(Re-)Setting the Scholarly Agenda on Transjudicial Communication

We consider the contributions made by Robert H. Bork's Coercing Virtue (2003) and Anne-Marie Slaughter's A New World Order (2004) to the ongoing debate over the citation of foreign law in United States courts. While empirically minded sociolegal scholars might be tempted to dismiss these books as mere op-eds, that would be a mistake. Taken with the spate of other recent work, they supply the makings of an agenda for rigorous research devoted to understanding the exchange of law among nations.     

The DutchAlgemene Rekenkamer and its role in light of contemporary theory

European Journal of Law and Economics - In this article I try to find answers for three questions: Which functions are exercised by the Court of Audit in the Netherlands, and what kinds of...     

Jurisprudential Dilemmas of European Law

Making a first sketch of philosophical issues arising fromEuropean Community law I want to present a series ofmore or less obvious, and more or less interrelated dilemmas,or even double binds.(i) Deepening the community becomes incompatible withwidening membership. (ii) National states seem bothnecessary for and obstructive in articulating transnationalproblems. (iii) The more democracy is needed as a warrantfor the public exercise of political power in Europe, themore the very concept of democracy on a European scaleevades understanding. (iv) European unity presupposes aunifying rule of law, while member states have radicallydifferent conceptions of this principle. (v) Even the verycore of European integration, the common market, is subjectto two conflicting and, indeed, incompatible doctrines ofcompetition. In explaining the nature of each dilemma I willtry to take my cue from the Maastricht Treaty wherever thisseems suitable. Then I will elaborate on the jurisprudentialproblems involved in it. Finally, each section will be closedby an attempt to state the nature of these problems inphilosophical terms.     

Does management by objectives stifle organizational innovation in the public sector?

Abstract. Does management by objectives stifle organizational innovation in the public sector? The authors explore this possibility by describing five common characteristics of mbo and then contrasting them with four characteristics of innovative organizations. The comparison suggests that mbo -pressures lead to organizational stress that is often resolved by the creation of two working environments; one for the pursuit of innovative objectives, and one for the pursuit of regular objectives. This could lead to dysfunctionalism in the form of abandoned objectives-objectives that might have been achieved if mbo were not used. The authors conclude with four implications for public-sector managers: (1) the practice of including innovation objectives along with traditional objectives in the same set of objectives is questionable; (2) broader objectives, perhaps pointing in the general direction of the innovations sought, might be more productive in some cases than specific objectives; (3) possible incompatibility between mbo and innovation might be lessened if innovative ventures are pursued in ad hoc organizational structures; and (4) management by objectives and innovation are not necessarily compatible.