1,721,196 research outputs found
Bridging promises and (Dis)illusions: deliberative democracy in an evolutionary perspective
Get PDFThe participatory, and especially deliberative, turn is a major political phenomenon of last decades. Deliberative democracy has spread quickly, regardless of differences in institutional layouts and traditions. An equally fast-evolving debate has addressed its virtues and problems, gradually shifting from theory to practice and from a focus on deliberative arenas to a concern for their policy and institutional context, the latter being implicitly or explicitly referred to the emergence of new governance styles. More recently a different critical literature has emerged, which adopts a governmentality perspective to argue about the inclusion of participatory democracy in neoliberal forms of regulation. The chapter illustrates major points of contention between these two literatures and considers some attempts at merging them, with related problems. Finally, it addresses the potentials of evolutionary governance theory as a framework for bridging diverse approaches to the promises and perils of participation
Bright Futures! (and Plenty of Work)
No full textThis epilogue briefly reflects on the novel ideas and insights put forward in the previous chapters. It will re-articulate how these can be used for the further development of EGT. In line the methodological consequences of an evolutionary theory of governance will be explored. Furthermore it will address the relation between descriptive and prescriptive analyses and elaborate on the ways in which EGT can contribute to reflexive and adaptive forms of governance
An Overview of EGT’s Main Concepts
No full textThis chapter briefly outlines the theoretical framework of Evolutionary Governance Theory. It presents its architecture as well as the most important concepts and their relations. We emphasize the concepts of contingency and co-evolution, which serve as the base of an analysis of co-evolving configurations: actor/institutions, formal/informal, and power/knowledge. We discuss the three dependencies: path dependence, interdependence, and goal dependence and reflect on governance techniques and steering options. For a more detailed overview of EGT we refer to the book: ‘Evolutionary Governance Theory, an introduction’ (Van Assche et al. (Evolutionary governance theory: an introduction. Springer, 2014a)). For a further elaboration on the relations between concepts we also refer to the Glossary chapter at the end of this book
Planning and law in evolving governance
No full textAbstract: This chapter presents a theoretical perspective on the roles of law in the evolution of planning systems. Three main roles of law in planning are distinguished: law can enable, delimit and codify planning. How these roles play out and relate to each other in the evolution of a planning system, will differ by community. In four scenarios we discern key points regarding the relation between the roles of law in evolving spatial governance. Understanding the different roles of law in planning, and their interplay in the evolution of the planning system, adds to the scientific and societal debates on planning and law, where hitherto polarizing discourses (planning vs law) dominated the discussion. More broadly, our perspective on the enabling, codifying and delimiting functions of law in planning sheds a new light on the potential and limitation of both law and planning to shape the future of communities
Illicit organ removal and international criminal law response : strengths and challenges
No full textAbstract: Organ trafficking \u2013 i.e. the use of financial inducements or other illicit means to obtain an organ \u2013 is a major point of concern for national governments, legal experts, and healthcare professionals, due to its exploitative nature and its detrimental effects on the integrity of the transplant system. As a result, various international legal instruments prohibit commercial dealings, coercion, and fraud in the context of organ donation. International human rights organisation and professional bodies, including the World Health Organization, the Council of Europe, the World Medical Association, and The Transplant Society developed transplant guidelines and ethical codes laying down minimum standards aimed at guaranteeing the voluntary and altruistic nature of organ donation. In a parallel legal development, in 2010 the United Nations adopted its Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, which included organ removal as an example of exploitation in the context of trafficking in persons. In Europe, this legislative development was mirrored in the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings and in EU Directive 2011/36/EU. In response to the loopholes left by these binding criminal law instruments on trafficking in persons for the removal of organs, the Council of Europe in 2015 adopted a Convention against Trafficking in Human Organs, hereby establishing a parallel criminal law regime. Due to the very recent nature of the criminal law regimes developed around organ trafficking and trafficking in persons for the removal of organs, there was an urgent need to examine the scope and overlap of both types of crimes, and to clarify the way in which the relevant legal provisions are currently implemented and should best be implemented in domestic law, within European borders and beyond. By applying a multimethod research approach, compiling all relevant data, and incorporating the latest insights in the academic literature and the opinions of a wide variety of experts in the field, this PhD identifies the legal and practical issues arising from the adoption of the two international legal frameworks that criminalise illicit organ removal. First, the PhD examines the scope and the legal challenges resulting from the overlap of both frameworks, including possible difficulties in their simultaneous application. This examination resulted in three publications. Second, my research also focused on the usefulness and application of both frameworks in different legal systems and political environments. These include countries affected by a humanitarian and refugee crisis, namely Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey (discussed in the fourth publication), and a country affected by natural disaster, namely Nepal, which has become one of the organ trafficking hubs in Asia. The current situation in Nepal, including the changing legal landscape regarding illicit organ removal, was discussed in the fifth publication. Third, special attention is paid to the legal interpretations of the crimes of trafficking in persons and organ trafficking in the context of organ donors, and, where applicable, to the philosophical and social science concepts that are connected to illicit organ removal, such as \u201cposition of vulnerability\u201d and valid consent. These aspects were discussed in the context of the victimhood or criminal liability of persons who engage in illicit organ removal, on the basis of field research conducted in Nepal in 2019, resulting in the sixth publication. Finally, on the basis of the research findings recommendations were made for all the major stakeholders. These recommendations advocate a more harmonised application of both legal regimes, with regard to the treatment of organ donors, including a proposal of criteria for the determination of victimhood under organ trafficking law, and with regard to the prevention of illicit organ removal. Additionally, this PhD identified areas in need of further research in order to address the outstanding legal, ethical, and practical issues in relation to the prevention and prosecution of illicit organ removal, in light of the constantly evolving nature of organ- and transplant-related abuses
Innovation in Governance
No full textIn this chapter we develop a theoretical framework, deriving from the social systems theory of Niklas Luhmann and Evolutionary Governance Theory, to grasp the paradoxes of current notions of innovation in governance, and to outline an alternative approach. A renewed reflection on innovation we deem essential for an understanding of the potential for delineating the limits and possibilities of managing, steering or planning innovation in such endeavor. Innovation, it is argued, has to be understood as a post-hoc interpretation of previous decisions and actions, emerging in shifting networks of actors and allies. It is a risky and unpredictable operation at the intersection of incompatible understandings of the world. Managing, steering or planning innovation, then, has to be understood as the creation of conditions for reflection, including the reflection on the redistribution of risks engendered by innovation
Legal implications of neurotechnology : rethinking human rights to protect the mind
No full textAbstract: Rapid advancements in neurotechnology are increasingly challenging long-held assumptions about the freedom of the human mind. Innovations in neuroimaging and brain decoding technologies threaten mental privacy, while neurostimulation may undermine individuals\u2019 mental autonomy and impair their mental integrity. At the same time, these technologies offer the potential to enhance through self-directed mental interventions, arguably supporting mental autonomy. These dual capacities highlight the profound impact of neurotechnology on mental privacy, autonomy, and integrity, and underscore the urgent need for proactive legal responses. This dissertation explores the foundations of a regulatory framework capable of governing the responsible development and application of neurotechnology. It argues that international human rights law should serve as the normative basis for such a framework and investigates whether the current human rights architecture is equipped to address the emerging challenges posed by neurotechnological interference with the human mind. In its first part, the research maps the existing protections for the human mind within international human rights law. Although current protections are limited, often incidental, and not tailored to the specific emerging context of neurotechnology, a closer analysis reveals that fundamental protections are present. Particularly the freedom of thought constitutes a foundational safeguard for mental privacy and autonomy. When complemented by the rights to privacy and (mental) integrity, a rudimentary but promising framework for protecting the mind emerges. Nonetheless, this protection remains significantly underdeveloped and, in its current state, is insufficiently clear to address the complex challenges posed by modern neurotechnologies. To overcome this shortcoming, the dissertation advocates for an evolutive interpretation of existing human rights \u2013 one that responds directly to the specific threats introduced by neurotechnological intrusions. It proposes the development of a soft-law instrument to articulate and flesh out how the freedom of thought, the right to privacy and integrity, and other relevant human rights contribute to the safeguarding mental privacy, autonomy, and integrity. At the heart of this proposal lies the freedom of thought, which holds substantial potential as the backbone of a robust and future-proof normative framework. Clarifying the scope of this right, and its intersection with adjacent rights, is crucial for establishing a robust Rights of the Mind framework. Such a framework must be capable of distinguishing permissible mental interferences from those that constitute human rights violations. This is essential not only for the regulation of neurotechnology, but also for addressing other technological applications that may profoundly affect the privacy, autonomy and integrity of the human mind
- …
