Zoekresultaat: 180 artikelen

x
Artikel

Access_open De moslimgemeenschap als bondgenoot?

Antiradicaliseringsbeleid in Nederland en België

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 2 2022
Trefwoorden Antiradicaliseringsbeleid, Nederland, Vlaanderen, Moslimgemeenschap, Radicalisering
Auteurs Annelies Pauwels, Floris Vermeulen en Marcel Maussen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Over the past twenty years the Netherlands and Flanders have developed policies aiming to prevent radicalization among Muslim youth. To what extent have Muslim communities been involved in these policies and has there been sufficient attention for the ideological and theological aspects of Islamic extremism? Overlooking the experiences and lessons learned it is clear that in both countries there is more and more attention for the individual dynamics of processes of radicalization. This is not only because of the prevailing interpretations of what is the most effective approach, but also because policy makers have encountered important set-backs and obstacles when aiming for a group-based approach in which Muslim communities and Islamic faith were being targeted.


Annelies Pauwels
A. Pauwels (MSc) is senior onderzoekster bij het Vlaams Vredesinstituut in Brussel.

Floris Vermeulen
Dr. F.F. Vermeulen is universitair hoofddocent bij de afdeling Politicologie van de Universiteit van Amsterdam.

Marcel Maussen
Dr. M.J.M. Maussen is universitair hoofddocent bij de afdeling Politicologie van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Hij is als redacteur verbonden aan het Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid.
Artikel

Access_open On Identifying Assumptions Underlying Legal Arrangements

Some Conceptual and Methodological Considerations

Tijdschrift Law and Method, mei 2022
Trefwoorden (Legislative) assumptions, legal arrangements, inference to the best explanation, theory-driven evaluations
Auteurs Frans L. Leeuw en Antonia M. Waltermann
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Legal arrangements rest on behavioural, cognitive, social, and other assumptions regarding their role and function in society and the legal system. The identification and subsequent evaluation of these assumptions is an important task for legal scholarship. In this article, we focus on the identification and categorisation of these assumptions, providing conceptual distinctions and methodological guidance. We distinguish between assumptions about the value(s), norm(s), or interest(s) underlying a legal arrangement, which can be legal or non-legal, and assumptions about the relationship between the legal arrangement and its underlying value(s), norm(s), or interest(s), which can be logical, causal, or contributory. Regarding the identification, we consider explicit references and inference to the best explanation and theory-driven evaluations as possible methods. Inference to the best explanation, we posit, functions as a manner of reconstructing the theory that the person(s) creating a legal arrangement had in mind regarding the place and function of that legal arrangement in society. Given this, we offer a step-by-step approach to reconstructing this theory in use, drawing from theory-driven evaluations and its sources in the social sciences. These distinctions and guidelines can contribute to understanding the context and untangling the complexities involved in identifying the assumptions that underlie legal arrangements.


Frans L. Leeuw
Prof. dr. Frans Leeuw, Professor emeritus, Law, Public Policy and Social Science Research, Department of Foundations and Methods of Law, Maastricht University.

Antonia M. Waltermann
Dr. Antonia Waltermann, Assistant Professor of Legal Theory, Department of Foundations and Methods of Law, Maastricht University.
Redactioneel

Access_open Zicht op de effecten van toezicht

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 1 2022
Auteurs Marieke Gorrée en Pieter Welp
Auteursinformatie

Marieke Gorrée
Drs. M. Gorrée is coördinerend/specialistisch inspecteur bij de Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport en redactielid van het Tijdschrift voor Toezicht.

Pieter Welp
Drs. P. Welp is senior wetenschappelijk medewerker van de Inspectieraad en redactielid van Tijdschrift voor Toezicht.
Artikel

Group model building om de doorwerking van het vernieuwde toezicht in het onderwijs in beeld te brengen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 1 2022
Trefwoorden onderwijstoezicht, effectiviteit, doorwerking van toezicht, principle based, group model building
Auteurs Marlies Honingh, Marieke van Genugten en Cor van Montfort
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Met het vernieuwde toezicht wil de Inspectie van het Onderwijs (IvhO) besturen en scholen blijvend en nadrukkelijker stimuleren. Van onderwijsorganisaties wordt verwacht dat zij verantwoordelijkheid nemen voor de onderwijskwaliteit in hun scholen. Bij de evaluatie van het vernieuwde toezicht van de Inspectie van het Onderwijs (IvhO) hebben we een mixed methods-aanpak gehanteerd waarbij we kwantitatieve en kwalitatieve mehtoden hebben gecombineerd. Een belangrijk onderdeel van het kwalitatieve deel van het onderzoek werd gevormd door group model building (gmb), een methodiek uit de systeemdynamica. Deze methodiek maakt het mogelijk om de dynamiek die ontstaat binnen de onderwijsorganisaties als gevolg van het vernieuwde toezicht in beeld te brengen. In dit artikel geven we inzicht in de methodologische onderbouwing van het gebruik van gmb en laten we zien hoe we de uitkomsten van deze methodiek hebben gebruikt bij toetsing van de beleidstheorie achter het vernieuwde toezicht. Daarmee bieden we inzicht in de waarde en bruikbaarheid van de methode van gmb om effecten van toezicht zichtbaar te maken. De methode van group model building helpt hierbij omdat (1) deze methodiek ruimte biedt om effectiviteit breed op te vatten en mee te nemen in de analyse en (2) gmb de mogelijkheid biedt om het systeem als geheel en de onderliggende interacties in beeld te krijgen.


Marlies Honingh
Dr. M. Honingh is associate professor bij de Nijmegen School of Management, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.

Marieke van Genugten
Dr. M. van Genugten is associate professor bij de Nijmegen School of Management, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen

Cor van Montfort
Dr. C. van Montfort is senior researcher bij de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam en research fellow bij Tilburg University
Peer reviewed

Access_open Ondersteunen van verandering en terugkeer

Een raamwerk voor exitprogramma’s voor geradicaliseerde (ex-)­gedetineerden

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 2 2022
Trefwoorden deradicalisering, disengagement, exitprogramma, gevangeniswezen
Auteurs Robin Christiaan van Halderen, Nanne Vosters, Janine Janssen e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article a framework is provided for the design and implementation of exit programmes used in prisons and by probation services. These programmes are targeted at violent extremist (ex-)offenders and are used for the purpose of deradicalisation or disengagement and support the successful reintegration of (ex-)offenders back into society. Based on a review of scientific and practice-oriented literature six categories of standards and practices are described. An exit programme needs to be tailored to the context in which it is used and to the risks and needs of the individual. In addition to various other aspects, earlier attention for reintegration and the active involvement of an (ex-)offender’s social environment are crucial in an exit progamme.


Robin Christiaan van Halderen
Dr. Robin Christiaan van Halderen is werkzaam als onderzoeker bij Hogeschool Saxion en was ten tijde van het project WayOut onderzoeker bij Avans Hogeschool.

Nanne Vosters
Nanne Vosters, MSc is onderzoeker bij Politie Midden-Nederland en was ten tijde van het project WayOut onderzoeker/docent bij Avans Hogeschool.

Janine Janssen
Prof. dr. Janine Janssen is hoofd onderzoek van het Landelijk Expertise Centrum Eer Gerelateerd Geweld van de Nationale Politie, bijzonder hoogleraar Rechtsantropologie aan de Open Universiteit, lector Veiligheid in Afhankelijkheidsrelaties aan Avans Hogeschool en de Politieacademie, en tevens voorzitter van de redactie van PROCES.

Bart Claes
Dr. Bart Claes is lector Transmuraal Herstelgericht Werken bij Avans Hogeschool, bestuurder bij het European Forum for Restorative Justice en directeur van CAW Boom Mechelen Lier.
Artikel

Access_open Legal Philosophy as an Enrichment of Doctrinal Research – Part II: The Purposes of Including Legal Philosophy

Tijdschrift Law and Method, januari 2022
Trefwoorden legal philosophy, research methods, interdisciplinary research, conceptual analysis
Auteurs Sanne Taekema en Wibren van der Burg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Many doctrinal legal research questions require making use of other academic disciplines or perspectives. This article explains the relevance of legal philosophy for doctrinal research projects. Often legal research questions have conceptual or evaluative dimensions that presuppose philosophical understanding. For research on the concept of democracy, the function of constitutional rights, or the possible introduction of a referendum in the Netherlands, questions of a philosophical nature need to be answered. Legal philosophy can supplement and enrich doctrinal research in various ways. In this article, we present seven purposes that legal philosophy may serve in the context of a doctrinal research project: conceptual clarification, exposition and reconstruction of fundamental normative principles and values, theory building, providing creative perspectives, structural critiques, evaluation, and recommendations. For each objective, we illustrate how to use relevant philosophical methods. Thus, this article complements our earlier publication ‘Legal Philosophy as an Enrichment of Doctrinal Research – Part I: Introducing Three Philosophical Methods’.1x http://www.lawandmethod.nl/tijdschrift/lawandmethod/2020/01/lawandmethod-D-19-00006.

Noten

  • * This text has been presented to classes at the University of Zagreb, Queen Mary University of London and Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam; we profited from the feedback of our students. We also want to thank Irma Bluijs, Machteld Geuskens, Tamar de Waal and the reviewers for their helpful comments on previous versions of this article, and Jacqueline Brand and Robert Poll for providing research assistance.
  • 1 http://www.lawandmethod.nl/tijdschrift/lawandmethod/2020/01/lawandmethod-D-19-00006.


Sanne Taekema
Prof. mr. dr. Sanne Taekema is Professor of Jurisprudence, Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.

Wibren van der Burg
Prof. dr. mr. Wibren van der Burg, is Professor of Legal Philosophy, Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Experimental Regulations and Regulatory ­Sandboxes – Law Without Order?

Special Issue Experimental Legislation in Times of Crisis, Sofia Ranchordás & Bart van Klink (eds.)

Tijdschrift Law and Method, december 2021
Trefwoorden experimental regulations, regulatory sandboxes, methodology, regulatory quality
Auteurs Sofia Ranchordás
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article discusses the key methodological shortcomings of experimental regulations and regulatory sandboxes. I argue that the poor design and implementation of these experimental legal regimes have both methodological and legal implications. The deficient design of experimental regulations and regulatory sandboxes can have three adverse effects: First, the internal validity of experimental legal regimes is limited because it is unclear whether the verified results are the direct result of the experimental intervention or other circumstances. The limited external validity of experimental legal regimes impedes the generalizability of the experiment. Second, experimental legal regimes that are not scientifically sound make a limited contribution to the advancement of evidence-based lawmaking and the rationalization of regulation. Third, methodological deficiencies may result in the violation of legal principles which require that experimental regulations follow objective, transparent, and predictable standards. I contribute to existing comparative public law and law and methods literature with an interdisciplinary framework which can help improve the design of experimental regulations and regulatory sandboxes. I draw on social science literature on the methods of field experiments to offer novel methodological insights for a more transparent and objective design of experimental regulations and regulatory sandboxes.


Sofia Ranchordás
Sofia Ranchordás is Full Professor of EU and Comparative Public Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of Groningen, The Netherlands & Associate Professor of Public Law, Innovation, and Sustainability at the Faculty of Law, LUISS Guido Carli, Italy.

    In recent years, big data technology has revolutionised many domains, including policing. There is a lack of research, however, exploring which applications are used by the police, and the potential benefits of big data analytics for policing. Instead, literature about big data and policing predominantly focuses on predictive policing and its associated risks. The present paper provides new insights into the police’s current use of big data and algorithmic applications. We provide an up-to-date overview of the various applications of big data by the National Police in the Netherlands. We distinguish three areas: uniformed police work, criminal investigation, and intelligence. We then discuss two positive effects of big data and algorithmic applications for the police organization: accelerated learning and the formation of a single police organization.


Marc Schuilenburg
Marc Schuilenburg is bijzonder hoogleraar Digital Surveillance aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam en universitair docent aan Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. m.b.schuilenburg@vu.nl.

Melvin Soudijn
Melvin Soudijn is senior onderzoeker bij de afdeling Analyse & Onderzoek van de Landelijke Eenheid Nationale Politie en research fellow bij het Nederlands Studiecentrum Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving.
Artikel

Access_open Dividing the Beds: A Risk Community under ‘Code Black’?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Cosmopolitan solidarity, COVID-19, Health care regulation, Risk society, Argumentative discourse analysis
Auteurs Tobias Arnoldussen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    During the COVID-19 crisis a risk of ‘code black’ emerged in the Netherlands. Doctors mentioned that in case of code black, very senior citizens might not receive intensive care treatment for COVID-19 due to shortages. Sociologist Ulrich Beck argued that palpable risks lead to the creation of new networks of solidarity. In this article this assumption is investigated by analyzing the different storylines prevalent in the public discussion about ‘code black’. Initially, storylines showing sympathy with the plight of the elderly came to the fore. However, storylines brought forward by medical organizations eventually dominated, giving them the opportunity to determine health care policy to a large extent. Their sway over policymaking led to a distribution scheme of vaccines that was favourable for medical personnel, but unfavourable for the elderly. The discursive process on code black taken as a whole displayed a struggle over favourable risk positions, instead of the formation of risk solidarity.


Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is Assistant Professor of Jurisprudence at Tilburg Law School.
Redactioneel

Access_open Solidarity and COVID-19: An Introduction

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Auteurs Wouter Veraart, Lukas van den Berge en Antony Duff
Auteursinformatie

Wouter Veraart
Wouter Veraart is Professor of Legal Philosophy at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Lukas van den Berge
Lukas van den Berge is Assistant Professor of Legal Theory at Utrecht University.

Antony Duff
Antony Duff is Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Stirling and Emeritus Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota.
Artikel

Access_open Welcoming the Other in a Pandemic Society

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Discourse, Solidarity, Poststructuralism, Levinas, Derrida
Auteurs Thomas Jacobus de Jong en Carina van de Wetering
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution explores the meaning and scope of solidarity with the emergence of the coronavirus discourse as formulated by politicians in order to make sense of the virus. It offers a poststructuralist account drawing on discourse theory together with insights from Levinas and Derrida. This leads to a critical reflection on the prevailing view of solidarity as secondary and derivative to corona policies, because solidarity is often subjugated to hegemonic meanings of efficiency. Instead, the argument is made that solidarity refers to the unique responsibility to which the other as wholly other commands me. This appeal for responsibility, that is presented in the face of the other, is to be assumed in the distance between the rules and the singularity of the situation. Accordingly, solidarity is described as a paradox of dependence (calculability) and independence (beyond calculation), that appears in a moment of undecidability, for it can never be overcome.


Thomas Jacobus de Jong
Thomas Jacobus de Jong is senior parketsecretaris at the Netherlands Public Prosecution Service (OM).

Carina van de Wetering
Carina van de Wetering is Lecturer in International Relations at the Institute of Political Science at Leiden University.
Artikel

Access_open Solidarity and Community

From the Politics of the Clan to Constituent Power

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Solidarity, Community, COVID-19 pandemic, Humanity, Ethnocentrism
Auteurs Luigi Corrias
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    What is at stake in invoking solidarity in legal-political contexts? The guiding hypothesis of this article is that solidarity is always and necessarily linked to the concept of community. A plea for solidarity will, in other words, directly lead one to the question: solidarity with whom? On the one hand, solidarity may be understood as extending only to those who belong to the same community as us. In this reading, solidarity builds upon an already existing community and applies to members only. On the other hand, invoked by those who aim to question the status quo, solidarity also plays a key role in practices of contestation. In these contexts, it focuses on collective action and the reimagination of political community. The article ends by articulating how this second interpretation of solidarity might prove helpful in making sense of our current predicament of a global pandemic.


Luigi Corrias
Luigi Corrias is Assistant Professor of Legal Philosophy, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Justice and Coercion in the Pandemic

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Justice as impartiality, Justice as mutual advantage, Solidarity, Coercion, Moral motivation
Auteurs Matt Matravers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Coercion plays two essential roles in theories of justice. First, in assuring those who comply with the demands of justice that they are not being exploited by others who do not do so. Second, in responding to, and managing, those who are unreasonable. With respect to the first, responses to the pandemic have potentially undermined this assurance. This is true in the distributions of vaccines internationally, and in some domestic contexts in which the rich and powerful have avoided public health guidance not to travel, to isolate, and so on. With respect to the second, the article considers whether those who refuse to be vaccinated are unreasonable, and if so, what follows for how they ought to be treated.


Matt Matravers
Matt Matravers is Professor of Law, University of York, York, UK.
Article

Access_open Ruled by Fear or Safety-Related Empowerment

The Experience and Meaning of Penal Protection Orders in Intimate Partner Violence in the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden intimate partner violence, stalking, protection orders, empowerment, safety, well-being
Auteurs Irma W.M. Cleven
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This study uses a novel approach to understand the experience and meaning of unsafety and the contribution of penal protection orders to victim empowerment in cases of intimate partner violence (IPV). In ten in-depth interviews, IPV survivors reflect on their relationship with their ex-partner and the previous years in which the order against their ex-partner was issued, including its role within the wider process of coming to terms with IPV victimisation and moving on. Depending on expectations of protection orders (POs) enforcement and deterrence, POs enhance one’s safety-related self-efficacy and result in a sense of empowerment. Its meaning can be understood in terms of one’s power from the ex-partner, power to act, status vis-à-vis the offender and the wider community, care/help of the CJS, and unity/togetherness with the wider community. Several implications for theoretical and empirical research and practice are discussed.


Irma W.M. Cleven
Irma W.M. Cleven, MSc, is PhD Candidate at the Department of Criminology of the Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Article

Access_open Victims’ Fundamental Need for Safety and Privacy and the Role of Legislation and Empirical Evidence

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden needs for safety, victim impact statements, legislation, Empirical Legal Studies, privacy protection
Auteurs Marijke Malsch
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Various laws, guidelines and other types of regulation have been created that introduced new rights worldwide for victims of crime. Many of these rights focus on active victims who wish to step into the open and to orally express their views and experiences in court. Rights and wishes to remain in the background and to preserve one’s privacy received less attention. This article focuses primarily on the wishes of victims that reveal their intention to not play an active role in the criminal process, and on victims who fear an invasion of their safety and privacy. According to the literature, such wishes and needs can be considered to be fundamental. The article questions the empirical basis for the present victim legislation: are the new laws that have been created over the decades founded on empirically established victim needs, or on presumed victim needs? The article concludes with a plea for a more extensive use of empirical findings that shed light on victim wishes in the legislation and the criminal process.


Marijke Malsch
Marijke Malsch is Professor of Empirical Legal Studies at Open Universiteit Netherlands.
Article

Access_open Hardship and Force Majeure as Grounds for Adaptation and Renegotiation of Investment Contracts

What Is the Extent of the Powers of Arbitral Tribunals?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden contract adaptation, hardship, force majeure, investment contracts, arbitration
Auteurs Agata Zwolankiewicz
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The change of circumstances impacting the performance of the contracts has been a widely commented issue. However, there seems to be a gap in legal jurisprudence with regard to resorting to such a remedy in the investment contracts setting, especially from the procedural perspective. It has not been finally settled whether arbitral tribunals are empowered to adapt investment contracts should circumstances change and, if they were, what the grounds for such a remedy would be. In this article, the author presents the current debates regarding this issue, potential grounds for application of such a measure and several proposals which would facilitate resolution of this procedural uncertainty.


Agata Zwolankiewicz
Agata Zwolankiewicz is an advocate trainee, graduated from the University of Silesia in Katowice (M.A. in law), and the University of Ottawa (LL.M. with concentration in international trade and foreign investment).
Artikel

Access_open Straffen en belonen in detentie

Een planevaluatie van het Nederlandse systeem van Promoveren en Degraderen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden policy evaluation, evidence-based policy, behavioral change, incentives and earned privileges
Auteurs Jan Maarten Elbers, Esther van Ginneken, Miranda Boone e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Although reward systems are utilized in prisons worldwide, evaluations regarding their intended use are lacking. This contribution reconstructs the policy theory of such a system: Promotion and Demotion, as implemented in Dutch prisons in 2014. With a policy scientific approach the intended target group, means, goals and causal mechanisms of the system were delineated. The policy theory assumes three means, ten goals and 24 causal mechanisms. The policy theory is insufficiently empirically substantiated on a number of points and takes limited account of (cognitively) impaired prisoners. This accurate reconstruction offers a unique insight into the assumed functioning of a part of Dutch detention policy and provides starting points for international considerations of behavioral change in detention.


Jan Maarten Elbers
J.M. Elbers MSc is Promovendus.

Esther van Ginneken
Dr. E.F.J.C. van Ginneken is Universitair Docent.

Miranda Boone
Prof. mr. dr. M.M. Boone is Hoogleraar Criminologie en Vergelijkende Penologie.

Paul Nieuwbeerta
Prof. P. Nieuwbeerta is hoogleraar Criminologie aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Leiden.

Hanneke Palmen
Dr. J.M.H. Palmen is Universitair Hoofddocent.
Article

Access_open Text-mining for Lawyers: How Machine Learning Techniques Can Advance our Understanding of Legal Discourse

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2021
Trefwoorden text mining, machine learning, law, natural language processing
Auteurs Arthur Dyevre
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Many questions facing legal scholars and practitioners can be answered only by analysing and interrogating large collections of legal documents: statutes, treaties, judicial decisions and law review articles. I survey a range of novel techniques in machine learning and natural language processing – including topic modelling, word embeddings and transfer learning – that can be applied to the large-scale investigation of legal texts


Arthur Dyevre
Arthur Dyevre is Professor at the KU Leuven Centre for Empirical Jurisprudence, Leuven, Belgium. arthur.dyevre@kuleuven.be.
Artikel

Constructief omgaan met conflicten en ­geschillen

Inleiding in probleemoplossend onderhandelen en bemiddelen

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 2 2021
Auteurs Alain-Laurent Verbeke en Geert Vervaeke
Auteursinformatie

Alain-Laurent Verbeke
Prof. Dr. Alain-Laurent Verbeke (1964) is gewoon hoogleraar aan de KU Leuven. Hij doceert er sinds 1991 onder meer onderhandelen en bemiddelen, nationaal en internationaal familiaal vermogensrecht, bijzondere overeenkomsten, zowel in de bachelor en master rechten als in de master notariaat. Aan de rechtsfaculteit is hij directeur van het Rector Roger Dillemans Instituut Familiaal Vermogensrecht, codirecteur van het Leuvens Centrum Notariaat en van het Instituut Contractenrecht. Aan de faculteit psychologie is hij covoorzitter van het Leuven Center for Collaborative Management (LCM). Hij is mede-oprichter (in 2001), lesgever en lid van de stuurgroep van het postgraduaat bemiddeling van de KU Leuven. Ook is hij (co)promotor van talrijke doctoraten, in de rechten en in de psychologie. Hij is advocaat aan de balies van Brussel en West-Vlaanderen, partner Greenille Private Client Team @ Deloitte Legal. Hij is sinds 2007 Visiting Professor of Law aan Harvard Law School, waar hij negotiation doceert. Sinds 2008 is hij ook Professor of Law & Negotiation aan UCP Lisbon Global School of Law en sinds 1999 deeltijds gewoon hoogleraar privaatrecht en rechtsvergelijking aan Tilburg University. Hij ontving de Francqui Leerstoel (VUB, 2010-2011), de KBC Chair in Family Wealth (Antwerp Management School, 2014-2015) en de Van Oosterwyck Leerstoel notarieel recht (VUB, 2003). In Harvard is hij verbonden aan het Program on Negotiation (PON). Zie www.law.kuleuven.be/fvr/nl/pdf/cvALV.

Geert Vervaeke
Prof. Dr. Geert Vervaeke (1960) is Decaan van de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van Tilburg University. Hij is tevens deeltijds Gewoon Hoogleraar aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de KU Leuven in de criminologische en rechtspsychologie. Momenteel is hij voorzitter van de European Association on Psychology and Law (https://eapl.eu). Tevens is hij voorzitter van de stuurgroep van het postgraduaat bemiddeling aan de KU Leuven. Hij is gewezen Voorzitter van de Belgische Hoge Raad voor de Justitie (2004-2012: www.hrj.be/nl). Hij was tussen 2004 en 2012 tevens lid van het bestuur van het Europees Netwerk van Hoge Raden (www.encj.eu) en curator van het wetenschappelijk luik van het Stadsfestival Op.Recht.Mechelen (2015-2017: www.oprechtmechelen.be).
Artikel

Access_open GMO Regulation in Crisis – The Experimental Potential of Regulation (EU) 2020/1043 on Covid-19 in Addressing Both a Crisis and a ­Pandemic

Special Issue Experimental Legislation in Times of Crisis Sofia Ranchordás & Bart van Klink (eds.)

Tijdschrift Law and Method, september 2021
Trefwoorden experimental legislation, regulatory knowledge, GMO regulation, evaluation
Auteurs Lonneke Poort en Willem-Jan Kortleven
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article, we analyse Regulation (EU) 2020/1043 on Covid-19 against the backdrop of the current deadlock in EU-regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). We build on temporary and experimental legislation scholarship and employ a normative framework of regulatory knowledge. The Covid-19 Regulation aims at speeding up the development of GMO-based Covid-19 treatments or vaccines by temporarily suspending requirements that otherwise would have made for time-consuming and burdensome authorization processes. Although the Regulation lacks an explicit experimental purpose, we hypothesize that experiences with its functioning may be utilized in evaluation processes serving attempts to change the GMO legal framework. As such, it may fulfil a latent experimental function. We reflect on the types of knowledge that are relevant when evaluating experimental legislation and developing regulation more generally and argue that the inclusion of social knowledge is pertinent in dealing with complex issues such as GMO regulation. Experimental law literature focuses on gathering evidence-based knowledge about the functioning of legislation but virtually neglects knowledge about different experiences and value appreciations of various societal actors and social-contextual mechanisms. We propose that such social knowledge be included in the design of experimental legislation and that evaluation be approached bottom-up instead of top-down.


Lonneke Poort
Lonneke Poort is Associate Professor at the department of Sociology, Theory and Methodology of Law at Erasmus School of Law.

Willem-Jan Kortleven
Willem-Jan Kortleven is Assistant Professor at the department of Sociology, Theory and Methodology of Law at Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Toont 1 - 20 van 180 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
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.