Verfijn uw zoekresultaat

Zoekresultaat: 17 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid x Rubriek Article x
Artikel

Upperdogs Versus Underdogs

Judicial Review of Administrative Drug-Related Closures in the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden Eviction, War on drugs, Party capability, Empirical legal research, Drug policy
Auteurs Mr. Michelle Bruijn en Dr. Michel Vols
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Netherlands, mayors are entitled to close public and non-public premises if drug-related activities are being conducted there. Using data from the case law of Dutch lower courts, published between 2008 and 2016, this article examines the relative success of different types of litigants, and the influence of case characteristics on drug-related closure cases. We build on Galanter’s framework of ‘repeat players’ and ‘one-shotters’, to argue that a mayor is the stronger party and is therefore more likely to win in court. We categorise mayors as ‘upperdogs’, and the opposing litigants as ‘underdogs’. Moreover, we distinguish stronger mayors from weaker ones, based on the population size of their municipality. Similarly, we distinguish the stronger underdogs from the weaker ones. Businesses and organisations are classified as stronger parties, relative to individuals, who are classified as weaker parties. In line with our hypothesis, we find that mayors win in the vast majority of cases. However, contrary to our presumptions, we find that mayors have a significantly lower chance of winning a case if they litigate against weak underdogs. When controlling for particular case characteristics, such as the type of drugs and invoked defences, our findings offer evidence that case characteristics are consequential for the resolution of drug-related closure cases in the Netherlands.


Mr. Michelle Bruijn
Michelle Bruijn is promovendus en docent aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Haar onderzoek richt zich op de regulering van cannabis en de sluiting van drugspanden.

Dr. Michel Vols
Michel Vols is hoogleraar Openbare-Orderecht aan Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Zijn onderzoek richt zich op Openbare orde en veiligheid, en het gebruik van data science (machine learning) bij het bestuderen van juridische data.
Artikel

Participatie in circulaire gebiedsontwikkeling

Over het creëren van alternatieve ruimtes door professionele stadmakers

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2019
Trefwoorden Circular City, Sustainable Development, City Makers, Co-creation, The Netherlands
Auteurs Linda van de Kamp PhD, Michaela Hordijk PhD, John Grin PhD e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    We analyze two citizen collectives of ‘professional city makers’ who have shaped participation in circular area development in anticipation of the Dutch Environment and Planning Act. The activities of professional city-makers form an interesting new phenomenon that requires attention as well as the implications: it is precisely through the professionalism of the city-makers’ efforts that there is a regular tension in the participation process between their role as citizen and professional in their contact with the government. We therefore discuss how the participation of professional city-makers in area development exposes different paradoxes that must be taken into account in the further implementation of the Environment and Planning Act. In short, we argue that participation in the Act is presented in a traditional way and does not fit the new role of citizens in area development in the 21st century.


Linda van de Kamp PhD
Linda van de Kamp is cultureel antropoloog en universitair docent aan de afdeling Sociologie van de Universiteit van Amsterdam.

Michaela Hordijk PhD
Michaela Hordijk is Universitair Hoofddocent aan de afdeling Sociale Geografie, Planologie en Internationale Ontwikkelingsstudies van de Universiteit van Amsterdam en verbonden aan het Kennisactieprogramma Water.

John Grin PhD
John Grin is Hoogleraar beleidswetenschap en systeeminnovaties aan de afdeling Politicologie van de Universiteit van Amsterdam.

(dr.ig.) Gert-Joost Peek PhD
Gert-Joost Peek is lector Gebiedsontwikkeling en Transitiemanagement aan de Hogeschool Rotterdam. Daarnaast is hij eigenaar van SPOTON Consulting en is hij als fellow Ruimtelijke procesorganisatie verbonden aan de Amsterdam School of Real Estate (ASRE). Hij is bestuurslid van I’M BINCK.

Frank Alsema MA
Frank Alsema is kwartiermaker Stadslab Buiksloterham, regisseur, producer en entrepeneur.

Saskia Müller MA
Saskia Müller is ondernemer en kwartiermaker Stadslab Buiksloterham.
Artikel

De rol van intermediairs in het Nederlandse prostitutiebeleid

Top-down toepassen of bottom-up aanpassen van regels?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden regulatory intermediaries, Social Working theory, Regulatory Intermediary Target model, prostitution policy
Auteurs Nicolle Zeegers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Similar to the more current Regulator Intermediary Target (RIT) model, Griffiths’ Social Working (SW) theory points to the relevance of intermediaries for explaining rule following behavior. In this article, the author applies both theories (RIT and SW) concerning the role of intermediaries in rule following to explain developments in Dutch prostitution policy: the non-implementation of the emancipatory, sex workers’ rights based approach, and its replacement by a more repressive policy of closing down sex facilities. The analysis shows that although both theories contain useful starting point for explaining these developments, the SW theory’s special value is its acknowledgement of how regulatory intermediaries operate in a social field with existing social rules and a specific balance of power. Such rules and power relations have put barriers to the implementation of the Dutch prostitution policy as formulated in 1999. As illustrated in the article, the SW- theory offers more tools than the RIT- model for an analysis of how legal rules work in practice.


Nicolle Zeegers
Nicolle Zeegers is universitair docent politicologie bij de vakgroep Transboundary Legal Studies (TLS), Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. In haar onderzoek richt zij zich op vraagstukken over invloed en macht in de totstandkoming en werking van wetgeving. In augustus 1998 werd zij lid van de vakgroep Rechtstheorie waarvan John Griffiths de voorzitter was. Zij heeft verschillende malen over de sociale-werkingstheorie gepubliceerd (zie Weyers & Stamhuis 2003 en Zeegers, Witteveen & Van Klink 2005).
Artikel

The precaution controversy: an analysis through the lens of Ulrich Beck and Michel Foucault

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden Precautionary principle, risk society, governmentality, risk governance, environmental law
Auteurs Tobias Arnoldussen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    According to the precautionary principle lack of scientific evidence for the existence of a certain (environmental) risk should not be a reason not to take preventative policy measures. The precautionary principle had a stormy career in International environmental law and made its mark on many treaties, including the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). However it remains controversial. Proponents see it as the necessary legal curb to keep the dangerous tendencies of industrial production and technology in check. Opponents regard it with suspicion. They fear it will lead to a decrease in freedom and fear the powers to intervene that it grants the state. In this article the principle is reviewed from the perspectives of Ulrich Beck’s ‘reflexive modernisation’ and Michel Foucault’s notion of governmentality. It is argued that from Beck’s perspective the precautionary principle is the result of a learning process in which mankind gradually comes to adopt a reflexive attitude to the risks modernity has given rise to. It represents the wish to devise more inclusive and democratic policies on risks and environmental hazards. From the perspective of Michel Foucault however, the principle is part and parcel of neo-liberal tendencies of responsibilisation. Risk management and prudency are devolved to the public in an attempt to minimise risk taking, while at the same time optimising production. Moreover, it grants legitimacy to state intervention if the public does not live up to the responsibilities foisted on it. Both perspectives are at odds, but represent different sides of the same coin and might learn from each other concerns.


Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is a socio-legal scholar affiliated with the University of Amsterdam Law School and the PPLE honours college. Next to lecturing on a variety of subjects, he focusses on interdisciplinary legal research into the possibilities of law to deal with contemporary social problems.
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.
Artikel

The legacy and current relevance of Cappelletti and the Florence project on access to justice

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden definition and dimensions access to justice, recommendations, historic context access to justice, current context access to justice
Auteurs Bernard Hubeau
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution explains what access to justice can encompass and how the ideals about access to justice have developed in time. The way to do this is going back to the work of the famous scholars Cappelletti and Garth, who were responsible for a worldwide project on access to justice in the 1970s. Their main issue was to explain access to justice is more than the access to a judge and the organization of courts. Primarily, the system must be equally accessible to all, irrespective of social or economic status or other incapacity. But it also must lead to results that are individually and socially just and fair. Equal access and effective access are the central notions. Their work is put in perspective. The importance of their legacy and the question how we can get along with their work are stressed. Their definition is compared to a few other authoritative definitions. The waves in the history of access to justice are described and putting them in the current context illustrates why a fourth waved can be observed. The major question to be answered is how one can assess the challenges and obstacles of access to justice in the current context. Therefore, some recent dimensions and developments within access to justice are presented: the democratic dimension, the effectiveness of new social rights, the attention for poor and vulnerable people, further juridification, expanding frontiers of and monitoring access to justice, e-justice, and self-help. Finally, a few building blocks for reforms are presented.


Bernard Hubeau
Bernard Hubeau is a full-time Professor in Sociology and Sociology of Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of Antwerp. He also teaches at the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Antwerp and the Faculty of Law and Criminology of the University of Brussels. He is the former ombudsman of the city of Antwerp and of the Flemish Parliament.
Artikel

Social security and social welfare: barriers and retrograde policies, but cause for optimism?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden social security, legal representation, means-testing, Britain, fees
Auteurs Amir Paz-Fuchs
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution addresses the limits placed on access to justice in the context of social services, with a particular, but not exclusive, focus on the UK, across five central platforms: legal representation, the financial barriers, the structure of the programme, the attitude of the bureaucracy, and the personal attributes of the client. The contribution finds that there exist, for decades, problematic elements that constitute barriers to justice in this area: the means-tested element in the programmes and the bureaucracy’s double role as provider of services and detector of fraud. But to them, in recent years, significant barriers were added: recent cuts in legal aid and the imposition of tribunal fees in the UK are retrograde steps, reverting 40 years of impressive achievements in the field.


Amir Paz-Fuchs
Amir Paz-Fuchs (D. Phil Oxford) is a Senior Lecturer at the School of Law, University of Sussex, where he teaches employment law, public law, and legal theory. In addition, he is a Visiting Research Fellow at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies and a Research Associate at Wolfson College, both at the University of Oxford. He is also Co-Director of the ‘The Limits of Privatization’ research project, based at the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem. He also served on the board of several human rights and social justice NGOs.
Artikel

Merits testing in the English legal aid system: exploring its impact in asylum cases

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden access to justice, asylum seekers, merits testing, English legal aid system
Auteurs Tamara Butter
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In recent years, there has been much discussion on the legal aid cuts and reforms in England and Wales, and the possible consequences this would have on access to justice for vulnerable groups in society, including immigrants and asylum seekers. This contribution focuses on one element of the English legal aid system: merits testing by legal aid providers in asylum cases. It explores whether and, if so, how this aspect may affect the access to justice for asylum seekers lacking the financial means to pay privately for legal assistance and representation. The findings indicate that a merits test which makes access to legal aid on appeal conditional upon a case having at least 50% prospect of success and makes legal aid providers responsible for conducting this assessment may compromise asylum seekers’ ability to achieve justice both within and outside the existing body of law.


Tamara Butter
Tamara Butter is a PhD candidate at the Institute for Sociology of Law/Centre for Migration Law of the Radboud University of Nijmegen. Her research consists of a comparative case study into the professional decision making of asylum legal aid lawyers in the Netherlands and England.
Artikel

Responsibilities of the state and legal professions

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden responsibilities, the state, lawyers, the judiciary and judges
Auteurs Mies Westerveld en Ashley Terlouw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution, which is based on the Dutch legal system, deals with the responsibilities of the State and legal professions in ensuring access to justice. The responsibilities of the four main players involved in bringing justice to the citizen are discussed: the legislator, the executive, the judiciary, and the legal profession. Responsibilities for access to justice do not only stem from the law, they do also evolve from societal problems and discussions. The contribution deals with both. Several actors share some of the responsibilities. One can think of responsibilities for information, for financing, and for being aware of vulnerabilities and other obstacles. What are the legal responsibilities and what other responsibilities are felt by the actors involved and how do they deal with them? And as a result: do they contribute to access to justice, do they form an obstacle, or both?


Mies Westerveld
Mies Westerveld is Professor Legal aid by special appointment and Professor in Labour Law (social insurance) at the University of Amsterdam. Her research concentrates on current issues of access to justice and state-financed legal aid on the one hand and the decreasing role of social insurance on a fragmented labour market on the other hand.

Ashley Terlouw
Ashley Terlouw is Professor in Sociology of Law at the Radboud University of Nijmegen. She is responsible for the Centre for Migration Law of the Radboud University. Besides she is part-time Judge at the District Court of Gelderland. Her research concentrates on legal and societal issues of asylum and equal treatment and on the working of the judiciary.
Artikel

De Nederlandse wetgever en andere normenstelsels: op zoek naar het recht der werkelijkheid

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2015
Trefwoorden multilevel lawmaking, Dutch legislator, private regulation, coherence of law
Auteurs Jan Smits
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    It is well known that the role of the national legislator in setting legally relevant norms is rapidly changing under the influence of increasing Europeanization, globalization and privatization. Today the national legislator is only one of the relevant norm-setters. This contribution considers the role that the Dutch legislator sees for itself in this emerging multilevel legal order. To this end, six themes of fundamental importance in a multilevel order are explored: (1) the question of when government regulation is to be preferred over private regulation; (2) the question of at which level of government (national, European, sub-national or supranational) a topic is preferably dealt with; (3) the role of the national legislator in realizing the cognoscibility and coherence of law; (4) the preferred way of implementing EU directives; (5) the question of whether the national legislator must refer to codes of conduct, certification and norms of standards bodies, and if so how; (6) the question of whether the national legislator must position its own national law on the international ‘law market.’


Jan Smits
Jan Smits is hoogleraar Europees Privaatrecht aan de Universiteit Maastricht.
Artikel

National variations in the implementation and enforcement of European food hygiene regulations

Comparing the structure of food controls and regulations between Scotland and the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2014
Trefwoorden food regulation, official controls, EU food law, implementation, enforcement
Auteurs Tetty Havinga
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Over the course of time the European Union has increased its powers considerably. Currently, almost all food safety regulations in the member states rest on European law. Despite this common legal base, several differences between member states still exist. This article compares the way Scottish and Dutch authorities deal with a particular item of European food law: the development of national guides to good practice for hygiene and for the application of HACCP principles by the food industry. The results of this investigation are consistent with the conclusion of Falkner et al. that the implementation of EU law in both the Netherlands and the UK depends on domestic issues. The dominant issue in Scotland (and the UK) is the FSA objective to bring consistent food controls and independency from industry which results in the development of governmental guidance. The prevailing issue in the Netherlands is making industry responsible for food safety which helps explain the extensive use of industry guides. This study shows that in order to understand what happens on the ground it is important to look beyond transposition or direct effect and also to investigate the implementation of regulations and to dig deeper than just their transposition.


Tetty Havinga
Tetty Havinga is Associate Professor at the Institute for the Sociology of Law, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands. She has published on the regulation of food safety, policy implementation and law enforcement, equal opportunities law, asylum migration and migrant workers. Her recent research projects deal with the development and effects of private regulation of food safety, oversight and official controls in the food industry, and the experiences of large companies with Dutch special courts. She is co-editor of The Changing Landscape of Food Governance (to be published by Edward Elgar, 2015).
Artikel

The government’s roles in transnational forest governance

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2014
Trefwoorden transnational governance, forest certification, legality verification, emerging economies, public-private interaction
Auteurs Liu Jing
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Forest certification schemes and the legality regime are two main methods of transnational forest governance. A recent review of the literature has revealed that the government and forest certification are often intertwined. Based on that review, this contribution argues that governments play divergent roles in forest certification schemes in different aspects of the regulatory process: namely, agenda and standard setting, implementation, monitoring, and enforcement. In most FSC schemes, governments in developed countries play a less active role in most of these aspects than they do in context-based industry-dominated schemes. In the three emerging economies examined – Indonesia, Brazil, and China – the government sometimes plays a more active role in context-based, industry-dominated schemes than it does in developed countries. The rising legality regime might further strengthen the role of the government in forest governance in these emerging economies. Moreover, China may exemplify the fact that forest governance is entering a new phase, because the country not only exports to countries demanding legal verification, but also imports from countries where the risk of illegal logging is high. This illustrates that the role of governments in forest governance is constantly evolving.


Liu Jing
Liu Jing is a postdoctoral researcher in Erasmus University Rotterdam (the Netherlands). She is conducting research on ‘smart mixes in relation to transboundary environmental problems’, especially in the areas of forest, fishery, oil and climate change governance. Her research interests cover regulation and governance, environmental law as well as law and economics.
Artikel

Regulatory governance by contract: the rise of regulatory standards in commercial contracts

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2014
Trefwoorden contracts, transnational regulation, codes of conduct, private standards, supply chain
Auteurs Paul Verbruggen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this paper a literature review is used to explore the role that commercial contracts concluded between private actors play as instruments of regulatory governance. While such contracts are traditionally seen as a means to facilitate exchange between market participants, it is argued in the literature that commercial contracts are becoming increasingly important vehicles for the implementation and enforcement of safety, social and sustainability standards in transnational supply chains. The paper maps the pervasiveness of this development, its drivers, and the governance challenges that arise from it. While doing so, the paper more generally explores the relationship between regulation and contract law.


Paul Verbruggen
Paul Verbruggen is Assistant Professor of Private Law at the Business and Law Research Centre of Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. He conducted his PhD research at the European University Institute, Florence, Italy, which resulted in the monograph Enforcing Transnational Private Regulation: A Comparative Analysis of Advertising and Food Safety (Edward Elgar, 2014). Paul writes on the design and operation of regulatory frameworks (both public and private), focusing on questions of legitimacy, accountability and enforcement. His research interests concern European private law, regulatory policy, risk regulation and certification.
Artikel

What role is there for the state in contemporary governance?

Insights from the Dutch building sector

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2014
Trefwoorden governance, collaborative governance, governance performance, urban sustainability, fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA)
Auteurs Jeroen van der Heijden
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    An emerging body of empirical governance studies highlights that the role of the state in governance has been changing. It has moved away from governing societal problems solely through traditional direct regulatory interventions. State actors are now (also) taking up facilitative and enabling roles in innovative voluntary governance arrangements. This article seeks to gain a better understanding of these facilitating and enabling roles of state actors in real world practice and what (clusters of) roles are needed to obtain successful outcomes from these arrangements. It builds on an empirical study of ten different arrangements in the Dutch sustainable building sector, which are analysed using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) methodology. It finds no evidence that any of the specific (clusters of) role(s) is necessary to achieve positive outcomes from the arrangements studied, but uncovers that when combined, such roles affect the outcomes of arrangements. It concludes by presenting an evidence-based typology of combinations of roles that state actors may wish to take up in seeking positive outcomes from innovative voluntary governance arrangements, or preventing negative outcomes.


Jeroen van der Heijden
Jeroen van der Heijden is a senior research fellow at the Australian National University and an assistant professor at the University of Amsterdam. His main research interest is governance for urban sustainability and resilience. He has recently brought together his research on this topic, conducted over nearly the last ten years, in his book Governance for Urban Sustainability and Resilience: Responding to Climate Change and the Relevance of the Built Environment (Edward Elgar Publishers, 2014).
Artikel

The food label as governance space: free-range eggs and the fallacy of consumer choice

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2014
Trefwoorden food label, free-range eggs, animal welfare, regulatory governance
Auteurs Christine Parker
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In a neoliberal age governments, NGOs, food producers and retailers all state that the food system can be governed via consumer choice aka voting with your fork. This makes the retail food label an important space for contests between different actors who each seek to govern the food system according to their own interests and priorities. The paper argues that this makes it crucial to ‘backwards map’ the regulatory governance networks behind the governance claims staked on food labels. The paper uses the example of the contested meaning of ‘free-range’ claims on animal products in Australia to propose and illustrate a methodology for this backwards mapping.


Christine Parker
Christine Parker is a Professor of Law at Monash University, Melbourne Australia. She conducts socio-legal research on business regulation enforcement and compliance and lawyer ethics. Her books include The Open Corporation (2002), Explaining Compliance (edited with Vibeke Nielsen, 2011), and Inside Lawyers Ethics (with Adrian Evans, 2014).
Artikel

The need for an integrated comparison of the effectiveness of international sustainable forestry, coffee and cocoa initiatives

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2014
Trefwoorden effectiveness, private sustainability standards, certification, FSC, UTZ Certified
Auteurs Martijn Scheltema
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    To date the effectiveness of private sustainability standards has been assessed from different angles which attribute different meanings to effectiveness. This contribution compares the effectiveness of two international certification initiatives (i.e. sustainable forestry (Forest Stewardship Council, FSC) and sustainable coffee and cacoa (UTZ Certified)) from three different angles (legal, impact, acceptance/legitimacy/governance). Based on publicly available data, it is shown that FSC scores better on some dimensions of these three angles (e.g. enforcement, cost and price premium, and government acceptance), while UTZ Certified scores better on others (e.g. verifiable evaluation criteria, regular evaluation, innovation). Hence, this analysis shows that a comparative evaluation of both initiatives would have been biased if it would have been based on a single angle approach. There is all the more reason to use such an integrated approach, since the different angles are intertwined. Therefore, it has been established that in order to establish the effectiveness of private certification initiatives an integrated approach is needed which combines different angles. This contribution shows such an approach is feasible.


Martijn Scheltema
Martijn Scheltema is professor at Erasmus University Rotterdam (the Netherlands). He researches the effectiveness of international private regulation in the CSR arena. He is board member of ACCESS Facility (www.accessfacility.org.) Beside this, he is board member of the CSR committee of the International Bar Association and attorney at law/partner with Pels Rijcken & Droogleever Fortuijn (The Hague, the Netherlands).
Artikel

Loyaliteit binnen de rechterlijke macht

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden judiciary, loyalty, judges, new public management, socialisation
Auteurs Nina Holvast en Nienke Doornbos
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Judges in the Netherlands have recently expressed their concerns in the media over the organization of the judiciary and the pressure to deliver output. At the same time, they consider themselves highly loyal to their work. In this article we explore this seeming contradiction by studying the developments in the selection, training and organisation of the judiciary and considering the consequences that these developments could have on the loyalty of judges. In doing so, a distinction is made between loyalty to the profession, to the organisation and to colleagues. We follow Hirschman's theory on Exit, Voice and Loyalty and determine that the act of judges expressing their concerns (instead of exiting the judiciary) is essentially a sign of their loyalty. However, we reason that this displays more loyalty to the profession than to the organisation. Due to changes in the selection and training of judges, more candidates who were formerly employed in other settings, e.g. in advocacy, will enter the profession. With their socialisation taking place in a more business-like setting, where values such as efficiency and productivity are significant, it is expected that they will be more willing to accept the new public management values which are criticized by the present generation of judges.


Nina Holvast
Nina Holvast is promovenda bij het Paul Scholten Centrum van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Zij schrijft een rechtssociologisch proefschrift naar de rol van juridische ondersteuning in het rechterlijk besluitvormingsproces. Over dit onderwerp verschijnt binnenkort: ‘Considering the consequences of increased reliance on judicial assistants: a study on Dutch courts’ in International Journal of the Legal Profession.

Nienke Doornbos
Nienke Doornbos is universitair docent en onderzoeker bij de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Zij doceert de minor Rechtswetenschappelijk onderzoek en het vak Recht en menselijk gedrag. Haar onderzoek richt zich onder meer op organisatorische kanten van rechterlijke besluitvorming en op toezicht en tuchtrecht binnen de advocatuur.
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.