Transnational Legal Theory

256 papers and 862 indexed citations i.

About

The 256 papers published in Transnational Legal Theory in the last decades have received a total of 862 indexed citations. Papers published in Transnational Legal Theory usually cover Political Science and International Relations (143 papers), Law (88 papers) and Strategy and Management (59 papers) specifically the topics of International Law and Human Rights (72 papers), Judicial and Constitutional Studies (50 papers) and Corporate Law and Human Rights (44 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Transnational Legal Theory are Peer Zumbansen, Horatia Muir Watt, Louis J. Kotzé, Joseph Raz, Ifesinachi Okafor‐Yarwood, Günther Teubner, Benjamin J. Richardson, Priscilla Claeys, Alexander Somek and Karl‐Heinz Ladeur.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Transnational Legal Theory

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Transnational Legal Theory. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Transnational Legal Theory.

Countries where authors publish in Transnational Legal Theory

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Transnational Legal Theory. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers published in Transnational Legal Theory with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Transnational Legal Theory more than expected).

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar’s output or impact.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025