Zoekresultaat: 9 artikelen

x
Jaar 2012 x
Artikel

Zijn veiligheidshuizen effectief?

Een onderzoek naar de stand van zaken

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 4 2012
Trefwoorden Safety Houses, network effectiveness, governance, crime prevention, QCA
Auteurs Remco Mannak, Hans Moors en Jörg Raab
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Netherlands ‘Safety Houses’ have been established, in which partner organizations in the field of criminal justice, crime prevention, law enforcement, public administration and social services collaborate in order to reduce crime and recidivism, and to increase public safety. This article examines why some Safety Houses are better in achieving these goals than others. The effectiveness of 39 Safety Houses is analyzed by means of QCA (qualitative comparative analysis). Results show two different paths leading to effective outcomes. Effective Safety Houses have been in existence for at least three years, show a high degree of stability and a centrally integrated collaboration structure. In addition, they either have considerable resources at their disposal or have been set up with a network administrative organization, where a neutral coordinator governs the network.


Remco Mannak
Remco Mannak MA MSC is promovendus aan het departement organisatiewetenschappen van Tilburg University. E-mail: r.s.mannak@uvt.nl

Hans Moors
Drs. Hans Moors is hoofd van de afdeling Veiligheid & criminaliteit, welzijn & zorg van IVA Beleidsonderzoek en Advies (Tilburg University). E-mail: j.a.moors@uvt.nl

Jörg Raab
Dr. Jörg Raab is universitair docent aan het departement Organisatiewetenschappen van Tilburg University.

Mr. A.J.J.P.B.M. Kersten
Mr. A.J.J.P.B.M. Kersten is (parttime) senior manager bij Ernst & Young en promovendus aan de Erasmus School of Law.

Dr. T.E. Lambooy
Dr. T.E. Lambooy is universitair docent aan de Rechtenfaculteit van de Universiteit Utrecht en Associate Professor Center for Sustainability aan de Nyenrode Business Universiteit.
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

Access_open Exciting Times for Legal Scholarship

Tijdschrift Law and Method, 2012
Trefwoorden legal methodology, law as an academic discipline, ‘law and …’-movements, legal theory, innovative and multiform legal scholarship
Auteurs Jan Vranken
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Until recently, legal-dogmatic research stood at the undisputed pinnacle of legal scientific research. The last few years saw increasing criticism, both nationally and internationally, levelled at this type of research or at its dominant role. Some see this as a crisis in legal scholarship, but a closer look reveals a great need for facts, common sense, and nuance. Critics usually base their calls for innovation on a one-dimensional and flawed image of legal-dogmatic research. In this article, the author subsequently addresses the various critical opinions themselves and provide an overview of the innovations that are proposed. He concludes that there are a lot of efforts to innovate legal scholarship, and that the field is more multiform than ever, which is a wonderful and unprecedented state of affairs. This multiformity should be cherished and given plenty of room to develop and grow, because most innovative movements are still fledgling and need time, sometimes a lot of time, to increase in quality. It would be a shame to nip them in the bud now, merely because they are still finding their way. In turn, none of these innovative movements have cause to disqualify legal-dogmatic research, as sometimes happens (implicitly), by first creating a straw-man version of the field and then dismissing it as uninteresting or worse. That only polarises the discussion and gains us nothing. Progress can only be achieved through cooperation, with an open mind towards different types of legal research and a willingness to accept a critical approach towards their development. In the end, the only criterion that matters is quality. All types of research are principally subject to the same quality standards. The author provides some clarification regarding these standards as well.


Jan Vranken
Jan Vranken is hoogleraar Methodologie van het privaatrecht aan de Universiteit van Tilburg.
Artikel

Met biografieën een beter begrip van witteboordencriminaliteit?

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden white-collar crime, corporate crime, biographies, case studies
Auteurs Wim Huisman
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The central question of this article is whether biographies can be a source for criminological research on white-collar crime and how they can contribute to the explanation of white-collar crime. To answer this question, 35 Dutch biographies were studied. Following the legal ambiguities of white-collar crime, not all of these biographies are about criminal offences. And following the dominant anthropomorphic approach to corporate crime, some of these are corporate biographies. Many biographies confirm current criminological explanations of the causation of white-collar crime. Yet, biographies also offer additional insights, for instance about the causal relevance of the private life of white-collar offenders.


Wim Huisman
Prof. dr. Wim Huisman is hoogleraar bij de sectie criminologie van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. E-mail: w.huisman@vu.nl.
Artikel

Pas de deux

De wisselwerking tussen Luxemburgse en Straatsburgse jurisprudentie bij de harmonisatie van het asielrecht

Tijdschrift Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht, Aflevering 3 2012
Auteurs Prof. mr. H. Battjes
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In januari 2011 oordeelde het Europese Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens dat artikel 3 EVRM overdracht van asielzoekers naar Griekenland verbiedt, in december 2011 concludeert het Hof van Justitie dat hetzelfde geldt voor artikel 4 van het Handvest van Grondrechten voor de EU. Met deze uitspraken leggen beide hoven belangrijke onvolkomenheden in het gemeenschappelijk Europees Asielstelsel bloot. In deze bijdrage wordt het voor beide arresten relevante recht geschetst, en de wisselwerking geanalyseerd in de jurisprudentie van het Hof van Justitie en het Europese Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens bij de Europese harmonisatie van het asielrecht.


Prof. mr. H. Battjes
Prof. mr. H. Battjes is hoogleraar Europees asielrecht bij de Faculteit rechtsgeleerdheid aan Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Legal Doctrine As a Non-Normative Discipline

A Refinement of Niiniluoto’s and Aarnio’s Distinction between Norm-Descriptions, Norm-Contentions and Norm-Recommendations

Tijdschrift Law and Method, 2012
Trefwoorden legal doctrine as a science, non-normative discipline, norm-descriptions, norm-contentions, norm-recommendations, Aarnio and Niiniluoto
Auteurs Anne Ruth Mackor
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article, the author argues that legal doctrine is not more normative than other scientific disciplines. This argumentation is built on the claim that the distinction between descriptive and normative statements is too simple to analyze the nature of legal doctrine. In the author’s view, a more detailed analysis of legal statements helps to achieve a better and more accurate characterization of legal doctrine as a science. For this purpose, the author builds on the distinction of Aarnio and Niiniluoto between norm-descriptions, norm-contentions and norm-recommendations. She argues that legal doctrine consists mainly of empirical and non-empirical norm-descriptions and that it can therefore be considered as a non-normative discipline.


Anne Ruth Mackor
Anne Ruth Mackor is professor of professional ethics, in particular of legal professions, at the Faculty of Law and Socrates professor of professional ethics at the Faculties of Theology and Philosophy at the University of Groningen.

Simone Glanert
Senior Lecturer in French and European Comparative Law, Kent Law School, Eliot College, Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NS, UK; S.Glanert@kent.ac.uk. I presented early formulations of this argument at the RELINE Network for Interdisciplinary Studies in Language and the Law Seminar, Faculty of Law, University of Copenhagen, on 25 October 2011; at the Faculté de Droit, Université de Montréal, on 27 January 2012; at the 4th Annual Meeting of the Irish Society of Comparative Law (ISCL), Faculty of Law, University of Cork, on 2 March 2012; and at the Faculté de Droit, Université de Grenoble, on 22 March 2012. I am grateful to Anne Lise Kjær, Jean-Franois Gaudreault-DesBiens, Bénédicte Fuller-Sage and David Dechenaud for their kind expression of interest in my work and generous invitations.

C.M.D.S. Pavillon
Dr. C.M.D.S. (Charlotte) Pavillon is a postdoctoral researcher with the Groningen Centre for Law and Governance, University of Groningen (The Netherlands).
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.