如何科学解读《刑法修正案（八）》第6条？——兼与陈金林同志商榷

修正后的刑法第65条“但书”规定中“过失犯罪”的表述之后是否存在“的”字,并不会导致“犯罪”与“犯罪分子”的区别;刑法第65条的“但书”对“前罪”和“后罪”均起限制作用,而不是“不满十八周岁的人犯罪的除外”的表述对“前罪”和“后罪”均有限制作用,但“过失犯罪除外”的表述仅对“后罪”有限制作用.另外,要正确把握“累犯的本质”和“累犯从重处罚的依据”这两个概念的内涵.     

Vollstreckung ausländischer Strafentscheidungen

Der Zweck des im Zuge der Vollstreckungsübernahme vorgesehenen Exequaturverfahrens ist darin gelegen, die Vollstreckung ausl?ndischer strafgerichtlicher Entscheidungen im Inland auch bei jeweils unterschiedlichen Strafen(systemen) durch eine allenfalls erforderliche Anpassung an das ?sterreichische Sanktionensystem und die inl?ndischen Strafbemessungsgrunds?tze zu erm?glichen. Dabei ist die in ?sterreich zu vollstreckende Strafe unter weitestgehender Bedachtnahme auf die im Urteilsstaat verh?ngte Sanktion zu bestimmen; dies unter Bindung an die Sachverhaltsfeststellungen im Erkenntnis des Urteilsstaates sowie unter Berücksichtigung des Schlechterstellungsverbots.     

University–Industry Linkage Framework to Identify Opportunity Areas

Although there are many studies of the collaboration between academia and industry in developed countries explaining the phenomenon and prescribing best practices, the findings cannot be extrapolated to developing countries. This article fills the gap by studying these interactions for the case of Mexico. To study these interactions, we performed a state‐of‐the‐art matrix analysis to obtain internal, structural, and environmental factors from literature. Then, an interpretative structural framework was built as a model to identify opportunities in the collaboration process. The results are presented in a map that describes how each element influences the others and highlights opportunities for improvement. The model shows that industry triggers collaboration and presents a highly complex internal organization for the academy. This study helps decision makers in government, the academy, and industry to understand the elements and how the system works to develop strategies that promote more effective collaboration.     

新生儿CYP1A1、GSTM1、GSTT1基因多态性分布的研究

目的:研究新生儿CYP1A1、GSTM1、GSTT1基因的多态性分布,为新生儿建立相应基因型记录,达到防病治病的目的。方法:收集新生儿脐血,抽提其中有核细胞的DNA,PCR扩增CYP1A1、GSTM1、GSTT1基因的特征性外显子片段。限制酶切CYP1A1扩增产物,RFLP分析每个标本的基因型;非变性聚丙稀酰胺凝胶电泳分析GSTM1、GSTT1的基因型。结果:CYP1A1、GSTM1和GSTT1基因型均成多态性分布,CYP1A1的基因型分布有3种,分别为A/A基因型占51·8%、A/G基因型占43.7%、G/G基因型占4.5%;GSTM1的基因型有2种分别为GSTM1 / 和GSTM1 /0占86.7%、GSTM1-/-占13·3%。GSTT1基因型分布为GSTT1 / 和GSTT1 /0占76.1%,GSTT10/0为23.9%结论在正常出生的新生儿中,他(她)们的代谢酶CYP1A1、GSTM1、GSTT1基因存在着多态性分布的现象。     

中国人p33.6位点的扩增片段长度多态性

用PCR、小型聚丙烯酰胺凝胶电泳和银染法对小卫星区域p33.6(D1S111)位点的扩增片段长度多态性(Amp—FLP)进行分析和对100例无关中国人p33.6位点的等位基因频率进行调查及数据处理,发现该位点核心序列重复数从9到22之间的全部14个等位基因,片段长度分布于435～925bp之间,基因频率为0.5～35.5％,杂合度为76％。对6个家系共22名相关个体进行分析,符合孟德尔遗传定律;对人体各种不同组织DNA进行该位点的分析,显示出高度的一致性。该位点适用于法医学上的个人识别以及亲子鉴定。     

Economic and Sociological Approaches To Institutions: Economy, Society And Law

Examined in this paper are some important paradigmatic differences between novel economic institutionalism as espoused by the new institutional economics and sociological institutionalism as advanced by economic sociology. Just as the old and the new institutional economics, economic institutionalism and sociological institutionalism display important differences in their assumptions, domains and methodologies. The paper also takes a look at the possibility for multidisciplinary integration, in a multiple-paradigm approach, of economic and sociological institutionalism, particularly law and economics (economic analysis of law) and law and society (sociology of law) literatures, in these times of interdisciplinary social analysis. Since in the current literature comparative analyses of economic and sociological institutionalism in general, and economic and sociological approaches to legal institutions in particular, are relatively rare, the paper attempts to fill in a gap in this respect.     

On‐Bill Financing Programs to Support Low‐Carbon Energy Technologies: An Agent‐Oriented Assessment

On‐bill financing (OBF) schemes have been welcomed as innovative mechanisms for encouraging the adoption of low‐carbon energy technologies. Yet while the potential effects of these schemes have received growing attention, less is known about their actual performance. Departing from New Institutional Economics and insights from Behavioral Economics, this theory‐driven assessment examines the How$mart^® program in Kansas (United States) and the Green Deal in the United Kingdom. The study identifies the mechanisms designed to trigger behavioral change and technology adoption. We focus on market agents, and related market failures and behavioral anomalies that often prevent energy efficiency improvements. The paper adds to our theoretical and empirical understanding of public and utility‐driven OBF programs applied to the residential sector. Our findings suggest that simple, carefully designed on‐bill programs, where the financing of efficient technologies takes the form of a service rather than a loan, are more effective for the diffusion of low‐carbon energy technology and the reduction of transaction costs. At the same time, on bill‐financing schemes challenge the core business of utilities, and given the complexities and dynamics of energy efficiency markets and energy use, other policy interventions are needed.     

Agenda‐Setting at the Energy‐Water Nexus: Constructing and Maintaining a Policy Monopoly in U.S. Hydraulic Fracturing Regulation

Despite calls to increase federal oversight of hydraulic fracturing (HF), the U.S. Congress has maintained a regulatory system in which environmental regulatory authority is devolved to the states. We argue that this system is characterized by a long‐standing “policy monopoly”: a form of stability in policy agenda‐setting in which a specific manner of framing and regulating a policy issue becomes hegemonic. Integrating theories on agenda‐setting and environmental discourse analysis, we develop a nuanced conceptualization of policy monopoly that emphasizes the significance of regulatory history, public perceptions, industry–government relations, and environmental “storylines.” We evaluate how a policy monopoly in U.S. HF regulation has been constructed and maintained through a historical analysis of oil and gas regulation and a discourse analysis of eleven select congressional energy committee hearings. This research extends scholarship on agenda‐setting by better illuminating the importance of political economic and geographic factors shaping regulatory agendas and outcomes.