The Impact of Court Delays on the Prosecutor and the Defendant: An Economic Analysis

One important aspect of the economic theory of criminal court delay is to understand how the prosecutor and the defendant make their decisions, and how these respond to changes in trial delay. If both parties jointly maximise expected utility, trial delay may increase or decrease the number of trials, depending upon the decision makers' attitudes towards risk. The main policy implication is that providing the criminal courts with more resources in the form of additional judges and court capacity may lengthen the trial queue rather than shorten it. This is a counterintuitive result contrary to popular belief.     

The ECJ eases the way for comparative advertisers

The ECJ reiterates its support for the comparative advertiserby indicating that common sense is needed to comply with theMisleading Advertising and Comparative Advertising Directive(Directive 97/55).     

Participation,education, and pluralism: towards a new extension ethic

The concern driving current debate on agricultural extension is increasingly that of how to help farmers learn how to deal with the complex world around them responsibly and profitably, in such a way that the extension worker is ancillary. This article seeks to deconstruct and provide a more reasoned assessment of agricultural extension services through a reflection on development paradigms, adult education, individual empowerment, and institutional pluralism. By calling into question the underlying ethical dimensions of agricultural extension, it is possible to develop an alternative paradigm and thereby generate new insights into it. The article concludes that the raison d'être of agricultural extension today must be to create an ethical basis which ensures that extension practices are more inclusive and thus responsive to the needs of farmers and other rural populations, integrating individual expectations into the wider socio-economic, cultural, political, and geographical environment.     

A Reasonable Balance of Law and Sentiment: Social Order in Democratic Taiwan from the Policeman's Point of View

Taiwan's political democratization has engendered a contradiction in its legal regime: consolidation of rule of law at the macro-institutional level is matched by the persistent marginalization of legal authority in ground-level social practices. This article uses an ethnographic study of neighborhood police to explore certain practical and structural elements involved in maintaining this contradictory sociopolitical order. I examine some of the processes through which state authority is invoked and applied to the policing of public space, focusing on the ideals of legitimacy that animate these processes. The argument of the article is that historical and cultural factors embodied in contemporary Taiwan's "idea of police"—exemplified in the trope of a balance between reason, law, and sentiment—are crucial to understanding how solidification of the rule of law within state institutions is kept within the boundaries of a social sensibility that does not take law as the last word.