DOI: 10.5553/ELR.000075

Erasmus Law ReviewAccess_open



Toon PDF Toon volledige grootte
Auteursinformatie Statistiek Citeerwijze
Dit artikel is keer geraadpleegd.
Dit artikel is 0 keer gedownload.
Aanbevolen citeerwijze bij dit artikel
Kristin Henrard, "Introduction", Erasmus Law Review, 3, (2016):121-121

Dit artikel wordt geciteerd in

    • This issue of Erasmus Law Review forms a historic bridge between the review’s original format of working exclusively with thematic issues and also having issues on submissions. This particular issue is not entirely ‘on submission’ and is closer in kind to a previous non-thematic issue (Issue 6(2) of Erasmus Law Review), which consisted of articles by promising doctoral students who, after having won an Erasmus School of Law (ESL) Doctoral Research Grant, were granted the opportunity to showcase part of their research. The experience with working occasionally with non-thematic issues has prompted us to open from next year onwards one issue a year for submissions, not only for promising PhD students and other colleagues from ESL, but also for external scholars.
      Returning to this particular issue of Erasmus Law Review, three PhD students have contributed to it, covering a broad variety of topics, ranging from strategies to outlaw motorcycle gang-related events, variations in workplace violence experienced by emergency responders, to the right to mental health in the digital era.

      1. Teun van Ruitenburg notes a shift in the security discourse from reactive management of actual events and threats to proactive management based on statistical calculations of risks. In relation to the latter, he zooms in on the distinction between (the criminological rationale of) pre-emption and prevention strategies, while focusing on the current governmental fight against outlaw motorcycle gangs and gang-related crimes. His analysis of three instances where motorcycle events have been prohibited by local governments in the Netherlands reveals the gradual difference between prevention and pre-emption, while problematising the latter as too radical. He calls for more research into pre-emption strategies and their implications and effects.

      2. Lisa van Reemst seeks to apply victimological theories to workplace violence experienced by emergency responders, in order to identify and categorise possible risk factors. More particularly, criminal opportunity theories and personal vulnerability notions are applied to experiencing workplace violence so as to address the role of situational and victim characteristics. Van Reemst highlights the importance of taking both situational and victim characteristics into account, while also examining the interaction between these two types of characteristics in longitudinal research. The ensuing gain in knowledge on workplace violence could enable the development of effective prevention mechanisms.

      3. Fatemeh Kokabisaghi, Iris Bakx and Blerta Zenelaj examine under what conditions e-mental healthcare could contribute to the realisation of the highest attainable standard of mental health, having regard to the criteria of Availability, Accessibility, Acceptability and Quality (the AAAQ framework developed by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights). This is obviously contingent on having an ICT infrastructure worldwide, and fighting digital illiteracy, while guidelines on medical ethics and quality standards need to be respected. The authors also identify a pressing need for further research, particularly in regard to the cultural acceptability of e-mental health care.

      We hope that you will enjoy reading this collection of articles, covering a rich variety of topics, straddling various fields of law and adopting a range of different methods.

      Kristin Henrard, Editor-in-Chief

Print dit artikel