation and the study of law and policy. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 10:153–72 [Google Scholar]
  61. Greenhouse CJ. 2006. Fieldwork on law. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 2:187–210 [Google Scholar]
  62. Greitens SC. 2015. Field research under authoritarianism: how ethics should shape methodology Presented at Am. Polit. Sci. Assoc. Annu. Meet., Sept 3–6 San Francisco, CA:
  63. Grenfell L. 2013. Promoting the Rule of Law in Post-Conflict States Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  64. Halliday S, Schmidt P. 2009. Conducting Law and Society Research: Reflections on Methods and Practices Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  65. Handler JF. 1970. Field research strategies in urban legal studies. Osgoode Hall Law J 8:2401–9 [Google Scholar]
  66. Hanson M. 2016. Legalized rent-seeking: local government, law, and land rights in Kazakhstan Presented at Cornell Int. Law J. Sympos., Feb. 19 Ithaca, NY:
  67. Harrington CB, Merry SE. 2010. Empirical Legal Training in the U.S. Academy. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
  68. Heimer CA, Morse J. 2016. Colonizing the clinic: the adventures of law in HIV treatment and research. The New Legal Realism, Volume II: Studying Law Globally H Klug, SE Merry 69–95 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  69. Heimer CA, Petty J. 2010. Bureaucratic ethics: IRBs and the legal regulation of human subjects research. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 6:601–26 [Google Scholar]
  70. Hirsch SF. 2006. In the Moment of Greatest Calamity: Terrorism, Grief, and a Victim's Quest for Justice Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  71. Ho DE, Rubin DB. 2011. Credible causal inference for empirical legal studies. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 7:17–40 [Google Scholar]
  72. Ho EL-E, Chua LJ. 2016. Law and “race” in the citizenship spaces of Myanmar: spatial strategies and the political subjectivity of the Burmese-Chinese. Ethn. Racial Stud. 39:5896–916 [Google Scholar]
  73. Huntington SP, Moore CH. 1970. Authoritarian Politics in Modern Society: The Dynamics of Established One-Party Systems New York: Basic Books
  74. Isaac JC. 2015. For a more public political science. Perspect. Polit. 13:2269–83 [Google Scholar]
  75. Isser D. 2011. Customary Justice and the Rule of Law in War-Torn Societies Washington, DC: US Inst. Peace Press
  76. Kapiszewski D, Maclean L, Read BL. 2015. Field Research in Political Science Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  77. Karpik L, Halliday TC. 2011. The legal complex. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 7:217–36 [Google Scholar]
  78. Kawar L, Massoud MF. 2012. Symposium: new directions in comparative public law. Law Court 22:332–36 [Google Scholar]
  79. Kilson ML. 1963. Authoritarian and single-party tendencies in African politics. World Polit 15:2262–94 [Google Scholar]
  80. King G, Keohane RO, Verba S. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  81. Kiser E, Hechter M. 1991. The role of general theory in comparative-historical sociology. Am. J. Sociol. 97:11–30 [Google Scholar]
  82. Kleinfeld R. 2012. Advancing the Rule of Law Abroad: Next Generation Reform New York: Carnegie Endow. Int. Peace
  83. Klug H, Merry SE. 2016. The New Legal Realism: Studying Law Globally 2 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  84. Koch N. 2013. Introduction—field methods in “closed contexts”: undertaking research in authoritarian states and places. Area 45:4390–95 [Google Scholar]
  85. Korobkin R. 2002. Empirical scholarship in contract law: possibilities and pitfalls. Univ. Ill. Law Rev. 2002:41033–66 [Google Scholar]
  86. Kritzer HM. 1996. “Data, data, data, drowning in data”: crafting “the hollow core.”. Law Soc. Inq. 21:3761–804 [Google Scholar]
  87. Kritzer HM. 2009. Conclusion: “Research is a messy business”—an archeology of the craft of sociolegal research. Conducting Law and Society Research: Reflections on Methods and Practices S Halliday, P Schmidt 264–85 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  88. Kritzer HM. 2010. The (nearly) forgotten early empirical legal research. See Cane & Kritzer 2010 886–900
  89. Krygier M. 2008. The Hart-Fuller debate, transnational societies, and the rule of law. The Hart-Fuller Debate in the 21st Century P Cane 107–34 Oxford: Hart [Google Scholar]
  90. Lake M. 2014. Organizing hypocrisy: providing legal accountability for human rights violations in areas of limited statehood. Int. Stud. Q. 58:3515–26 [Google Scholar]
  91. Lake M, Muthaka I, Walker G. 2016. Gendering justice? Opportunity and (dis)empowerment through legal development aid in the Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Law Soc. Rev. 50:539–74 [Google Scholar]
  92. Ledeneva AV. 2013. Can Russia Modernise? Sistema, Power Networks and Informal Governance Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  93. Leonardi C. 2013. Dealing with Government in South Sudan: Histories of Chiefship, Community & State Suffolk, UK: James Currey
  94. Levitsky S, Way LA. 2010. Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  95. Lokaneeta J. 2014. Transnational Torture: Law, Violence, and State Power in the United States and India New York: N.Y. Univ. Press
  96. Luker K. 2008. Salsa Dancing into the Social Sciences: Research in the Age of Info-Glut Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  97. Lupia A, Elman C. 2014. Openness in political science: data access and research transparency. PS Polit. Sci. Polit. 47:119–42 [Google Scholar]
  98. Lyon TD. 2014. Interviewing children. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 10:73–89 [Google Scholar]
  99. Massoud MF. 2011. Do victims of war need international law? Human rights education programs in authoritarian Sudan. Law Soc. Rev. 45:11–32 [Google Scholar]
  100. Massoud MF. 2012. Lawyers and the disintegration of the legal complex in Sudan. Fates of Political Liberalism in the British Post-Colony: The Politics of the Legal Complex T Halliday, L Karpik, MM Feeley 193–218 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  101. Massoud MF. 2013. Law's Fragile State: Colonial, Authoritarian, and Humanitarian Legacies in Sudan Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  102. Massoud MF. 2014. International arbitration and judicial politics in authoritarian states. Law Soc. Inq. 39:11–30 [Google Scholar]
  103. Massoud MF. 2015. Work rules: how international NGOs build law in war-torn societies. Law Soc. Rev. 49:2333–64 [Google Scholar]
  104. Massoud MF. 2016a. Ideals and practices in the rule of law: an essay on legal politics. Law Soc. Inq. 41:2489–501 [Google Scholar]
  105. Massoud MF. 2016b. The politics of Islamic law and human rights: Sudan's rival legal systems. The New Legal Realism: Studying Law Globally 2 H Klug, SE Merry, pp 96–112 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  106. Mawani R. 2012. Law's archive. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 8:337–65 [Google Scholar]
  107. Mazurana D, Jacobsen K, Gale LA. 2013. Research Methods in Conflict Settings: A View from Below Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  108. Merry SE. 2006. Human Rights and Gender Violence: Translating International Law into Local Justice Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  109. Mertz E, Macaulay S, Mitchell TW. 2016. The New Legal Realism: Translating Law-and-Society for Today's Legal Practice 1 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  110. Moore B. 1966. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy Boston: Beacon
  111. Moustafa T. 2014. Law and courts in authoritarian regimes. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 10:281–99 [Google Scholar]
  112. Mutua M. 2008. Human Rights: A Political and Cultural Critique Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press
  113. Nielsen LB. 2010. The need for multi-method approaches in empirical legal research. See Cane & Kritzer 2010 952–75
  114. Nixon R. 2011. Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  115. Nonet P, Selznick P. 2001. Law & Society in Transition: Toward Responsive Law New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction
  116. Nordstrom C. 2002. Four ways to tell a story on violence. Rev. Anthropol. 31:11–19 [Google Scholar]
  117. Nordstrom C, Robben ACGM. 1996. Fieldwork under Fire: Contemporary Stories of Violence and Culture Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
  118. Nouwen SMH. 2013. Complementarity in the Line of Fire: The Catalysing Effect of the International Criminal Court in Uganda and Sudan Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  119. Osanloo A. 2004. Doing the “rights” thing: methods and challenges of fieldwork in Iran. Iran. Stud. 37:4675–84 [Google Scholar]
  120. Pils E. 2015. China's Human Rights Lawyers: Advocacy and Resistance London: Routledge
  121. Portillo S, Rudes DS. 2014. Construction of justice at the street level. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 10:321–34 [Google Scholar]
  122. Pyper N. 2016. The murder of my friend Giulio Regeni in Egypt was an attack on academic freedom. The Guardian Feb. 6. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/06/murder-giulio-regeni-egypt-academic-freedom-students
  123. Rajagopal B. 2003. International Law from Below: Development, Social Movements, and Third World Resistance Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  124. Rajah J. 2011. Punishing bodies, securing the nation: how rule of law can legitimate the urbane authoritarian state. Law Soc. Inq. 36:4945–70 [Google Scholar]
  125. Rajah J. 2012. Authoritarian Rule of Law: Legislation, Discourse and Legitimacy in Singapore Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  126. Read BL. 2010. More than an interview, less than Sedaka: studying subtle and hidden politics with site-intensive methods. Contemporary Chinese Politics: New Sources, Methods, and Field Strategies A Carlson, ME Gallagher, K Lieberthal, M Manion 145–61 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  127. Reno W. 1998. Warlord Politics and African States Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner
  128. Romano D. 2006. Conducting research in the Middle East's conflict zones. PS Polit. Sci. Polit. 39:3439–41 [Google Scholar]
  129. Rone J. 1996. Behind the Red Line: Political Repression in Sudan New York: Hum. Rights Watch
  130. Rowen J. 2016. We don't believe in transitional justice: war, peace and the circulation of legal ideas in Colombia. Law Soc. Inq. 41:In press [Google Scholar]
  131. Sachs JA. 2013. “Native courts” and the limits of the law in colonial Sudan: ambiguity as strategy. Law Soc. Inq. 38:4973–92 [Google Scholar]
  132. Scammell R, Michaelson R. 2016. Italy prepares to repatriate body of Cambridge student Giulio Regeni. The Guardian Feb. 5. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/05/italy-prepares-repatriate-body-cambridge-student-giulio-regeni
  133. Scholars at Risk Network 2016. Scholars at Risk Network http://scholarsatrisk.nyu.edu/
  134. Selznick P. 1959. The sociology of law. Sociology Today R Merton, L Broom, L Cottrell 115–29 New York: Basic Books [Google Scholar]
  135. Seron C, Coutin SB, White Meeusen P. 2013. Is there a canon of law and society. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 9:287–306 [Google Scholar]
  136. Sezgin Y. 2013. Human Rights Under State-Enforced Religious Family Laws in Israel, Egypt, and India Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  137. Shaffir W, Stebbins RA. 1991. Experiencing Fieldwork: An Inside View of Qualitative Research Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  138. Shaver A, Zhou Y-Y. 2016. How to make surveys in war zones better, and why this is important. Washington Post Monkey Cage Blog Jan. 7. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/01/06/how-to-make-surveys-in-war-zones-better-and-why-this-is-important/
  139. Solomon PH. 2015. Understanding the history of Soviet criminal justice: the contribution of archives and other sources. Russ. Rev. 74:3401–18 [Google Scholar]
  140. Spamann H. 2015. Empirical comparative law. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 11:131–53 [Google Scholar]
  141. Sriram CL, King JC, Mertus JA, Martin-Ortega O, Herman J. 2009. Surviving Field Research: Working in Violent and Difficult Situations London: Routledge
  142. Stephens D. 2009. Qualitative Research in International Settings: A Practical Guide London: Routledge
  143. Stern RE. 2010. On the frontlines: making decisions in Chinese civil environmental lawsuits. Law Policy 32:179–103 [Google Scholar]
  144. Stern RE. 2011. From dispute to decision: suing polluters in China. China Q 206:294–312 [Google Scholar]
  145. Stern RE. 2013. Environmental Litigation in China: A Study in Political Ambivalence Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  146. Suchman MC, Mertz E. 2010. Toward a new legal empiricism: empirical legal studies and new legal realism. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 6:555–79 [Google Scholar]
  147. Taussig M. 2006. Law in a Lawless Land: Diary of a Limpieza in Colombia Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  148. Trubek DM, Galanter M. 1974. Scholars in self-estrangement: some reflections on the crisis in law and development studies in the United States. Wis. Law Rev. 1974:1062–102 [Google Scholar]
  149. US Dep. State 2016. State Sponsors of Terrorism Washington, DC: US Dep. State http://www.state.gov/j/ct/list/c14151.htm
  150. Van Maanen J. 2011. Tales of the Field: On Writing Ethnography Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press, 2nd ed..
  151. Vogt A. 2016. Italian Cambridge PhD student suffered “inhuman, animal-like” violence before his death in Egypt. Telegraph Feb. 7. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/12145257/Italian-Cambridge-PhD-student-suffered-inhuman-animal-like-violence-before-his-death-in-Egypt.html
  152. Wax ML. 1980. Paradoxes of “consent” to the practice of fieldwork. Soc. Probl. 27:3272–83 [Google Scholar]
  153. Webley L. 2010. Qualitative approaches to empirical legal research. See Cane & Kritzer 2010, pp 927–50
  154. Wedeen L. 1999. Ambiguities of Domination: Politics, Rhetoric, and Symbols in Contemporary Syria Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  155. Weiss M. 2010. In the Shadow of Sectarianism: Law, Shi‘ism, and the Making of Modern Lebanon Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  156. Wood EJ. 2006. The ethical challenges of field research in conflict zones. Qual. Sociol. 29:3373–86 [Google Scholar]
  157. Yanow D, Schwartz-Shea P. 2013. Meaning and methodology. Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn D Yanow, P Schwartz-Shea, pp 1–26 London: ME Sharpe, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  158. Yashar D. 2015. Editorial trust, gatekeeping, and unintended consequences. Comp. Polit. Newsl. 26:157–64 [Google Scholar]
  159. Young C. 2006. The heart of the African conflict zone: democratization, ethnicity, civil conflict, and the Great Lakes crisis. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 9:301–28 [Google Scholar]
  160. Young KM. 2014. Everyone knows the game: legal consciousness in the Hawaiian cockfight. Law Soc. Rev. 48:3499–530 [Google Scholar]
  161. Zenker O, Kumoll K. 2010. Beyond Writing Culture: Current Intersections of Epistemologies and Representational Practices New York: Berghahn Books
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110615-084918
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110615-084918
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error