How Courts Act as Institutional Actors in Governance: Strategic Adjudication in Embedded Courts

Abstract “Embedded courts” explains how Chinese courts operate within the system of local bureaucratic organisation, raising concerns about how judges balance adjudicative functions with the expectations of local governance. Using 47,641 first-instance trademark judgments (2014–2021), we empirically examine adjudication in embedded courts and observe the following phenomenon: non-local plaintiffs are more likely to win but receive lower compensation; corporate defendants win more often yet face higher damages when they lose. Regional heterogeneity indicates that some courts exhibit lower support rates for local plaintiffs and well-known trademark holders. These findings reveal the strategic logic underlying local bureaucratic organisation. We develop a Judicial Behavior Index (JBI) and analyse Henan Province. The results suggest courts act as institutional actors responding to local governance incentives. By exercising discretion strategically, courts navigate local governance logics within the legal framework.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Asian Journal of Law and Society
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2025.10033
Primary Topic
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How Courts Act as Institutional Actors in Governance: Strategic Adjudication in Embedded Courts

Lingyan Yang, Fang Wang, Ke Jiang
Asian Journal of Law and Society
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
article

How Courts Act as Institutional Actors in Governance: Strategic Adjudication in Embedded Courts

Lingyan Yang, Fang Wang, Ke Jiang
article en

Abstract

Abstract “Embedded courts” explains how Chinese courts operate within the system of local bureaucratic organisation, raising concerns about how judges balance adjudicative functions with the expectations of local governance. Using 47,641 first-instance trademark judgments (2014–2021), we empirically examine adjudication in embedded courts and observe the following phenomenon: non-local plaintiffs are more likely to win but receive lower compensation; corporate defendants win more often yet face higher damages when they lose. Regional heterogeneity indicates that some courts exhibit lower support rates for local plaintiffs and well-known trademark holders. These findings reveal the strategic logic underlying local bureaucratic organisation. We develop a Judicial Behavior Index (JBI) and analyse Henan Province. The results suggest courts act as institutional actors responding to local governance incentives. By exercising discretion strategically, courts navigate local governance logics within the legal framework.

Asian Journal of Law and SocietyVol. 12(4)
Shandong University (CN), Shandong Normal University (CN)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

How Courts Act as Institutional Actors in Governance: Strategic Adjudication in Embedded Courts — Lingyan Yang, Fang Wang, et al. · Asian Journal of Law and Society (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS