Zoekresultaat: 3 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid x Jaar 2012 x
Praktijk

De case van het rookverbod in de horeca

Instrumentele en normatieve nalevingsmotieven van horecaondernemers

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden compliance, motivational postures, smoking ban
Auteurs Willem Bantema
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Research on (self-reported) compliance has focused on instrumental explanations like deterrence and other rational choice based calculations. In my text, the focus will be on my operationalization of the normative explanation: motivational postures (an idea developed by Valerie Braithwaite). Motivational postures are clusters of compliance motivations in which the degree of agreement with the rules and the degree of agreement with the regulator have been integrated. Theoretically, there are five different postures. Motivational postures are applied in research in Australia to the contexts of taxing, nursing homes, safety and environmental regulation, but have never been applied to the context of a smoking ban. The motivational postures have been tested in a pilot study. First results of this study revealed that four of the five postures were based on valid and reliable measures. Finally, these motivational postures have a high explanatory value in the analysis on self-reported compliance, even when controlled for instrumental explanations.


Willem Bantema
Willem Bantema is in 2010 afgestudeerd als socioloog. Vanaf 1 januari 2011 is hij werkzaam als promovendus bij de vakgroep Rechtstheorie, Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Daar onderzoekt hij motieven van horecaondernemers bij het (niet) naleven van het rookverbod. Willem Bantema is gespecialiseerd in kwantitatief onderzoek.
Artikel

Juridische verkaveling van publieke taken: een historische vergelijking van dijkonderhoud en re-integratietaken

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden allotment, legal continuity, work reintegration, collective action
Auteurs Robert Knegt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Netherlands the task of reintegrating partially disabled workers into the labour market, that used to be accomplished by collective institutions, has been redistributed by the government to private actors: those who were the last to employ these workers. It is pointed out that this policy choice implies reusing a medieval legal technique and that its use regenerates typical legitimacy problems. Building on Ostrom’s theory of ‘institutions for collective action’, a historical comparison of the organization of dyke maintenance in the Dutch bog peat areas of the 11th-13th centuries and of these recent policies reveals that both are to be analysed in terms of a ‘double allotment’: duties as to collective tasks are allotted to individual participants in a collectivity by linking them up with a preceding allotment of usage rights, legally formalized in terms of ‘private law’. While neoliberal ideology may account for the direction that recent reintegration policies have taken, it is only in the Netherlands that this legal technique has to such an extent been mobilized. This observation raises questions as to long-term continuities in Dutch policies.


Robert Knegt
Robert Knegt is als directeur onderzoek verbonden aan het Hugo Sinzheimer Instituut, centrum voor onderzoek van ‘arbeid en recht’ aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Hij doet daar onderzoek naar de praktijk van arbeidsrechtelijke regelingen (ontslagrecht, flexwerk, arbeidstijden) en werkt aan een bij uitstek interdisciplinair project over ‘langetermijnontwikkelingen in de regulering van arbeid’. In 2008 verscheen The employment contract as an exclusionary device (Antwerp/Oxford/Portland: Intersentia).
Praktijk

Securing legal certainty within a multilevel regulatory space

Evidence from the regulatory practice of marketing authorisation of medical devices in Europe

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden legal certainty, multilevel regulation, regulatory space
Auteurs Nupur Chowdhury
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    One of the primary functions of law is to ensure that the legal structure governing all social relations is predictable, coherent, consistent and applicable. All these characteristics of law are referred to as legal certainty. In traditional approaches to legal certainty, law is regarded as a hierarchic system of rules characterised by stability, clarity, predictability, uniformity, calculable enforcement, publicity and predictability.1xWeber 1925, p. 68. Others like Llewellyn have underlined the importance of appellate courts in ensuring legal certainty by filling up gaps in the law.2xLlewellyn 1960. Also see, Stinchcombe 1999. Such traditional approaches to legal certainty were developed within the context of national legal orders, in which rule making, rule enforcement and rule adjudication authority vested within public actors functioning as representatives of the state.

Noten

  • 1 Weber 1925, p. 68.

  • 2 Llewellyn 1960. Also see, Stinchcombe 1999.


Nupur Chowdhury
Nupur Chowdhury is doctoral fellow at the Law and Regulation Group, School of Management and Governance, University of Twente.
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.