Global Norm Diffusion and Local Legal Resistance: Cultural Contestation in Practice
Keywords:
global norm diffusion, local legal resistance, cultural contestation, legal pluralism, vernacularization, qualitative research, TehranAbstract
This study aimed to explore how globally circulating legal norms are interpreted, translated, resisted, and selectively incorporated within local legal and socio-cultural practices in Tehran. This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews to examine the everyday meanings attached to global legal norms among legal professionals, civil society actors, academics, and community-based practitioners in Tehran. Participants were selected through purposive sampling, followed by snowball recruitment to identify individuals with practical experience in law, rights discourse, institutional policy, or community mediation. A total of 28 participants were interviewed, and theoretical saturation was reached after the twenty-fourth interview, with four additional interviews conducted to confirm the stability of the emerging categories. Interviews were audio-recorded with consent, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed through thematic analysis. NVivo software was used to organize transcripts, code segments, compare categories, and construct thematic relationships. Four main categories were identified: global norms as aspirational legal language, cultural translation and vernacularization, institutional gatekeeping and selective compliance, and everyday resistance through pragmatic negotiation. Participants described global norms as symbolically powerful but socially contested when they appeared detached from local moral vocabularies, institutional capacity, or culturally recognized forms of legitimacy. Resistance did not appear only as rejection; rather, it often operated through reinterpretation, delay, selective enforcement, and translation into locally acceptable language. Participants emphasized that the practical acceptance of global legal norms depended on trust, institutional credibility, cultural resonance, and the ability of local actors to connect abstract legal principles to concrete social problems. The study suggests that global norm diffusion is not a linear process of legal transfer but a contested socio-legal practice shaped by cultural meaning, institutional mediation, and everyday negotiation. Local resistance should not be understood merely as opposition to global law; it may also function as a mechanism through which communities test, reinterpret, and domesticate global legal ideas.
Downloads
References
Acharya, A. (2004). How ideas spread: Whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism. International Organization, 58(2), 239–275. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818304582024
Berman, P. S. (2009). The new legal pluralism. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 5, 225–242. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.093008.131539
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550789
Goodman, R., & Jinks, D. (2004). How to influence states: Socialization and international human rights law. Duke Law Journal, 54(3), 621–703.
Goodman, R., & Jinks, D. (2013). Socializing states: Promoting human rights through international law. Oxford University Press.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Halliday, T. C., & Shaffer, G. (Eds.). (2015). Transnational legal orders. Cambridge University Press.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Merry, S. E. (1988). Legal pluralism. Law & Society Review, 22(5), 869–896. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053638
Merry, S. E. (2006a). Human rights and gender violence: Translating international law into local justice. University of Chicago Press.
Merry, S. E. (2006b). Transnational human rights and local activism: Mapping the middle. American Anthropologist, 108(1), 38–51. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.2006.108.1.38
Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (Eds.). (1999). The power of human rights: International norms and domestic change. Cambridge University Press.
Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (Eds.). (2013). The persistent power of human rights: From commitment to compliance. Cambridge University Press.
Santos, B. de S. (2002). Toward a new legal common sense: Law, globalization, and emancipation (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Simmons, B. A. (2009). Mobilizing for human rights: International law in domestic politics. Cambridge University Press.
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research: A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
