598 Bibliographic EssayStone and the So cio log i cal Approach to International Law,” 9(2) UNSWLJ 14– 25
(1986). On Álvarez’s career on the World Court bench, see Katharina Zobel, “Judge
Alejandro Álvarez at the International Court of Justice (1946– 1955): His Th eory of a
‘New International Law’ and Judicial Lawmaking,” 19 Leiden J. Int’l L. 1017– 40
(2006). On Rolando Quadri, see Roberto Ago, “Sciences juridiques et droit interna-
tional,” 90 RdC 851– 958 (1956), 908– 11.
Assessments of the New Haven School are also rather sparse, considering the impact
that it has had, at least in American law schools in the generation aft er 1945. Probably
the single best pre sen ta tion of the school’s stance is Myres S. McDougal, “International
Law, Power, and Policy: A Contemporary Conception,” 82 RdC 133– 259 (1953). For a
survey of international law in general through the New Haven lens, see W. Michael
Reisman, “Th e Quest for World Order and Dignity in the Twenty- First Century: Con-
stitutive Pro cess and Individual Commitment,” 351 RdC 9– 381 (2010), especially 151–
61, where the “text- rule- based” mode of decision making is contrasted with the
“policy- context- based mode.” For a capsule account, see Martti Koskenniemi, Th e
Gentle Civilizer of Nations: Th e Rise and Fall of International Law 1870– 1960 (Ca m-
bridge University Press, 2001), 474– 77. For an account that focuses chiefl y on Lass-
well, see James Farr, “Th e New Science of Politics,” in Terrence Ball and Richard Bel-
lamy (eds.), Th e Cambridge History of Twentieth- Century Po liti cal Th ought, 431– 45
(Cambridge University Press, 2006). For a critical, but not unsympathetic, assessment
of the New Haven School, see Richard A. Falk, “Casting the Spell: Th e New Haven
School of International Law,” 104 Yale L. J. 1991– 2008 (1995). For further criticism,
see Oran R. Young, “International Law and Social Science: Th e Contributions of
Myres S. McDougal,” 66 AJIL 60– 76 (1972). In response, see Myres S. McDougal, “In-
ternational Law and Social Science: A Mild Plea in Avoidance,” 66 AJIL 77– 81 (1972).
For the best fl avor of the controversies generated by the New Haven School, see the
series of sharp attacks and defenses in “McDougal’s Jurisprudence: Utility, Infl uence,
Controversy,” 79 ASIL Procs. 266– 88 (1985).
On the World Order Models Project, see Simon Dalby, “Against ‘Globalization
from Above’: Critical Geopolitics and the World Order Model Project,” 17 Environ-
ment and Planning, D: Society and Space 181– 200 (1999). For Richard Falk’s own
pre sen ta tion of his position, the best sources are probably Richard A. Falk, A Study of
Future Worlds (Free Press, 1975); and Richard A. Falk, On Humane Governance: To-
ward a New Global Politics (Polity Press, 1995).
On the emergence of the Th ird World countries into a major role on the world
scene, see Peter Lyon, “Th e Emergence of the Th ird World,” in Hedley Bull and Adam
Wat son (ed s.), Th e Expansion of International Society, 229– 37 (Clarendon Press, 1984);
Patricia Buirette- Maurau, La participation du tiers- monde à l’ élaboration du droit in-
ternational (Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, 1983); and Gustavo Gozzi,
Diritti e civilità: Storia e fi losofi a del diritto internazionale (Il Mulino, 2010), 289– 312.
On the termination of extraterritoriality in China, see Wesley R. Fishel, Th e End of
Extraterritoriality in China (University of California Press, 1952). On decolonization