Invasive Neobiota – neue Herausforderung im Umweltrecht

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

German Supreme Court stands firm on liability for unjustified warning letters

In one of its very rare decisions, the Grand Senate of the GermanSupreme Court has ruled that intellectual property right ownersface damages claims if they issue warning letters in cases wherethere is no infringement and the claim has been brought at leastnegligently, thus putting an end to the tendency in some Germancourts—including the First Senate of the German SupremeCourt itself—to lessen the liability of senders of unjustifiedwarning letters.     

Coalition Prospects and Policy Change: An Application to the Environment

In most developed democracies, parties adjust their positions to polls and public opinion. Yet, in a coalition government, the policy that emerges is often the outcome of negotiations between governing parties. We argue that the credibility of exit threats by current coalition members and the importance of outside parties for the formation of potential alternative coalitions both matter for policy adoption. Building on a new data set measuring the expected coalition‐inclusion probabilities of parties in parliamentary democracies, we estimate the effect of coalition prospects on an important policy outcome—environmental policy stringency—in nine European countries between 1990 and 2012. Our findings demonstrate that only polling shifts that alter coalition probabilities affect outcomes. Changes in the coalition‐inclusion probability of green parties—regardless of whether they are in government—predict changes in the environmental policy stringency of sitting governments. Political polls, in contrast, do not.     

Anhängige Klagen vor dem Europäischen Gerichtshof

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Do Poor Citizens Vote for Redistribution,Against Immigration or Against the Establishment? A Conjoint Experiment in Denmark

What is the link between socioeconomic disadvantage and vote choice? The literature on this question is fragmented and points to motivations based on welfare policy, immigration policy or anti‐establishment sentiments. To test which of these motives explains differences in voting behaviour between classes, a conjoint experiment in which fictitious candidates present randomly assigned positions was designed. The experiment evaluated the relative importance of the position on welfare, immigration and anti‐establishment as well as candidates’ occupational background. By splitting the analyses into lower, middle‐ and upper class voters, it was found that lower class voters are most distinct from other voters in their preferences for anti‐establishment candidates. Strikingly, lower class voters even support welfare retrenchment, as long as it is an anti‐establishment candidate proposing it. The experiment also found a general tendency to vote against career politicians across classes and remarkably few differences regarding immigration preferences.