Trendwatching is a tool to get a better grip on what happens next and as such it is used by the Dutch Financial and Fiscal Investigation Service (FIOD) to explore possible futures of financial crime with a time lap of two years. The author describes how trendwatching works. In this case a platform Trends4fi (www.trends4fi.org) was created with a website, a mobile app and trend groups to generate foresights in cooperation with connected networks from public and private organisations. This is called network trendwatching, in fact a social intelligence tool designed to generate as much new information and new insights on developments which might have an impact on financial crime and the fight against it.

Threats, vulnerabilities, and new forms of attack within the cyber domain develop rapidly. To keep up with and respond to these trends, cyber security professionals must demonstrate reaction velocity, accuracy and a high tolerance for complexity. Publicly available information (PAI) can serve as an important aid to personnel engaged in cyber security analysis. However, evaluation of cyber analytical capacity – a pre-requisite for any measurement of quality or improvement – is still inchoate. This article covers the concept and design of an initial phase of research begun in October 2018 in The Netherlands to measure and improve cyber analysis techniques. The research program features a forecasting tournament to record participants’ probabilistic estimates on future cyber outcomes based exclusively on PAI knowledge acquisition. This phase of research seeks to address whether analysts’ predictions are more accurate in certain subjects within the cyber domain than in others and to assess how predictive accuracy in the cyber domain compares to accuracy in other domains in which forecasting tournaments have been organized.

This article focusses on the question whether quantitative modelling and simulation is useful for judicial forecasting, ex-ante testing of judicial policies, and (re)designing chains of organisations like the judicial chain. Specific attention is given to methods that can be used in the face of complexity and deep uncertainty. That is, when facing many substantial uncertainties. Complexity and uncertainty are first of all focused on. Subsequently, modelling methods for dealing with complexity and uncertainty are discussed in more detail, examples are given, and the process needed to build such models in a participatory way is discussed.

In the field of policymaking, there is a growing need to take advantage of the opportunities that big data predictions offer. A strong point of big data is that the large amounts of data that are collected nowadays can be re-used to find new insights. However, for effective use in policymaking it is also important to take into account the relating limitations and challenges. For example, the quality of the data used can be a problem. Outdated data and data of which the semantics have changed, may result in predictions that are no longer correct. In addition, it is difficult to apply predictions to individual cases or people. In this article authors provide various practical recommendations for dealing with these problems. As long as people are aware of the limitations and handle the results with care, big data models can be a useful addition to traditional methods in the field of policymaking.

What are the most important threats for national security in the following years? What do we foresee for the longer term? How are threats interrelated? In this article, we discuss the work of the Dutch Network of Safety and Security Analysts (ANV), which deals with this type of questions since 2011. The main task of this multidisciplinary network is to provide input for the National Security Strategy. It does so by providing an Integrated Risk analysis and a Horizon scan National Security. The authors discuss the foresight-methods used by the network (scenario studies and horizon scanning techniques), as well as the most important conclusions from both studies.

In Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) a group of trained and supervised volunteers support a medium to high-risk sex offender in his process of re-entry after detention. Sex offenders participate on a voluntary basis. Circles have a double aim: the prevention of new sexual offences and the rehabilitation of the sex offender. Circles offer social inclusion and support for behavior change, and monitor risk. They are embedded in the professional network of sex offender after care. Through a professional circle coordinator relevant information is circulated between the circle and professional agencies, to enable adequate support and interventions. Effect studies show that COSA contributes to a reduced risk of reoffending. The model was developed in Canada almost 25 years ago and has been picked up by a growing number of countries in Europe, the America’s, Asia, as well as Australia and New Zealand. Variations in the model become apparent and raise questions about the essentials of COSA.

Dutch legal scholars have expressed their concern over an increase in (the relevance of) supervision as part of the criminal sanction system. They endorse the need for a more fundamental research on the nature and position of supervision within the Dutch criminal sanction system. This article discusses some fundamental issues: the meaning of autonomy and the position of the autonomous person as an object of supervision, the possible consequences of supervision for and the various purposes of supervision within the criminal sanction system.

How can technological tools contribute to supervising and reintegrating offenders in society? Globally, technological tools for supervision are broken down into so-called first generation (GPS tracking) and second generation (smartphone and sensor technology). An overview is given of what is globally known about the effectiveness and assumed mechanisms of action of first-generation technical tools. Then it is explored what added value second-generation technical aids can have and to which working mechanisms they could connect. Smartphone and sensor technology have the potential to contribute to the rehabilitation functions of the supervision, inter alia because they offer possibilities for more personalized supervision and for the combination of supervision and treatment. Although initiatives have been started in this regard and research is ongoing, hardly anything is known yet about the effectiveness of these new technological applications. The reliability and safety of IT, as well as ethical and legal aspects also require attention.

The decision to revoke or recall a conditional sanction is barely researched in criminal justice research, despite the interests involved for the offender as well as society. This article reflects on some results from a comparative research project on breach decision-making (COST Action on Offender Supervision in Europe). Using Hawkins’ concept of serial decision-making, the interdependence of early stage and final stage decision makers is highlighted. The significant power exercised by early stage actors raises the issue of the need to ensure credibility of community sanctions and appropriate due process protections, without reducing their discretion so much that they cannot perform their role of supporting the offender to complete the supervisory order successfully.

Little is known about how ex-prisoners’ parole supervision experiences relate to desistance. The aim of this article therefore is to gain insight into the nature of release conditions and parole supervision of ex-prisoners and parolees’ perceptions of their supervision related to the desistance process. A total of 23 Dutch parolees were interviewed in depth at three waves starting in prison up to one year after their release, and the 69 interviews were combined with their parole files containing information about conditions, violations and sanctions. Parole files revealed the practice of highly engaged parole officers, who worked with parolees to strengthen factors known to foster desistance. However, the interviews showed that most parolees found their parole experience predominantly surveillance-oriented and not very helpful for desistance. Parole was experienced as most beneficial when parole officers used their discretionary power to adjust conditions creating ‘space’ for trial-and-error.

In this article the author asserts, based on his own experiences in this field, that the independence of research and researchers is not a given, but must always be conquered and defended. He relates the necessity of doing commissioned research to developments in Dutch legal academia and describes its strengths and weaknesses. He then makes the comparison with ‘pure’ academic research. He shows that most lecturers must fight and defend their independence against all sorts of developments within the modern university. There is not much room anymore to do one’s own free research. He concludes that neither academic nor commissioned research takes place in a vacuum without power relations.

Those who commission scientific research sometimes try to influence what and how the researcher executes the project, or to influence the outcomes. The scientific community utterly rejects such practices. The author discusses the diametrically different opinions on what is acceptable in the relation between those who commission scientific research and those that accept such a commission.

The new Dutch Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2018) offers an important document for strengthening good research practices. It can be used in training researchers, informing the general public on standards guaranteeing trustworthiness of scientific research and handling allegations of misconduct in this research. The code departs from a set of principles worked out in standards describing the do’s and don’ts of good research practice. The Dutch code distinguishes itself for amongst others having a special section on duties of care of the organization where researchers are appointed. The organization has special responsibilities to give support to its researchers to develop good research practice and to foster a research culture in which dilemmas of integrity can be discussed in an open atmosphere. In this article special attention is paid to the principle of dependency. It is with regard to this principle that the researcher is most vulnerable, especially when it comes to commissioned research projects. How can the researcher be supported when dependency and honesty are under pressure?

Dutch police research is predominantly of a policy supporting or evaluative nature. Significant publications, such as those that started police research in the 1970s, are rare. This loss is analyzed in this article. Firstly, the author describes how the research community has changed: police officers who were disillusioned with the organization and mastered scientific competencies were succeeded by university-educated researchers who had to earn a position in the police. Secondly, the police integrated the societal urge for change, transformed it into a style of management and immunized themselves in this way against innovation. Thirdly, researchers exchanged social scientific theories for policy concepts, focusing on efficiency and excluding a societal perspective on the police. Finally, by recognizing the impact of research as a criterion of success, researchers relinquished their judgment on the quality of their research to police managers. Improvement of the situation depends first of all on the creativity and boldness of researchers.

Governments have a great need for policy-relevant research. The Dutch government obtains part of this research from the so-called state knowledge institutions: public research organizations that support ministries in the preparation and implementation of policy. To be able to provide reliable research, state knowledge institutions must be able to act independently and with integrity. But to be policy-relevant, they must maintain in close contact with ministries. Proper handling of this tension does not only requires ‘hard’ formal rules, procedures and codes of conduct, but also ‘soft’ informal institutions, such as awareness, dialogue, education, and culture. Implementing this is a shared responsibility of both the research organizations and the ministries.

This article outlines the need in the Netherlands for socially effective justice that better resolves citizens’ problems. The author argues that new forms of dispute resolution should be integrated in the justice system. The author first describes various types of innovations. Then he outlines the obstacles to innovations. A major obstacle is that many stakeholders in the existing legal system are simultaneously the gatekeepers for the admission of innovations. It is necessary to create an infrastructure that welcomes, reinforces, tests, finances and imports new treatments for legal problems.

This article is about the history of the justice of the peace, a low profile judge where people easily have access to. The history of the justice of the peace goes back to the seventeenth century. The justice of the peace was reintroduced in the Netherlands in the French period, when the country was annexed by the French Empire under the reign of Napoleon. The justice of the peace was also introduced in Belgium and is still in use. The most important task of the justice of the peace is ‘conciliation’. In the conciliation procedure the justice of the peace has a very active role. The judge tries to mediate between the parties in order to come to an agreement.

In Dutch courts several pilots are being carried out in order to enhance the quality of civil procedure. The main focus of the pilots is to speed up the procedure and make it more cost-effective, while ensuring the procedure is easily accessible and is overseen by a mediating judge in a nearby court. This focus largely corresponds with aspects of the civil procedure that the courts and the minister of Justice have identified as in need of attention. The courts and the minister have focused on different specific problems and propose different solutions, however, and neither aims to address the quality of civil procedure as a whole. It is doubtful whether the proposals for improvement, put forward by the courts and the minister, can address the concerns they have intended to resolve and whether the overall quality of the civil procedure (for all civil cases instead of the simple ones) will be improved. Solutions to the problems of the civil procedure cannot be devised without first developing a clear picture of the problems people experience with civil procedures and the courts.

Socially effective justice requires innovative legislation that allows the judge to experiment with simple procedures that bring parties together in order to prevent escalation of disputes. For that reason, the Dutch government has enabled experiments with low-threshold local civil courts. This article focuses on the experiences with such a court in Rotterdam. The court provides a simple, fast and cheap procedure with the aim of reaching a solution to the dispute in joint consultation. The article provides insight into the nature and the number of disputes that have been dealt with up to now.