Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39691212›Full record

ArticleLegal pluralism and critical social analysis2024

Legal pluralism and the production of (un)certainty in lived migration orders.

Larissa Vetters, Carolien Jacobs, Sophie Andreetta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Legal pluralism and critical social analysis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Larissa VettersLaw & Anthropology Department, Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology, Halle, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3408-4850
Carolien JacobsVan Vollenhoven Institute for Law, Governance and Society, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5304-4654
Sophie AndreettaLaboratoire d'Anthropologie Sociale et Culturelle, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9427-3007

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article builds on three of Keebet von Benda-Beckmann's core concepts, namely, legal pluralism, social security and relational social theory, to reflect on the place of law in lived migration orders, both in the global north and in the global south. To do this, we build on three empirical case studies from our respective fieldsites in Germany, Belgium and the DRC. These cases illustrate how 'thinking with Keebet's work' not only offers useful 'sensitizing concepts' for the empirical study of migration law and migration studies more broadly, but also provides a much-needed conceptual vocabulary to speak to and intervene in current debates in more doctrinal legal scholarship on global migration law. With this double aim in mind, we first build on a legal pluralism perspective to show how migration governance can be better understood through the prism of 'lived migration orders'. We then suggest rethinking state sovereignty, citizenship, and individual human rights in light of historical and newly emerging relational configurations. Finally, we suggest a new avenue for reconceptualizing migration governance beyond rights-based categorizations of migrants by paying more nuanced analytical attention to situations of uncertainty and how they contribute to social (in-)security.

Indexed as

Legal pluralismmigrationrelational statesocial securityuncertainty

Identifiers

PMID39691212
PMCPMC11651163

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.