This post summarises a presentation delivered as part of the Law and Political Economy Stream convened by Jack Meakin and Manoj Dias-Abey at the 2026 Socio-Legal Studies Association Annual Conference, University of Sussex, 30 March – 1 April 2026.
I created the term ‘econo-socio-legal’ over a decade ago, as part of a wider effort to advance sociologically-informed approaches to ‘law’ and ‘economy’, often referred to as Economic Sociology of Law.
My contributions to those efforts have been heavily influenced by collaborations with Diamond Ashiagbor and Prabha Kotiswaran, which are captured in special issues of the Journal of Law and Society (2013) and the Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly (2014), and three panels at the 2022 Law and Society Association Annual Meeting in Lisbon. Given the context in which I delivered this paper, it is worth explaining how I see Economic Sociology of Law (ESL) in relation to Law and Economy (LPE). Both focus on the constitutive nature of law–the fact that it shapes and is shaped by the wider world. In my view ESL has the advantage of being both more structured, in that it offers concepts with which to map the field in horizontally and vertically holistic ways; and more flexible, in that it allows diverse issues and disparate perspectives to be located in relation to each other.
I first used ‘econo-socio-legal’ in the title of an extremely rudimentary poster exhibited at the 2013 LSE Research Festival. I was trying to visually clarify what Economic Sociology of Law is. I could not find an existing term that captured the substantive focus (what) or methodological orientation (how) of the ESL approach, so I made one up.
Since then, I have used the term in more formal publications to retrospectively clarify; and to prospectively generate change.
How have I used it to clarify?
Focusing on theory, I have used ‘econo-socio-legal’ to (try to) clarify the methodological orientation of Economic Sociology of Law, suggesting that it is ‘an econo-socio-legal approach’, and hat this shapes what is being approached (economic and legal dimensions of social life), and how it is approached (drawing on law, economics and sociology). I have also used it to (try to) clarify what ideas can be understood as being in the spirit (if not the name) of Economic Sociology of Law (econo-socio-legal ‘thinking and practice’ and ‘research’, ‘concepts’ and ‘constructions’) and their implications (‘lesson[s]’, ‘norms’)
Focusing on the wider social world, I have used the term to highlight particular problems (econo-socio-legal ‘stor[ies]’, ‘situation[s]’, ‘futures’, ‘tangle[s]’ and ‘matters of econo-socio-legal concern’) to which Economic Sociology of Law might help to produce solutions (‘econo-socio-legal change’ or ‘transformation’).
How have I used it to change?
Firstly, I use the term as a constant, ‘deliberately awkward’, reminder of the fundamental, dynamic, scalar, interconnectedness of legal, economic and wider social life.
Secondly, I use it to signal the need to generate more dynamic, scalar, and interconnected approaches to the field (theorists, policy-makers)–especially the need to think in terms of ‘complex econo-socio-legal systems’, and systems of systems, composed of human actors, actions, interactions, regimes and rationalities; and more-than-human materialities.
Thirdly, I use it as a prefigurative device. To work prefiguratively is to act as if a desired future were already present. When I introduced the term, I did not name and claim it as novel. Rather I acted ‘as if’ it were already in use, and as if ‘the social’ is, and is broadly understood to be, the foundation of real and theoretical worlds, in the hopes that this would all come to pass.
So, is it useful?
All theorists, whether we fancy ourselves as traditionalists or radicals, claim (at least to peers and funders) to be doing something different. But different does not necessarily equate to useful. From an academic perspective, a term can only really be useful if it is used, and not only by individuals in conversation with themselves, but also in communication with others.
A diverse, but sparse, array of scholars have used the term econo-socio-legal, usually in passing, and only to signal their general field of inquiry. Perhaps the lack of ceremony suggests that it is intuitively useable? Only a handful have engaged with it in more detail, and many of these have engaged with me or been supervised by me when completing their PhDs.
I am not sure (and am probably not best placed to judge) whether this term is a useful work-in-progress, or a useless flop. I intend to continue to use it as an ungainly placeholder, and hope that others may join me or, perhaps better still, offer a (more gainly) alternative.
More interesting and important (at least to me) is what I learned by conducting this reflective exercise. I noticed that this term emerged from a (graphic) design process, and my development and use of it can be understood as an ongoing process of (what I am calling) ‘pragmatic conceptual design’.
I intend to explore this idea further in my ongoing book project, Law and Design: A pragmatic approach, with the generous support of a Leverhulme Trust Research Fellowship.
Amanda Perry-Kessaris 