Zoekresultaat: 10 artikelen

x

Peter Mascini
Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Law. Corresponding author. Sanders building, 7 West, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, pmascini@gmail.com.

Wibo van Rossum
Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Law.

    This paper starts by reviewing empirical research that threatens law and economics’ initial success. This research has demonstrated that the functioning of the law cannot be well understood based on the assumption of the rational actor and that policies which are based on this assumption are likely to be flawed. Subsequently, three responses to this criticism are discussed. Whereas the first response denounces this criticism by maintaining that the limitations attributed to the rational actor can easily be incorporated in rational choice theory, the second response welcomes the criticism as an opportunity to come up with an integrative theory of law and behavior. The third response also takes the criticism seriously but replaces the aspiration to come up with such an integrative theory by a context-sensitive approach. It will be argued that the first two responses fall short while the third response offers a promising way to go forward.


Peter Mascini
Prof. dr. P. Mascini, Erasmus School of Law and Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Redactioneel

Recht als probleemoplossing?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2017
Auteurs Hilke Grootelaar, Prof. Peter Mascini en Dr. Wibo van Rossum
Auteursinformatie

Hilke Grootelaar
Hilke Grootelaar is postdoc onderzoeker bij het Montaigne Centrum voor Rechtspleging en Conflictoplossing van de Universiteit Utrecht. Daarnaast is ze redactiesecretaris van dit tijdschrift en maakt ze deel uit van de gastredactie van dit themanummer van Recht der Werkelijkheid.

Prof. Peter Mascini
Peter Mascini is hoogleraar Empirical Legal Studies aan de Erasmus School of Law, de universiteit waaraan hij ook verbonden is als universitair hoofddocent Sociologie bij de Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen. Zijn onderzoek richt zich op legitimering, uitvoering en handhaving van wetgeving en beleid. Daarnaast is hij redactielid van Recht der Werkelijkheid en maakt hij deel uit van de gastredactie van dit themanummer van Recht der Werkelijkheid.

Dr. Wibo van Rossum
Wibo van Rossum is Universitair Hoofddocent aan het departement Sociology, Theory & Methodology van de Erasmus School of Law. Hij maakt deel uit van de gastredactie van dit themanummer van Recht der Werkelijkheid.
Redactioneel

Waarheen leidt de weg…?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2016
Trefwoorden review process, VSR, editorial, journal rankings
Auteurs Peter Mascini
Auteursinformatie

Peter Mascini
Peter Mascini is hoogleraar Empirical Legal Studies aan de Erasmus School of Law, de universiteit waaraan hij ook verbonden is als universitair hoofddocent Sociologie bij de Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen. Zijn onderzoek richt zich op legitimering, uitvoering en handhaving van wetgeving en beleid.
Artikel

Understanding judges’ choices of sentence types as interpretative work: An explorative study in a Dutch police court

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2016
Trefwoorden Judicial decision-making, sentencing type, (ir)redeemability, whole case approach
Auteurs Peter Mascini, Irene van Oorschot PhD, Assistant professor Don Weenink e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article critically evaluates the prevailing factor-oriented (e.g. a priori defined legal and extralegal characteristics of defendants) approach in analyses of judicial decision-making. Rather than assuming such factors, we aim to demonstrate how Dutch judges engage in interpretative work to arrive at various sentence types. In their interpretative work, judges attempt to weigh and compare various legal and extralegal features of defendants. Importantly, they do so in the context of the case as a whole, which means that these features do not have independent or fixed meanings. Judges select and weigh information to create an image of defendants’ redeemability. However, extralegal concerns other than redeemability also inform judges’ decisions. We argue that studying the naturally occurring interpretative work of judges results in a better understanding of judicial decision-making than outcome-oriented studies, which view criminal cases as collections of independent legal and extralegal factors.


Peter Mascini
Peter Mascini holds a chair in Empirical Legal Studies at the Erasmus School of Law of the Erasmus University Rotterdam, where he is also associate professor of sociology at the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences. His research focuses on the legitimization, implementation, and enforcement of laws and policies.

Irene van Oorschot PhD
Irene van Oorschot is a PhD candidate at the Faculty of the Social Sciences at the Erasmus University Rotterdam and will soon start as a postdoctoral researcher at the Anthropology Department of the University of Amsterdam. Drawing on actor network theory and feminist studies of knowledge, her research focuses on legal and scientific modes of truth-production.

Assistant professor Don Weenink
Don Weenink is assistant professor of Sociology at the Department of Sociology at the University of Amsterdam. He has published work on, among other subjects, ethnic inequalities in judicial sentencing.

Gratiëlla Schippers
Gratiëlla Schippers has studied Sociology at the Erasmus University Rotterdam. For her master thesis she has done research about the understanding of judges’ choices of sentence types.

    This editorial offers an introduction to the current issue.


Peter Mascini
Peter Mascini is an associate professor of sociology at Erasmus University Rotterdam and he holds a chair in empirical legal studies at the same university. He serves as co-director of the research program Behavioral Approaches to Contract and Tort. His research focuses on the legitimization, implementation, and enforcement of different policy ideas. He often studies the tenability of assumptions underlying policy instruments.

Judith van Erp
Judith van Erp is an associate professor in Criminology at Erasmus School of Law and chair of its research program Monitoring Safety and Security. Her research focuses on monitoring and compliance of business. She co-chairs the Collaborative Research Network on Regulatory Governance at the Law and Society Association and the European Society of Criminology’s working group on Corporate and White Collar Crime.

Peter Mascini
Artikel

Verzet tegen gedoogbeleid: iets typisch rechts?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2011
Trefwoorden punitive turn, political conservatism, ‘gedoogbeleid’, administrative tolerance
Auteurs Peter Mascini en Dick Houtman
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article demonstrates on the basis of a representative survey among the Dutch population (N=1,892) that it is not necessarily politically ‘rightist’ or ‘conservative’ to resist the toleration of illegal activities (‘gedoogbeleid’). Even though, generally speaking, political conservatives are most likely to be critical, this is merely because they unconsciously associate the latter with practices of tolerating illegal activities by marginal individuals. Whereas conservatives hence oppose the latter more than political progressives do, the latter for their part are more critical than conservatives about tolerating illegal activities by official agencies. These findings illustrate that gedoogbeleid does not have a universal legitimacy in the eyes of the public, but that its legitimacy is determined case by case by the concrete aims and targets addressed by this policy instrument.


Peter Mascini
Peter Mascini is universitair docent sociologie aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Zijn onderzoek richt zich op de legitimiteit, uitvoering en handhaving van publiek beleid. Hierover heeft hij onder andere gepubliceerd in Law and Policy, Regulation and Governance, British Journal of Criminology, International Migration Review en Tijdschrift voor Criminologie.

Dick Houtman
Dick Houtman is als hoogleraar cultuursociologie verbonden aan het Centre for Rotterdam Cultural Sociology (CROCUS) van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Hij verricht overwegend onderzoek naar de spiritualisering van religie en de culturalisering van de politiek in hedendaagse westerse samenlevingen. Zijn twee recentste boeken zijn Religions of modernity (2010; red. met Stef Aupers) en Paradoxes of individualization (in druk; met Stef Aupers en Willem de Koster).
Titel

Kan de gewelddadige jihad zonder sympathisanten?

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 02 2005
Trefwoorden Internet, Illegaal, Aanwijzing, Verblijfsvergunning, Bankieren, Inkomen, Legaliteit, Auteur, Financiering, Geweld
Auteurs Mascini, P. en Verhoeven, M.

Mascini, P.

Verhoeven, M.
Titel

'Vis ruikt nou eenmaal zo': Responsive regulation door de Voedsel en Waren Authoriteit

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, Aflevering 02 2008
Trefwoorden Ondernemer, Handhaving, Compliance, Gebrek, Risico, Beslissingsruimte, Delinquent, Fout, Making, Observatie
Auteurs Mascini, P. en Wijk, E. van

Mascini, P.

Wijk, E. van
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.