MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1504181684

Global Problems in Domestic Courts

2011· article· en· W1504181684 sur OpenAlexfundno aff
Ralf Michaels

Notice bibliographique

RevueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueConflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesRaymond and Beverly Sackler Institute for Biological, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Yale UniversityYork UniversityYale UniversityCarnegie Corporation of New YorkNational Science Foundation
Mots-clésBusinessPolitical scienceLaw and economicsLawEconomics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Against this background, it may be wise to clarify, at the outset, the objectives of the book and where the limits of this ambitious endeavour are drawn.As explained in the Preface, the book forms part of a broader initiative to encourage prospective thinking in the legal sphere.The basic premise of this initiative is quite straight forward: while prospective thinking in the realm of law is not quite common, we consider such thinking to be not only desirable but in fact necessary.Such an approach is required in order to ensure that legal systems and institutions will not constantly lag behind the ever accelerating pace of change and that law, as means for change but also for protection, will not become obsolete.Contemporary law and legal institutions are apt to undergo significant changes as our world transforms.The book thus aims to explore a range of challenges that law and legal systems are facing today and some of the challenges that lie ahead and to examine to what extent the present institutional design and the global legal universeif such a thing existsare apt to successfully cope with such challenges and problems.This is already a tall order to face and what the book does not purport to do is to present a comprehensive set of predictions, the validity of which could later be tested as a matter of whether or not the future has unfolded in line with such assessments.The editors of this book, unfortunately, do not posses a time machine with which one can travel to the future (and to the best of our knowledge, nor do any of the authors who contributed to this book).Indeed, we have no pretention to predict the future in the manner of a fortune teller.Rather, the intent is to discuss critically the possibilities we can see today and what these trends suggest about our collective future.Therefore, the value of this book is in presenting visionary, innovative and at times bold observations and insights that attempt to look at the law of the future and the future of law; thus initiating further discussion on how to prepare for the future or, better yet, what do we need to do now to reach a desirable future.Unless one opts for an entirely deterministic perspective, the future, of course, is not merely something to look at, rather, something to shape.The decisions we make now will direct our collective future.Thus, understanding the possibilities of the law of the future is relevant and important.It is relevant because the projected transnationalisation and internationalisation of law will affect an everwidening sphere of subjects.It is important because the new processes of rule-making, adjudication and enforcement entailed in such changes areThe Law of the Future and the Future of Law FICHL Publication Series No. 11 (2011)page 4 globalisation on law).The meaning of globalisation is subject to much theoretical and academic debate.Undoubtedly, it is a complex phenomenon of multiple dimensions.Many attempts to define it have been made by scholars from a range of disciplines, but no single definition can be found that neatly captures the great scope and complexity of globalisation as a matter of a consensus understanding.Literature about globalisation fills entire shelves in many libraries across the globe as well as thousands of web pages (the Internet itself being a global platform, of course).Irrespective of globalisation, legal theoreticians have long attempted to define what law' is and yet a single, clear definition is not quite available.The deeper one goes into it the more difficult it may become to understand exactly what law is.The definition of law also depends on competing perceptions as to what the role of law is (or should be) and what objectives law is serving (or should serve).Moreover, law may be seen as one academic and professional discipline, but it may be very difficult to find a uniform definition of law's essence, role and purpose cutting across the various fields of law (criminal law, constitutional law, administrative law, private law, commercial law, etc.) and kinds of law (municipal law, national law, international law and so forth).The legal aspects of globalisation, the role of law in this process and the consequences for legal systems are relatively under-researched, compared, for example, to the economic, political, social and cultural aspects of globalisation.A useful concept in this respect is the internationalisation of law', denoting the process of the accommodation by a legal system of elements of other legal systems.This process can be observed at the national level, as well as at the international, regional and global levels.The internationalisation of law is driven by vertical and horizontal processes.Vertical processes consist of top-down and bottomup pressures on legal systems, and this is particularly applicable in respect of national legal systems.Horizontal processes involve transnational interactions between individuals, states and organisations.While recent years have shown an increasing interest in globalisation and law and in the internationalisation of law, quite clearly there is still a long way to go.Meanwhile, new challenges in this respect keep appearing.In any event, it is hardly surprising that, in a book about the law of the future and the future of law, the phenomena of globalisation and the 1.Part I: The Law of the Future 1.1.Globalisation, the International System, International Law and a Global Constitutional Framework: Towards a New Global New Deal?The first section of the book concerns the big questions': those problems and dilemmas that result from or go hand in hand with the process of globalisation and relate primarily to the international system of law and governance.Whereas Section 2 contains think pieces that discuss how 5

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,765
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,029
Tête enseignante GPT0,291
Écart entre enseignants0,262 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueeYLS (Yale Law School)Même sujetConflict of Laws and JurisdictionTravaux en français237 207