Nanotechnologie als Herausforderung für die Rechtsordnung

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

合同诈骗罪犯罪构成若干问题探析

目前,无论从理论还是司法实践来看,对合同诈骗罪的认定依然存在众多疑难之处.合同诈骗罪中的"合同"应界定为:由<中华人民共和国合同法>所调整,以实现一定经济利益为目的,能够直接体现和影响市场经济秩序的双务合同.对合同诈骗罪"以其他方法骗取对方当事人财物"的理解,必须符合刑法所限定的构成合同诈骗罪的基本特征;对"单位"的认定应正确把握刑法的立法原意并坚持实事求是的原则;该罪的主观方面为直接故意,且具有非法占有他人财物的目的,间接故意不应成为其罪过形式.     

Book Reviews

Ben Agger, Fast Capitalism: A Critical Theory of Significance (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1989), 191 pp.

Donna Haraway, Simians, Cyborgs, and Women, 1991, New York: Routledge, ISBN 0–415–90387–4

Timothy W. Luke, Screens of Power. Ideology, Domination, and Resistance in Informational Society: (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1989), pp. 265.

Andre Gorz, Critique of Economic Reason. London: Verso. 1989. pp. 250.     

Why Anticorruption Reforms Fail—Systemic Corruption as a Collective Action Problem

With an increased awareness of the detrimental effects of corruption on development, strategies to fight it are now a top priority in policy circles. Yet, in countries ridden with systemic corruption, few successes have resulted from the investment. On the basis of an interview study conducted in Kenya and Uganda—two arguably typically thoroughly corrupt countries—we argue that part of an explanation to why anticorruption reforms in countries plagued by widespread corruption fail is that they are based on a theoretical mischaracterization of the problem of systemic corruption. More specifically, the analysis reveals that while contemporary anticorruption reforms are based on a conceptualization of corruption as a principal–agent problem, in thoroughly corrupt settings, corruption rather resembles a collective action problem. This, in turn, leads to a breakdown of any anticorruption reform that builds on the principal–agent framework, taking the existence of noncorruptible so‐called principals for granted.     

Foreclosing on the American dream? The financial consequences of low-income homeownership

Federal programs have consistently encouraged ever-lower-income households to buy homes, despite concerns about the long-term sustainability and desirability of homeownership from the perspective of wealth-building, especially since the recent housing market collapse and the epidemic of mortgage foreclosures. We ask in this paper: can very low-income households build wealth through sustainable homeownership, with the aid of an innovative public program? We answer this question by examining 122 very low-income households who purchased their homes between 1996 and 2007 after completing an extensive asset-building and homeownership education/counseling program offered by the Housing Authority of the City and County of Denver (DHA), called HOP. We analyze our own longitudinal surveys and focus groups, as well as data compiled from administrative agency sources, real estate records, and longitudinal census data from the Neighborhood Change Database and the Piton Foundation's Neighborhood Facts Database. We find that homeownership attained through HOP typically did provide very low-income households with opportunities to build home equity (both absolutely and relative to generic homeowner cohorts in Denver) and net wealth, although this was contingent on time of purchase and ethnicity. Our multivariate analyses revealed that changes in annualized home equity appreciation were associated with the ethnic composition of the neighborhood and age of property. Annualized wealth accumulation was associated with annualized home equity appreciation, being married throughout the tenure of homeownership, and year of home purchase. HOP homebuyers received exceptionally favorable initial mortgage terms and conditions, often enhanced with down-payment assistance from their own DHA escrow account or from local housing and neighborhood development organizations, resulting in a dramatically low rate of default and foreclosure to date. Moreover, HOP homebuyers were not immune to financial stresses, and the continuing lack of wealth for many makes them vulnerable to future interruptions in primary wage earner's employment or health. We discuss the implications for low-income homeownership policy and argue that the goal of expanding homeownership opportunities should not be abandoned.