Zoekresultaat: 27 artikelen

x
Artikel

Genderdiversiteit en organisatiecriminaliteit: een systematische literatuurreview

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, Aflevering 4 2018
Trefwoorden gender, white-collar crime, old boys network, board diversity, corporate crime
Auteurs Dr. Marieke Kluin MSc. en Mr. Lucy de Ruiter BSc.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Women are less likely to commit criminal acts than men. This gender gap appears to be particularly pronounced in white-collar crime. This systematic literature review examines existing theories, such as the situational hypothesis and the ‘gendered theory of focal concerns’ and evaluates to what extent they find support in empiricism. The results seem to offer the most support to the ‘gendered theory of focal concerns’. This nourishes the hypothesis that with an increase of women at positions in the upper tiers of the company ladder a decrease in the prevalence of white-collar crime can be expected. However, it is also possible that the explanation of corporate crime does not lie in a lack of femininity, but in a lack of gender diversity. Furthermore, limited access to informal criminal networks, the ‘old boys networks’, seems to play an important role in the gender gap of white-collar crime.


Dr. Marieke Kluin MSc.
Dr. M.H.A. Kluin is als universitair docent Criminologie verbonden aan het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden.

Mr. Lucy de Ruiter BSc.
L.M. de Ruiter heeft rechten en criminologie gestudeerd aan de Universiteit Leiden.
Artikel

Empiricism as an ethical enterprise. On the work of Erhard Blankenburg

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2018
Trefwoorden Empiricism, Erhard Blankenburg, mobilization of law, legal instruments, problems and disputes
Auteurs Prof. dr. Pieter Ippel
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article gives an interpretation of the empirical work of the well-known sociologist of law Erhard Blankenburg, who passed away in the Spring of 2018. He conducted interesting and intelligent research on the process of ‘mobilization of law’. The thesis of this article is that Blankenburg’s empirical approach is actually guided and stimulated by normative considerations. A complete and coherent picture of the concrete utilization of legal instruments shows that ‘alternative’ ways of dealing with problems and disputes are often morally preferable as they are inspired by a realistic assessment of persons-in-a-social-context.


Prof. dr. Pieter Ippel
Pieter Ippel is professor of law at University College Roosevelt (Middelburg) and Utrecht University. He studied philosophy, criminology and Dutch Law. From 1981-1987 he worked as an assistant with Erhard Blankenburg and finished his PhD in 1989. From 1989-1995 he worked as a civil servant in The Hague and from 1995-2005 he was professor of jurisprudence in Utrecht.

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.
Article

Access_open Making Sense of the Law and Society Movement

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden law and society, sociology of law, sociolegal, empirical legal studies
Auteurs Daniel Blocq en Maartje van der Woude
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article aims to deepen scholarly understanding of the Law and Society Movement (L&S) and thereby strengthen debates about the relation between Empirical Legal Studies (ELS) and L&S. The article departs from the observation that ELS, understood as an initiative that emerged in American law schools in the early 2000s, has been quite successful in generating more attention to the empirical study of law and legal institutions in law schools, both in- and outside the US. In the early years of its existence, L&S – another important site for the empirical study of law and legal institutions – also had its center of gravity inside the law schools. But over time, it shifted towards the social sciences. This article discusses how that happened, and more in general explains how L&S became ever more diverse in terms of substance, theory and methods.


Daniel Blocq
Daniel Blocq is assistant professor at Leiden Law School.

Maartje van der Woude
Maartje van der Woude is professor at Leiden Law School.
Article

Access_open Empirical Legal Research in Europe: Prevalence, Obstacles, and Interventions

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden empirical legal research, Europe, popularity, increase, journals
Auteurs Gijs van Dijck, Shahar Sverdlov en Gabriela Buck
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Empirical Legal research (ELR) has become well established in the United States, whereas its popularity in Europe is debatable. This article explores the popularity of ELR in Europe. The authors carried out an empirical analysis of 78 European-based law journals, encompassing issues from 2008-2017. The findings demonstrate that a supposed increase of ELR is questionable (at best).
    Moreover, additional findings highlight:

    • An increase for a few journals, with a small number of other journals showing a decrease over time;

    • A higher percentage of empirical articles for extra-legal journals than for legal journals (average proportion per journal is 4.6 percent for legal journals, 18.9 percent for extra-legal journals);

    • Criminal justice journals, environmental journals, and economically oriented journals being more likely to publish empirical articles than other journals;

    • More prestigious journals being more likely to publish empirical articles than less-prestigious journals;

    • Older journals being more likely to publish empirical work than younger journals, but not at an increasing rate;

    • Journals being legal/extra-legal, journals in a specific field, journal ranking, or the age of the journal not making it more (or less) likely that the journal will publish empirical articles at an increasing (or decreasing) rate.
      Considering the lack of convincing evidence indicating an increase of ELR, we identify reasons for why ELR is seemingly becoming more popular but not resulting in more empirical research in Europe. Additionally, we explore interventions for overcoming the obstacles ELR currently faces.


Gijs van Dijck
Professor of Private Law at Maastricht University, the Netherlands.

Shahar Sverdlov
Law student at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Gabriela Buck
Law student at Maastricht University, the Netherlands.
Artikel

Empirisch-juridisch onderzoek in Nederland

Bespiegelingen over de stand van zaken in de rechtswetenschap, het juridisch onderwijs en de rechtspraktijk

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Empirical methods, Legal research, Legal education, Legal practice, Legislation
Auteurs Dr. Nieke Elbers, Mr. dr. Marijke Malsch, Dr. Peter van der Laan e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Empirical Legal Studies (ELS) is research in which legal questions are answered using empirical research methods. Traditionally, lawyers conduct normative, non-empirical research. Lately the legal discipline is increasingly interested in ELS. It is argued that we need more ELS. This raises the question to what extent Dutch researchers and practitioners conduct and apply ELS. In this article, we investigate the state of affairs of ELS in the Netherlands. We look at three different areas: legal research, legal education and legal practice. The data we use are legal PhD theses, legal course material, legislative proposals, and questionnaire data from legal practitioners. The methods are a systematic review, a quantitative content analysis, and a questionnaire research. Our study on legal research shows that researchers do apply empirical methods, but mainly the researchers with an education in social science. Our study on legal education shows that lawyers receive hardly any training on empirical research methods. Finally, our research on legal practice shows that practitioners and legislators struggle to apply empirical legal research. We plead for investments to enhance the production and usage of ELS, to prevent wrongful judicial decision-making, to generate effective legislation, and to create scientific innovation.


Dr. Nieke Elbers
Nieke Elbers is als postdoc onderzoeker verbonden aan het NSCR als projectleider Empirical Legal Studies (ELS).

Mr. dr. Marijke Malsch
Marijke Malsch werkt als senior onderzoeker bij het NSCR.

Dr. Peter van der Laan
Peter van der Laan werkt als senior onderzoeker bij het NSCR. Daarnaast is hij bijzonder hoogleraar sociaal pedagogische hulpverlening aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam en bijzonder hoogleraar reclassering aan de Vrije Universiteit.

Prof. dr. Arno Akkermans
Arno Akkermans is hoogleraar privaatrecht aan de faculteit der rechtsgeleerdheid van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Prof. dr. Catrien Bijleveld
Catrien Bijleveld is hoogleraar methoden en technieken van criminologisch onderzoek aan de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam en directeur van het NSCR.

    The nexus between religion and law is an important subject of comparative law. This paper, however, finds that the majority of comparative theorists rely on the immanent frame; that legal legitimacy can and should be separated from any objective truth or moral norm. But the fact of the matter is many constitutional systems were founded based on a complicated mixture between the transcendent and immanent frame. Whereas in the immanent frame, human actions are considered self-constituting, in the transcendent frame, human actions were judged in light of their correspondence to higher, divine laws and purposes.
    This article argues that it is not sufficient for comparative theorists to offer a perspective from the immanent frame. Comparative theorists in law and religion should understand at least basic religious doctrines and know how to systematize those doctrines. In other words, comparative theorist of law and religion should work within the transcendent frame. By using a transcendent frame, comparative theorists will be able to excavate the underlying structure of religion, and so they will understand better how theological ideas influence law. Furthermore, this paper will also present a thought experiment in applying the transcendent frame in comparative constitutional studies.


Stefanus Hendrianto
Stefanus Hendrianto is a scholar at Boston College, School of Theology and Ministry. In recent years, he has been a visiting professor at Santa Clara University School of Law (2013-2015) and a guest scholar at the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame (2015-2016). He holds a Ph.D. degree from the School of Law, University of Washington, Seattle and LLM degree from Utrecht University, Netherlands, in addition to his LLB degree from Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia.

    Both H.L.A. Hart and John Searle repeatedly refer to games in their work on the concept of law and the construction of social reality respectively. We can argue that this is not a coincidence, Hart’s analysis of law as a system of primary and secondary rules bears close resemblances to Searle’s analysis of social reality as a system of regulative and constitutive rules and the comparison to games leads to interesting insights about the ontology of law and legal epistemology. The present article explores both the institutional theory of law that can be devised on the basis of the work of Hart and Searle, the method of analytical philosophy they employ and the particular consequences that can be deduced for legal research from the resulting legal theory.


Arie-Jan Kwak
Dr. A.J. Kwak, Faculty of Law, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Artikel

Naar een succesformule voor empirisch-juridisch onderzoek

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 6 2016
Trefwoorden empirical legal research, Relevance of ELR, United States, legal community, education
Auteurs Prof. mr. dr. G. van Dijck
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    How to make empirical legal research successful? This article seeks to find an answer. It does so by building on experiences in the US with empirical legal research. Three themes are identified that should be considered when thinking about advancing empirical legal research in the Netherlands, and possibly in other countries. First, empirical legal research should address topics that the legal community can relate to and that are considered relevant. Second, empirical legal research should educate the legal community about the possibilities and pitfalls of empirical legal research in addition to conducting empirical legal research. Third, legal scholars should be educated in conducting empirical legal research. The combination of these three elements is likely to determine empirical legal research’s success.


Prof. mr. dr. G. van Dijck
Prof. mr. dr. Gijs van Dijck is hoogleraar Privaatrecht aan Maastricht University.
Artikel

Empirisch-juridisch onderzoek – toekomstmuziek of werkelijkheid?

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 6 2016
Trefwoorden empirical legal studies, law in action, law in the real world, evidence-based law
Auteurs Dr. N.A. Elbers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Empirical Legal Studies (ELS) are studies investigating the law in the real world, using empirical methods. Internationally, ELS is on the rise. However, not much is known about what is being done around ELS in the Netherlands. This article describes the results of a systematic review, investigating how many PhD researchers who defended their thesis at a Dutch law faculty in 2015 have collected empirical data, what topic they investigated, which method they used and what background they have. The findings are that 33% of the PhD theses could be labelled as ELS. The majority of ELS were conducted by researchers who have a social science degree. Some of the (only few) lawyers collecting empirical data did not aim to conduct ELS, even though their research questions were very empirical. It is concluded that more empirical education and research funding are needed to stimulate lawyers to conduct more ELS.


Dr. N.A. Elbers
Dr. Nieke Elbers is postdoc-onderzoeker bij het Nederlands Studiecentrum Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving (NSCR) en projectleider voor de stimuleringsactie Empirical Legal Studies. Zij is als sociale wetenschapper (MSc (neuro)psychologie) gepromoveerd bij de rechtenfaculteit van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (afdeling privaatrecht).
Redactioneel

Access_open Introduction Special Issue Stumbling Blocks in Empirical Legal Research

Tijdschrift Law and Method, oktober 2016
Auteurs Gijs van Dijck en Sanne Taekema

Gijs van Dijck

Sanne Taekema
Artikel

Over de vraag naar de kwaliteit van de bemiddelaar

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Bemiddelaar, kwaliteit, Rechtskarakter herstelrecht, Strafrechtspleging
Auteurs Leo Van Garsse
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Some believe that the credibility of restorative justice can be increased if more attention is given to the quality of the mediator, as well as methods to select people with the right profile or by training. At first glance this seems a legitimate aim: mediation services should offer quality. Reflecting on practical experience and research into mediation between offenders and victims in Flanders, the author problematizes these assumptions. The quest for tangible quality to ensure ‘credibility’ refers to a neo-liberal approach aimed at reducing risks and promoting the client’s satisfaction. In this article the author confronts the apolitical approach of client satisfaction with alternative ideas about (restorative) justice. Ideally, the mediator is critical of established (legal) authorities and professional expertise. Mediation is political in nature, even if the mediator relies on neutrality. The mediator must be aware of his – inevitable – political stance and should be ready to be interrogated on this matter.


Leo Van Garsse
Leo Van Garsse is oud-herstelbemiddelaar en momenteel werkzaam bij het vicariaat Mechelen – Vlaams Brabant als stafmedewerker voor territoriale pastoraal.

    When discussing O. W. Holmes’s answer to the question What constitutes the law? Morton White underlines the fact that Holmes’s inquiry didn’t focus on developing the concept of law. White states: '…Holmes said little in The Path of the Law about the notion of legal authority, perhaps because he was interested not in what he called a "useless quintessence of all legal systems" but in "an accurate anatomy of one"'. Such ambition (or lack of ambition) is characteristic of many pragmatic enterprises in the field of jurisprudence. However, sometimes the opposition between legal pragmatism and other legal theories is built upon a reference to the notion of the 'nature' or 'essence' of law. Many legal philosophers who aim to reveal the very 'nature of law' (or 'the concept of law' as H. L. A. Hart did) try to interpret Holmes and other pragmatists as offering a competitive view to their own. I will follow White’s early intuition that such a construal of the controversy is simply wrong. Afterwards I will sketch a portrait of legal pragmatism in the context of White’s own inquiry and his version of 'holistic pragmatism'; thirdly, I will present in brief the main reasons for exploring the concept of law in the contemporary analytic philosophy of law. Then I will show that traditionally 'pragmatic' and 'analytic' efforts in legal theory are situated on different levels of generality and conceptuality. However, these efforts can be, at least to some extent, reordered under the aegis of holistic pragmatism.


Adam Michał Dyrda
Adjunct Professor, Department of Legal Theory, Faculty of Law, Jagiellonian University, Cracow, Poland. Contact: adam.dyrda@uj.edu.pl; http://jagiellonian.academia.edu/AdamDyrda.
Diversen

Sociology of law in search of a distinct identity

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden sociology of law, legal sociology, socio-legal studies, interdisciplinary study of law, law & society
Auteurs Koen Van Aeken
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Rechtssociologie en recht-en-samenlevingstudies hebben behoefte aan de ontwikkeling van een eigen identiteit, die hen onder meer onderscheidt van het groeiende juridisch onderzoek waarbij empirische methoden gehanteerd worden. Deze identiteit kent vijf verbindende elementen: excellente (primaire of secundaire) empirische methodologie, kritisch, nuttig, blijvend geïnformeerd door theorie uit een inclusieve sociologie, en afwijzend tegenover reductionistische benaderingen van de werkelijkheid. Als een van deze eigenschappen ontbreekt, is er geen sprake van volwaardige rechtssociologie. Als alle eigenschappen aanwezig zijn, is de rechtssociologie bijzonder goed uitgerust om de actuele veranderingen in recht en samenleving te bestuderen. In die context kan de ontwikkeling en verspreiding van een eigen identiteit, die de vijf eigenschappen incorporeert, kansen bieden om de rechtssociologie een meer centrale positie toe te kennen in de rechtenfaculteiten.


Koen Van Aeken
Koen Van Aeken studeerde politieke en sociale wetenschappen en methodologie en promoveerde op een rechtssociologisch proefschrift over wetsevaluatie aan de Universiteit Antwerpen. Sinds 2006 is hij verbonden aan Tilburg Law School. Zijn onderwijs en onderzoek situeren zich op het terrein van de interdisciplinaire benadering van het recht, met bijzondere aandacht voor reguleringsvraagstukken.
Artikel

Consumer Dispute Resolution (CDR) in Europe

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 2 2014
Trefwoorden Consumer Dispute Resolution, CDR, national cultures, CDR-models
Auteurs Naomi Creutzfeldt en Christopher Hodges
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper is a combination of the ‘Oxford study 2012’ (C. Hodges, I. Benöhr & N. Creutzfeldt-Banda, Consumer ADR in Europe, Oxford: Hart Publishing 2012) and subsequent publications about consumer dispute resolution in Europe. Recent EU legislation aims to establish a EU-wide framework for consumer alternative dispute resolution (CADR or CDR) schemes and a platform for online dispute resolution (ODR). This forces member states to revisit their existing CDR models and in some cases, to modernize their structures. Many member states face challenges of reform of existing systems by the directives implementation date of 2015. This paper will provide an overview of CDR, the development of current legislation and discuss some national examples. The paper concludes with comments about implementation of the directive and potential future direction.


Naomi Creutzfeldt
Naomi Creutzfeldt is ESRC Research Fellow at the Center for Socio-Legal Studies, University of Oxford.

Christopher Hodges
Christopher Hodges is Head of the CMS/Swiss Re Research Programme on Civil Justice Systems, Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of Oxford; Erasmus Professor of the Fundamentals of Private Law, Erasmus University, Rotterdam; Honorary Professor of the China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing; Guest Professor of Wuhan University, Wuhan; Life Member of Wolfson College, Oxford; Solicitor of the Senior Courts of England & Wales. Research funding is received from the international law firm CMS, the European Justice Forum and Swiss Reinsurance Company Limited.

    This article addresses the problem of qualitative interviewing in the field of legal studies, and more precisely the practice of interviewing judges. In the last five years the authors of this article conducted two different research projects which involved interviewing judges as a research method. In this article the authors share their experience and views on the qualitative interviewing method, and provide the reader with an overview of the ‘ins’ and ‘outs’ attached to this tool, but also its advantages and disadvantages.


Urszula Jaremba
Urszula Jaremba is an Assistant Professor of EU Law at Erasmus School of Law (Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands)

Elaine Dr. Mak
Elaine Mak is Endowed Professor of Empirical Study of Public Law, in particular of Rule-of-Law Institutions, at Erasmus School of Law (Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands)
Artikel

Access_open Absolute Positivism

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2013
Trefwoorden jurisprudence, legal positivism, Hans Kelsen, pure theory of law
Auteurs Christoph Kletzer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The paper argues that we miss the point and strength of Kelsen’s Pure Theory of Law if we take it to drive a middle way between reductionism and moralism. Rather conversely, the Pure Theory is a radical theory. It tries to overcome the opposition between reductionism and moralism by making clear that both opponents rest on the same ill-conceived convictions about legal validity. Both take it that the law cannot be normative by itself. In contrast, the Pure Theory tries to find a new approach to the understanding of law that takes seriously the constitutive functions of law. It tries to understand the validity of law as resting in law itself. As such it is an attempt to find a philosophically satisfactory formulation of what can be called absolute positivism.


Christoph Kletzer
Christoph Kletzer is a Senior Lecturer at the Dickson Poon School of Law at King’s College in London.
Artikel

Non-pecuniary damages: financial incentive or symbol?

Comparing an economic and a sociological account of tort law

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2012
Auteurs Rob Schwitters
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Schwitters focuses on the differences between economic and a sociological perspectives on non-pecuniary damages. By exposing the alternative perspectives on this issue, he illuminates some methodological differences between both disciplines. Although law and economics has had a positive influence on empirical research, he questions the merits of this perspective when analysing non-pecuniary damages. Law and economics regards non-pecuniary damages exclusively as a financial incentive to realise optimal deterrence and maximisation of welfare. Alternatively, in sociology of law there is also attention for the symbolic dimension of law in which rules are seen as normative standards of behaviour. Compensation is a way to bring the wrongdoer to recognise that he has done wrong and has to compensate the victim, and to show the victim that his rights are taken seriously. Through a sociological lens, the adoption of an exclusively economic model of human behaviour has to be questioned. To what extent human behaviour is really influenced by either financial incentives or by normative standards of behaviour is an open empirical question. Finally, he argues that the decision to base our institutions (such as law) on economic underpinnings is a decision which itself cannot be based on an economic procedure of aggregating individual preferences and maximising welfare.


Rob Schwitters
Rob Schwitters is associate professor (sociology of law) and member of the Paul Scholten Centre (University of Amsterdam). He publishes on tort law, responsibility and liability, the welfare state, compliance and methodological issues.
Artikel

Access_open Relational Jurisprudence

Vulnerability between Fact and Value

Tijdschrift Law and Method, februari 2012
Trefwoorden fact/value separation, vulnerability, relational jurisprudence, empirical methodology, normative methodology
Auteurs Maksymilian Del Mar
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Relational jurisprudence is an approach to law that situates it in five relational contexts: (1) relations between individuals; (2) relations between individuals and communities; (3) relations between communities; (4) relations between individuals or communities on the one hand, and institutions on the other; and (5) relations between institutions. Thus, part of what makes relational jurisprudence distinctive is its object: the study of law in the context of certain relations, including investigating what factors affect and influence the quality of those relations. Relational jurisprudence is also distinctive, however, in its method. One of its methodological commitments is to avoid the dichotomy, without losing the benefits of a distinction, between facts and values. In trying to avoid this dichotomy, the approach identifies and uses devices that have both factual and evaluative dimensions, called here ‘factual-evaluative complexes’. These devices are then used to investigate the quality of different relations. One such device is ‘vulnerability’. The argument of this paper is that at least some of law can be profitably understood as managing vulnerability, i.e. recognising some vulnerabilities as worthy of protection and others not, or balancing the protection of different vulnerabilities in different relational contexts. Avoiding the dichotomy while retaining the usefulness of the distinction between facts and values in the above-outlined way means that we ought to employ a mix of empirical and normative methodology in the study of law.


Maksymilian Del Mar
Maksymilian Del Mar is lecturer in Legal and Social Philosophy, Department of Law, Queen Mary University of London.
Artikel

Access_open Exciting Times for Legal Scholarship

Tijdschrift Law and Method, februari 2012
Trefwoorden legal methodology, law as an academic discipline, ‘law and …’-movements, legal theory, innovative and multiform legal scholarship
Auteurs Jan Vranken
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Until recently, legal-dogmatic research stood at the undisputed pinnacle of legal scientific research. The last few years saw increasing criticism, both nationally and internationally, levelled at this type of research or at its dominant role. Some see this as a crisis in legal scholarship, but a closer look reveals a great need for facts, common sense, and nuance. Critics usually base their calls for innovation on a one-dimensional and flawed image of legal-dogmatic research. In this article, the author subsequently addresses the various critical opinions themselves and provide an overview of the innovations that are proposed. He concludes that there are a lot of efforts to innovate legal scholarship, and that the field is more multiform than ever, which is a wonderful and unprecedented state of affairs. This multiformity should be cherished and given plenty of room to develop and grow, because most innovative movements are still fledgling and need time, sometimes a lot of time, to increase in quality. It would be a shame to nip them in the bud now, merely because they are still finding their way. In turn, none of these innovative movements have cause to disqualify legal-dogmatic research, as sometimes happens (implicitly), by first creating a straw-man version of the field and then dismissing it as uninteresting or worse. That only polarises the discussion and gains us nothing. Progress can only be achieved through cooperation, with an open mind towards different types of legal research and a willingness to accept a critical approach towards their development. In the end, the only criterion that matters is quality. All types of research are principally subject to the same quality standards. The author provides some clarification regarding these standards as well.


Jan Vranken
Jan Vranken is hoogleraar Methodologie van het privaatrecht aan de Universiteit van Tilburg.
Toont 1 - 20 van 27 gevonden teksten
« 1
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.