As a reaction to the perceived enforcement deficit of criminal law in the field of drug control, several countries implemented alternative regulatory strategies. One such strategy is the reregulating drugs, especially cannabis. Another strategy is the use of civil or administrative law to address drug-related crime. Especially the use of eviction to combat drug activities has become increasingly popular.
My PhD research focuses on these two developments within the field of drug control. More specifically, on the underlying rationales for the policies on recreational cannabis, the possibilities that international law provide to regulate recreational cannabis, the legal protection against drug-related evictions, and the explanation for the use of eviction to fight drug-related activities.

This PhD project uses a mixed method design to study perceived procedural justice among defendants in Dutch single-judge criminal cases. To find out whether defendants are concerned with perceived procedural justice and to get a better grasp on the concept, the first empirical project reviewed here is an interview study among defendants conducted in 2017. In this study, defendants were interviewed after their court hearings about perceived procedural justice during their court hearings. The second empirical project, which started in January 2019, zooms in on experiences of defendants with a non-western migration background. Using a questionnaire, I examine whether and how perceived everyday discrimination affects defendants’ perceptions of and reactions to procedural justice during their court hearings. I am currently designing a third empirical study, which entails a scenario experiment among people with a non-western migration background. I plan to manipulate the level of perceived procedural justice during a hypothetical court hearing to examine its influence on, for instance, people’s trust in judges, and again assess whether people’s reactions to perceived procedural justice differ depending on their levels of perceived everyday discrimination. At the end of my dissertation, I plan to connect the empirical findings to the legal domain by assessing possible normative implications.

There is little known on settlement negotiations during civil lawsuits in the Netherlands. Settlement negotiations take place during a (suspension of the) public court hearing. The public hearing takes place in the majority of the civil lawsuits in the Netherlands. The qualitative empirical research I am carrying out, intents to give insight in these settlement negotiations and questions what lawyers actually do during these negotiations. The research intents to contribute to the effectiveness of settlement negotiations in the sense that (i) the number of settlements increases and of compulsory settlements decreases, (ii) the perceived fairness of procedure and outcome in settled cases increases, and (iii) the number of resolved underlying conflicts increases.
I expect to find that most settlement negotiations can be qualified as distributive negotiations (as opposed to integrative negotiations). Furthermore, based on a literature review on biases and heuristics I hypothesized that settlement could be more effective than they actually are. The paper touches on the methodology and on both hypotheses.

If someone disagrees with an administrative order, he or she has to lodge an objection with the administrative authority responsible for the order. Only after the administrative authority has fully reconsidered the contested order is the interested party allowed to seek redress with the administrative courts. Estimates are that around 2.6 million objections are filled each year, making the administrative objection procedure the most frequently used dispute resolution procedure in the Netherlands. Numerous variations can be found in the way administrative authorities handle objections. Does this affect how professional users evaluate its quality? And if so, how can this be explained?

Many scholars interpreted the lifting of the ban on brothels in 2000 (often called the legalization of prostitution) in The Netherlands, as a sign that selling sex was no longer deemed morally objectionable. Governing prostitution thus became primarily a technical matter of government. A task that, for a large part, was delegated to municipalities. However, nearly two decades later, the debate surrounding prostitution (policy) is still characterized by its moral tone of voice, and we lack insight into the strategies and techniques deployed by local governments. This raises two important questions. First, what actually happens in legalized local prostitution markets? Extant research, focusses too much on (changes in) national policy, and too little on what key actors (such as municipalities) are actually doing in local prostitution markets. Second, what is the role of moral aspects? When local actors are studied, insufficient attention is paid to the influence of moral issues. My PhD research addresses these two questions, by looking at the relationship between moral beliefs surrounding prostitution and the way in which local governments attempt to stabilize or change the modus operandi of a local prostitution market. It develops a theoretical framework combining field theory and Foucauldian governmentality concepts, and tries to shed light on the broader theme of the relation between morality and governing in late modern times.

Liability insurances shift the financial risk of the loss of a damage from the person who is liable for the damage to the liability insurer. To avoid negligent behavior of the insured, the insurer provides different prevention tools in the insurance policy. The insurer will attach certain sanctions or rewards to certain behavior and certain circumstances in the general conditions of the insurance contract. This research raises the question of the effectiveness of these instruments. The hypothesis is that without knowledge of the insured of these sanctions or rewards, these sanctions and rewards will not form an additional incentive for careful behavior and they will have no preventive effect. Additionally, these prevention tools may undermine the protection of the insured. For this reason the legislature has limited the freedom of contract. This study examines the extent to which the legislature has limited the possibilities of the insurer to provide in prevention tools in de insurance policy. It assesses the extent to which the legislature may or may not succeed in its purpose to protect the insured, and on the other hand, where there are still possibilities for the insurer to fulfill its prevention task.

The Dutch social security is mainly conducted by municipalities (social services), the Dutch Employment Insurance Agencies (UWV) and the Social Insurance Bank (SVB). In order to explore to what extent agents adjust their enforcement style, as stated in the responsive regulation approach (Ayres & Braithwaite), five case studies will be conducted; three studies at social services and two studies at Employment Insurance Agencies.
During this field research I will attend every agency for two months. I will be observing the behavior of agents during their contact moments with beneficiaries. At the same time I will ask for comments on events, opinions and feelings regarding various aspects of the work. I will also conduct in-depth interviews with several agents and beneficiaries. Based on a sample I will make a selection of enforcement cases and I will analyze agreements on enforcement, regulation, directives, guidelines and recommendations.

Over the last two decades, there has been a growing interest in the development and implementation of knowledge management systems. In the judicial context, these knowledge management systems are designed to support judges in the decision-making process by providing them with the knowledge that they need in order to deal with doubts or uncertainties in complex cases. However, less attention has been given to the related process of knowledge sharing between judges. In order to optimally benefit from the knowledge available in the organization, this process should be better understood and acted upon. The aim of this research project is to gain a better insight into the interactive process of knowledge sharing between judges. To this end, a research model has been developed which will be quantitatively tested on the basis of survey responses from judges.