ULUSLARARASI ADALET DİVANI İLE İLGİLİ ÇALIŞMALARA İLİŞKİN BİBLİYOMETRİK BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Öz

Bu çalışmanın temel gayesinde ‘Uluslararası Adalet Divanı’ ile ilgili eserlere ilişkin olarak ayrıntılı bir inceleme yapmak yatmaktadır. Bu gaye doğrultusunda hedeflenen şey ise Uluslararası Adalet Divanı temelinde araştırma yapmak isteyen araştırmacılara kolaylık sağlamaktır. Bu hedef doğrultusunda çalışmada yararlanılan verilere Web of Science (WOS) üzerinden ulaşılmış, bu verilerin analiz edilmesinde bibliyometrik analiz kullanılmıştır. Ayrıca çalışmadaki grafiklendirmede de Vosviewer yazılım programı kullanılmıştır. Tüm bunların yanı sıra, bu çalışmada bazı sonuçlara ulaşılmıştır. Bunlardan birincisi, WOS’ta ‘International Court of Justice’ anahtar kelimesi doğrultusunda yapılan tarama sonrasında 1980-2025 yılları arasında makaleden kitap bölümüne kadar çeşitli çalışma türlerinde yayımlanan 1970 esere ulaşılmıştır. Bu yıllar arasında en fazla eser 2021 yılında yayımlanmıştır. Ayrıca bu yıllar arasında çalışma türleri noktasında en çok makale tercih edilmiştir. İkincisi, eserler arasında en fazla yayına Robert Kolb, devlet noktasında İngiltere ve kurum noktasında da Cambridge University sahiptir. Diğer ise eserlerin en fazla yayımladığı endeks ise ESCI’dır. Dördüncüsü, eserlerde en fazla kullanılan dil ise İngilizcedir. Sonuncusu, eserlerde kullanılan anahtar kelimeler noktasında en çok tekrar edilen kelime, ‘international court of justice’ şeklindedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Uluslararası Adalet Divanı
• Bibliyometrik Analiz
• Robert Kolb
• İngiltere

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE A BIBLIOMETRIC RESEARCH ON THE STUDIES RELATED TO

Öz

This study focuses on analyzing the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and aims to provide a thorough review of related works for researchers interested in studying the ICJ. The researchers accessed data through the Web of Science (WOS) and conducted a bibliometric analysis to analyze the data. The Vosviewer software program was used for data visualization. The study found a total of 1,970 works published between 1980 and 2025, with the highest number of works published in 2021. Articles were the most preferred study type during this period. Among the authors, Robert Kolb had the highest number of publications, while England and Cambridge University were identified as the leading state and institution, respectively. The index with the highest number of publications was ESCI. English emerged as the most commonly used language in the works, and the most repeated keyword was ‘international court of justice’.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• International Court of Justice
• Bibliometric Analysis
• Robert Kolb
• England

Kaynakça

1. Abibe, A. B., Amancio-Filho, S. T., Dos Santos, J. F. ve Hage, E. (2013). Mechanical and failure behavior of hybrid polymer–metal staked joints. Materials and Design (1980-2015), 46, 338-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.10.043
2. Abibe, A. B., Sônego, M., Dos Santos, J. F., Canto, L. B. ve Amancio-Filho, S. T. (2016). On the feasibility of a friction-based staking joining method for polymer–metal hybrid structures. Materials and Design, 92, 632-642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.12.087
3. Abresch, W. (2005). A Human rights law of internal armed conflict: The European court of human rights in Chechnya. European Journal of International Law, 16(4), 741-767. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chi139
4. Alsan, Z. M. (1947). Devletler hukuku dersleri (1.Baskı). Siyasal Bilgiler Okulu Yayınları.
5. Ateş, D. (2012). Uluslararası örgütler: Devletlerin örgütlenme mantığı (1.Baskı). Dora Basım Yayın Dağıtım.
6. Barral, V. (2012). Sustainable development in international law: Nature and operation of an evolutive legal norm. European Journal of International Law, 23(2), 377-400. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chs016
7. Bradley, C. A. (1999). Breard, our dualist constitution and the internationalist conception. Stanford Law Review, 51(3), 529. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229264
8. Cassese, A. (2007). The Nicaragua and Tadic tests revisited in light of the icj judgment on genocide in Bosnia. European Journal of International Law, 18(4), 649-668. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chm034

9. Das, P., Goswami, P., Das, T. K., Nag, T., Sreenivas, V., Ahuja, V. ve Makharia, G. K. (2012). Comparative tight junction protein expressions in colonic Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis and tuberculosis: A new perspective. Virchows Archiv, 460(3), 261-270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-012-1195-1
10. Dedeoğlu, B. (2011). Uluslararası örgütlerin farklı sınıflandırma biçimleri. İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 49, 15-30.
11. Dixon, P. ve Tenove, C. (2013). International criminal justice as a transnational field: Rules, authority and victims. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 7(3), 393-412. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijtj/ijt015
12. Dunoff, J. L. ve Pollack, M. A. (2017). The Judicial trilemma. American Journal of International Law, 111(2), 225-276. https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2017.23
13. Glanville, L. (2012). The Responsibility to protect beyond borders. Human Rights Law Review, 12(1), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngr047
14. Gowlland-Debbas, V. (1994). The Relationship between the International Court of Justice and the Security Council in the Light of the Lockerbie Case. American Journal of International Law, 88(4), 643-677. https://doi.org/10.2307/2204134
15. Gross, A. M. (2007). Human proportions: Are human rights the emperor’s new clothes of the International Law of Occupation?. European Journal of International Law, 18(1), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chm001
16. Gross, A. (2017). The writing on the wall (1.Baskı). Cambridge University Press. Jamnejad, M. ve Wood, M. (2009). The principle of non-intervention. Leiden Journal of International Law, 22(2), 345-381. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156509005858
17. Li, L., Li, J. ve Sun, D. (2016). Anisotropically elasto-plastic solution to undrained cylindrical cavity expansion in K0-consolidated clay. Computers and Geotechnics, 73, 83-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.11.022
18. Meray, S. L. (1956). Devletler hukukunda bazı terimler. Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(4), 52-73.
19. Milanovic, M. (2006). State responsibility for genocide. European Journal of International Law, 17(3), 553-604. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chl019
20. Murphy, S. D. (2005). Self-Defense and the Israeli wall advisory opinion: An Ipse dixit from the ICJ?. American Journal of International Law, 99(1), 62-76. https://doi.org/10.2307/3246090
21. Öberg, M. D. (2005). The Legal effects of resolutions of the UN Security Council and General Assembly in the Jurisprudence of the ICJ. European Journal of International Law, 16(5), 879-906. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chi151
22. Palmeter, D. ve Mavroidis, P. C. (1998). The WTO legal system: Sources of law. American Journal of International Law, 92(3), 398-413. https://doi.org/10.2307/2997915
23. Paulson, C. (2004). Compliance with final judgments of the International Court of Justice since 1987. American Journal of International Law, 98(3), 434-461. https://doi.org/10.2307/3181640
24. Pazarcı, H. (2020). Uluslararası hukuk (19.Baskı). Turhan Kitabevi.
25. Peters, A. (2017). The refinement of international law: From fragmentation to regime interaction and politicization. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 15(3), 671-704. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mox056
26. Posner, E. A. ve De Figueiredo, M. F. P. (2005). Is the International Court of Justice biased? The Journal of Legal Studies, 34(2), 599-630. https://doi.org/10.1086/430765
27. Posner, E. A. ve Yoo, J.-C. (2005). Judicial independence in international tribunals. California Law Review, 93(1), 1-74.
28. Powell, E. J. ve Mitchell, S. M. (2007). The International Court of Justice and the world’s three legal systems. The Journal of Politics, 69(2), 397-415. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00539.x
29. Reçber, K. (2020). Uluslararası hukuk (4.baskı). Dora Yayıncılık.
30. Saaltink, D., Håvik, B., Verissimo, C. S., Lucassen, P. J. ve Vreugdenhil, E. (2012). Doublecortin and doublecortin‐like are expressed in overlapping and non‐overlapping neuronal cell population: Implications for neurogenesis. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 520(13), 2805-2823. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.23144
31. Sands, P. (2016). Climate change and the rule of law: Adjudicating the future in international law. Journal of Environmental Law, 28(1), 19-35. https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqw005
32. Schabas, W. A. (2007). Lex specialis? Belt and suspenders? The parallel operation of human rights law and the law of armed conflict and the conundrum of Jus ad Bellum. Israel Law Review, 40(2), 592-613. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021223700013443
33. Shany, Y. (2005). Toward a general margin of appreciation doctrine in international law?. European Journal of International Law, 16(5), 907-940. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chi149
34. Sklansky, D. A. (2009). Anti-inquisitorialism. Harvard Law Review, 122(6), 1634-1704.
35. Sur, M. (2011). Uluslararası hukukun esasları (5. Baskı). BETA Yayıncılık.
36. Talmon, S. (2015). Determining customary international law: The icj’s methodology between induction, deduction and assertion. European Journal of International Law, 26(2), 417-443. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chv020
37. Ünal, Ş. (2005). Uluslararası hukuk (1. Baskı). Yetkin Yayınları.