Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Bridging or Widening the Gap? Digital Supervision and the Everyday Production of Judicial Norms in China

Bao, Kangjun LU (2026) SOLM02 20261
Sociology of Law Department
Abstract
This thesis examines how intelligent case evaluation systems participate in the everyday
production, interpretation, and enforcement of judicial norms within Chinese judicial
organizations. Drawing on a qualitative documentary analysis of central-level policy
documents, a published technical patent, and operational reports from courts and
procuratorates, the study traces how abstract expectations of “case quality” are translated
into indicators, thresholds, and evaluative categories. The analysis addresses three dimensions of judicial norm governance — how norms are
produced through technical translation, interpreted through evaluative outputs and
benchmarking practices, and enforced through continuous automated monitoring and
... (More)
This thesis examines how intelligent case evaluation systems participate in the everyday
production, interpretation, and enforcement of judicial norms within Chinese judicial
organizations. Drawing on a qualitative documentary analysis of central-level policy
documents, a published technical patent, and operational reports from courts and
procuratorates, the study traces how abstract expectations of “case quality” are translated
into indicators, thresholds, and evaluative categories. The analysis addresses three dimensions of judicial norm governance — how norms are
produced through technical translation, interpreted through evaluative outputs and
benchmarking practices, and enforced through continuous automated monitoring and
deviation detection. It combines Ehrlich’s concept of living law with the socio-legal gap
between formal standards and law in action and analytical concepts from the sociology of
quantification. The central finding is that these systems do not simply implement pre-existing standards
but actively produce new norms. The patent’s six-step method converts long-standing
judicial practices — quality sampling, peer assessment, contextual professional judgment, and shared threshold standards — into mathematical formulas. The resulting evaluative
outputs construct categories that become the primary organizational vocabulary for
perceiving judicial quality, while rendering dimensions that resist quantification — such
as legal reasoning and procedural fairness — structurally invisible. The thesis argues that digital supervision reconfigures rather than bridges or widens the
gap between formal standards and judicial practice. The 2024 revision of the Supreme
People ’ s Court ’ s Trial Quality Management Indicator System — which reduced
indicators and eliminated inter-court rankings in response to documented distortions
including “ mere data-ism ” and “ layer-by-layer intensification ” — provides
evidence that the system designed to close the old gap produced a new one: between
indicator-based digital norms and socially embedded judicial practice. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Bao, Kangjun LU
supervisor
organization
course
SOLM02 20261
year
type
H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
subject
keywords
intelligent case evaluation, judicial norms, digital supervision, sociology of quantification, living law, China
language
English
id
9229904
date added to LUP
2026-06-24 14:49:17
date last changed
2026-06-24 14:49:17
@misc{9229904,
  abstract     = {{This thesis examines how intelligent case evaluation systems participate in the everyday
production, interpretation, and enforcement of judicial norms within Chinese judicial
organizations. Drawing on a qualitative documentary analysis of central-level policy
documents, a published technical patent, and operational reports from courts and
procuratorates, the study traces how abstract expectations of “case quality” are translated
into indicators, thresholds, and evaluative categories. The analysis addresses three dimensions of judicial norm governance — how norms are
produced through technical translation, interpreted through evaluative outputs and
benchmarking practices, and enforced through continuous automated monitoring and
deviation detection. It combines Ehrlich’s concept of living law with the socio-legal gap
between formal standards and law in action and analytical concepts from the sociology of
quantification. The central finding is that these systems do not simply implement pre-existing standards
but actively produce new norms. The patent’s six-step method converts long-standing
judicial practices — quality sampling, peer assessment, contextual professional judgment, and shared threshold standards — into mathematical formulas. The resulting evaluative
outputs construct categories that become the primary organizational vocabulary for
perceiving judicial quality, while rendering dimensions that resist quantification — such
as legal reasoning and procedural fairness — structurally invisible. The thesis argues that digital supervision reconfigures rather than bridges or widens the
gap between formal standards and judicial practice. The 2024 revision of the Supreme
People ’ s Court ’ s Trial Quality Management Indicator System — which reduced
indicators and eliminated inter-court rankings in response to documented distortions
including “ mere data-ism ” and “ layer-by-layer intensification ” — provides
evidence that the system designed to close the old gap produced a new one: between
indicator-based digital norms and socially embedded judicial practice.}},
  author       = {{Bao, Kangjun}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Bridging or Widening the Gap? Digital Supervision and the Everyday Production of Judicial Norms in China}},
  year         = {{2026}},
}