Zoekresultaat: 15 artikelen

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

Warnings and product liability

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2012
Auteurs Bert Niemeijer

Bert Niemeijer

Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is writing his PhD at the Erasmus School of Law at the University of Rotterdam. He concerns himself with the regulation of air pollution and other environmental problems from a social constructivist and discourse analytic perspective.
Redactioneel

Introduction

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2012
Auteurs Rob Schwitters en Bert Niemeijer
Auteursinformatie

Rob Schwitters
Rob Schwitters is associate professor (sociology of law) and member of the Paul Scholten Centre (University of Amsterdam). He publishes on tort law, responsibility and liability, the welfare state, compliance and methodological issues.

Bert Niemeijer
Bert Niemeijer is part-time professor of sociology of law at the VU University of Amsterdam and coordinator of strategy development at the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice. His research interests concern family law, evaluation of law, the social working of rules and courts, trust and confidence in law and courts and the development of legal disputes.

    Visscher gives an overview of the empirical research on the deterrent effects of tort law within the domain of traffic accidents. An impressive amount of law and economics research has been done in the last few decades. This has resulted in special attention for the deterrent effects of the financial incentives which are embedded in various legal systems. Contradictory empirical evidence motivates Visscher to reflect on methodological issues. A major shortcoming of most studies is that the dependent and independent variables are not properly defined and distinguished. Another difficulty is to properly assess the influence of the introduction of the no-fault system on incentives: no-fault not only implies that the prevalence of the tort-system is more-or-less marginalised, but also that it transforms the extent to which the damages of those injured are covered by insurances in various ways. It is not easy to isolate both factors properly. Nevertheless, Visscher finds enough support in the empirical evidence to conclude that, without added financial deterrence incentives, no-fault schemes are likely to lead to increased accident rates, more injuries and more fatalities.


Louis Visscher
Louis Visscher is associate professor in law and economics at the Rotterdam Institute of Law and Economics (RILE) of the Erasmus School of Law. He has studied both economics and law (cum laude) at the Erasmus University Rotterdam, where he also wrote a PhD dissertation on ‘An economic analysis of Dutch tort law’. Louis has published articles and book chapters in the area of the economic analysis of tort law, the law of damages, causation in tort law, insurance, contract law and law enforcement.
Artikel

Medical liability: do doctors care?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2012
Auteurs Ben C.J. van Velthoven en Peter W. van Wijck
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Van Velthoven and Van Wijck review empirical studies on the effects of tort law in the medical sector. The data they present comes mainly from the US, because from the 1970’s US states have enacted a variety of reforms in their tort systems. This variation has provided very useful data to study preventive effects. The empirical evidence analysed shows that medical malpractice risk affects the behaviour of health care providers. It has a negative impact on the supply of services and it encourages extra diagnostic testing;yet if the additional tests and procedures have any value, it is only a marginal one. Furthermore it has been found that changes in the supply of services do not affect health adversely. This suggests that the physicians who are driven out of business have a below average quality of performance. The authors conclude that, at the margin, medical liability law may have some social benefits after all.


Ben C.J. van Velthoven
Ben van Velthoven is associate professor of law and economics at Leiden University. His research interests are: liability issues, civil litigation, and criminal law enforcement.

Peter W. van Wijck
Peter van Wijck is associate professor of law and economics at Leiden University and coordinator strategy development at the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice. His research interests concern tort law, contract law, civil litigation, and crime.
Artikel

Non-pecuniary damages: financial incentive or symbol?

Comparing an economic and a sociological account of tort law

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2012
Auteurs Rob Schwitters
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Schwitters focuses on the differences between economic and a sociological perspectives on non-pecuniary damages. By exposing the alternative perspectives on this issue, he illuminates some methodological differences between both disciplines. Although law and economics has had a positive influence on empirical research, he questions the merits of this perspective when analysing non-pecuniary damages. Law and economics regards non-pecuniary damages exclusively as a financial incentive to realise optimal deterrence and maximisation of welfare. Alternatively, in sociology of law there is also attention for the symbolic dimension of law in which rules are seen as normative standards of behaviour. Compensation is a way to bring the wrongdoer to recognise that he has done wrong and has to compensate the victim, and to show the victim that his rights are taken seriously. Through a sociological lens, the adoption of an exclusively economic model of human behaviour has to be questioned. To what extent human behaviour is really influenced by either financial incentives or by normative standards of behaviour is an open empirical question. Finally, he argues that the decision to base our institutions (such as law) on economic underpinnings is a decision which itself cannot be based on an economic procedure of aggregating individual preferences and maximising welfare.


Rob Schwitters
Rob Schwitters is associate professor (sociology of law) and member of the Paul Scholten Centre (University of Amsterdam). He publishes on tort law, responsibility and liability, the welfare state, compliance and methodological issues.
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).

    In this feature authors review recently published books on subjects of interest to readers of Recht der Werkelijkheid.


Nicolle Zeegers
Nicolle Zeegers is universitair docent politicologie bij de vakgroep Rechtstheorie, Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. In haar onderzoek richt zij zich op vraagstukken over invloed en macht in de totstandkoming en toepassing van wetgeving. Onlangs publiceerde zij over dit onderwerp in Recht en Methode en in Legisprudence.
Discussie

Erasmus Law College: active academic learning

Met recht goed onderwijs

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden legal education, Erasmus Law College, problem based learning, academic learning
Auteurs Suzan Stoter
Auteursinformatie

Suzan Stoter
Suzan Stoter is als hoogleraar rechtssociologie verbonden aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, waar ze enige jaren daarvoor als postdoc rechtssociologie heeft gewerkt. Momenteel is ze fulltime werkzaam als onderwijsdecaan om de invoering van het vernieuwende programma van het Erasmus Law College, dat de komende drie jaar per bachelorjaar wordt uitgerold, zo goed mogelijk te kunnen begeleiden.
Artikel

Cultuur en werkstijlen van private beveiligers: een vergelijking met politiecultuur

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden private security, police culture, private security culture, stress-coping model of police culture
Auteurs Jan Terpstra
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    To what extent do private security workers have a culture that is comparable to the police culture? To what extent can such a private security culture be explained by the use of the so-mentioned stress-coping model of police culture? This comparative survey of a sample of private security workers and a sample of police officers shows that contrary to popular assumptions of increasing similarities between police and private security cultures, in reality there are important differences. Private security workers have a much stronger focus on service tasks than police officers and are less oriented to crime fighting. The stress factors that contribute to a stronger police culture, can also contribute to a similar culture in private security. However, because these stress factors are much less prominent in private security, it may be assumed that such a police-like culture is almost absent among private security workers.


Jan Terpstra
Jan Terpstra is hoogleraar criminologie aan de Radboud Universiteit te Nijmegen.
Artikel

Burgerschap en niet-statelijk recht: een reconstructie

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden cities, citizenship, exclusion, social formations
Auteurs Robert Knegt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In recent discussions on ‘citizenship’, the concept is oddly dealt with as if it would have originated shortly before the French Revolution and would have meaning in a nation state context only. During at least seven centuries before that, however, it had a crucial importance in the development of Western-European cities. Citizenship, being primarily based on an exclusion from the jurisdiction of local rulers (privilege) which then opens opportunities for the inclusion of citizens in systems of self-rule, has been closely connected with law as from the start. In the article a model developed by Sassen (2006) is used to reconstruct the development of ‘citizenship’ with special reference to the transfer of its elements, often with a considerable change of meaning and function, from one into the other of the four social formations to be distinguished. It is argued that an extended perspective, that acknowledges citizenship and law before its usurpation by the nation state, may be relevant to our assessment of recent developments towards ‘transnational’ forms of citizenship.


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).

    In this feature authors review recently published books on subjects of interest to readers of Recht der Werkelijkheid.


Ashley Terlouw
Ashley Terlouw is hoogleraar Rechtssociologie aan de Radboud Universiteit te Nijmegen. Zij publiceert op het gebied van gelijke behandeling, rechtspleging en migratierecht. Voor haar oratie, getiteld angst en regelgeving (Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers 2009) onderzocht zij de sociale werking van de Nederlandse Sanctieregeling Iran, die Iraniërs de toegang ontzegt tot nucleaire instellingen en tot opleidingen aan Nederlandse universiteiten waarbij zij in aanraking kunnen komen met nucleaire informatie.

Emma Cohen de Lara
Emma Cohen de Lara is universitair docent politieke theorieën aan het Amsterdam University College. In haar onderzoek houdt ze zich bezig met burgerschap en met het thema vormend academisch onderwijs (liberal education).
Artikel

Burgerschap en inburgering

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden citizenship, republicanism, communitarianism, naturalization policy
Auteurs Roland Pierik
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Citizenship is a notoriously complex and an essentially contested concept which has been defined in many different ways. The only stable element in all these definitions seems to be that citizenship is primarily described in terms of the relationship between the political community and the citizen. This article aims to explain why citizenship is such a contested concept by showing that it is embedded in three very different normative traditions: the liberal conception of citizenship as a (legal) status, the republican conception of citizenship as an activity and the communitarian conception of citizenship as identity. Each approach emphasizes an important element of citizenship, but none of the three is comprehensive enough to provide a complete picture of what citizenship implies in contemporary constitutional democracies. At the same time they cannot simply be merged because they come from different normative traditions among themselves at odds with each other.This article starts by illustrating the three conceptions of citizenship on the basis of the underlying theoretical models: liberalism, republicanism and communitarianism. Section 3 discusses two mutual tensions between different conceptions of citizenship: first between the liberal and republican conception and then between the liberal and republican conception on the one hand and the communitarian conception on the other. In Section 4, this conceptual analysis is used to analyze a policy terrain that is explicitly embedded in the idea of citizenship, namely the integration of immigrants through naturalization policy. Section 5 concludes.


Roland Pierik
Roland Pierik is universitair hoofddocent rechtstheorie aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Hij werkt op het gebied van hedendaagse liberale politieke theorie, toegepast op discussies van de multiculturele samenleving, integratiebeleid en internationale rechtvaardigheid. In 2010 is een door hem geredigeerde bundel over het kosmopolitisme en internationaal recht gepubliceerd door Cambridge University Press. Recent verschenen artikelen van hem in Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, Journal of Social Philosophy, Ethics & International Affairs, Political Studies en Ethnicities.
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.