Refine
Year of publication
- 2015 (202) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (74)
- Part of a Book (56)
- Working Paper (16)
- Conference Proceeding (15)
- Contribution to a Periodical (14)
- Editorship book (9)
- Book (8)
- Master's Thesis (4)
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
- Journal (2)
Keywords
- Solar power (3)
- Variable renewables (3)
- Wind power (3)
- Außenpolitik (2)
- China (2)
- Deutschland (2)
- Europe (2)
- European Union (2)
- Fertility (2)
- Germany, fertility, migration, own children data (2)
The rise in inequality has been explained with reference to organized groups and the lobbying of the financial sector. This article argues that the image of politics as organized combat is contradicted by empirical evidence on lobbying in the United States, and does not travel well to Europe. The power of finance does not operate through
organized political influence. Rather, politics in the interest of capital unfolds as a structural feature of advanced economies over time. Tellingly, at the height of the financial crisis, one of the most promising strategies of institutions seeking government support
was not organizing for combat, but collective inaction. Our challenge, then, is to explain how the power of finance has built up and is playing out in creating inequality. A more structural, less agency-focused perspective highlights how the rise of finance has been supported by actors that few would accuse of being finance-friendly, such as the European center-left parties and consumers. Reconceptualizing the power of finance has important implications for political solutions to rising inequality.
Neue deutsche Diplomatie?
(2015)
In der aktuellen Debatte stellt sich die Frage, ob mit einer „neuen“ deutschen Außenpolitik auch eine neue deutsche Diplomatie einhergeht oder einhergehen sollte. Berlin täte gut daran, sich auf die außenpolitischen Traditionen der Bonner Republik zu besinnen. Diese Prinzipien werden bisweilen vernachlässigt, sind aber aufgrund der allseits konstatierten gewachsenen Bedeutung Deutschlands heute aktueller denn je. Allerdings bedürfen die konkreten Instrumente der Diplomatie und ihr institutioneller Rahmen einer Überarbeitung, um den Herausforderungen gerecht zu werden, denen die Berliner Republik gegenübersteht.
Mit dem Tabubruch, Grenzen nicht gewaltsam zu verändern,
hat Moskau der Idee einer euro-atlantischen Sicherheitsgemeinschaft
schweren Schaden zugefügt. Strategische Geduld ist nun gefragt. Der Westen
sollte das Ziel aber nicht aufgeben und im Umgang mit Russland auf
Einhegung und Einbindung setzen. Ansatzpunkte dafür gibt es.
Field Experiments
(2015)
Field experiments are experiments in settings with high degrees of naturalism. This article describes different types of field experiments, including randomized field trials, randomized rollout designs, encouragement designs, downstream field experiments, hybrid lab-field experiments, and covert population experiments, and discusses their intellectual background and benefits. It also lists methodological challenges researchers can encounter when conducting field experiments, including failure to treat, selective attrition, spillover, difficulty of replication, and black box causality, and discusses available solutions. Finally, it provides an overview over current and emerging directions in field experimentation and concludes with a brief history of field experiments.
Upon request by the LIBE committee, this study examines the reasons why the Dublin system of allocation of responsibility for asylum seekers does not work effectively from the viewpoint of Member States or asylum-seekers. It argues that as long as it is based on the use of coercion against asylum seekers, it cannot serve as an effective tool to address existing imbalances in the allocation of responsibilities among Member States. The EU is faced with two substantial challenges: first, how to prevent unsafe journeys and risks to the lives of people seeking international protection in the EU; and secondly, how to organise the distribution of related responsibilities and costs among the Member States. This study addresses these issues with recommendations aimed at resolving current practical, legal and policy problems.
Detention as part of migration control is sometimes portrayed as a ‘necessary adjunct’ of the state’s power to control immigration. This characterization is a masking device, obscuring the grounds of detention (or the lack thereof) from proper scrutiny. It has convincingly been argued that human rights law fails to scrutinize the necessity of immigration detention. Many scholars have pointed out the anomalous approach to assessing the legal justifications for immigration detention, compared with other forms of deprivation of liberty, which are more powerfully constrained by human rights law. Yet, cogent as this critique is, it sometimes fails to interrogate the related questions concerning the legal grounds of detention. A ground is a particular form of legal reason, which both explains and justifies the official action in question. By examining the question of grounds, this article aims to elucidate the manner in which immigration law itself produces reasons to detain, and by doing so creates detainable subjects, migrants. Basic liberty-protective principles and practices developed in other areas of law are notably absent. This state of affairs is not inevitable, and legal alternatives are within reach.
The norm of non-refoulement is at the heart of the international protection of refugees yet there remains a lack of consensus as to its status. In this contribution, we examine the question whether it has attained the status of a jus cogens norm. Adopting the methodology of ‘custom plus’ we first examine whether non-refoulement has attained the status of custom, concluding that widespread state practice and opinio juris underpin the view that it is clearly a norm of customary international law. Moreover, much of this evidence also leads to the conclusion that it is ripe for recognition as a norm of jus cogens, due to its universal, non-derogatory character. In other words, it is a norm accepted and recognised by the international community of states as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted. The chapter then examines the consequences for its recognition as jus cogens, exploring some of the many ways in which jus cogens status may have meaningful implications for the norm of non-refoulement.
In this chapter I illustrate, that immigration law, the immigration process and labour market structures may interact to create vulnerability to forced labour, drawing on empirical studies in the UK. Section II begins with some reflection on labour law’s autonomy. Section III seeks to clarify ‘forced labour’. I examine in turn the binary between ‘free’ and ‘unfree’ labour in political economy, and the notion of a continuum from free labour to the ultimate form of unfreedom, slavery. While both the binary and continuum approaches are illuminating, neither approach entirely befits the legal task of identifying the human rights violation that is forced labour. The distinct legal labels of ‘slavery’, ‘servitude’ and ‘forced labour’ are legal concepts embodying distinctive institutional forms of work relation. This part also explores how prohibitions on trafficking, in contrast, introduce a distinctive, potentially distortive focus on migration control and criminalization into this field. In light of the preceding discussion, Section IV examines how the migration process and immigration law create fertile conditions for forced labour. Some features of immigration law, such as precarious and irregular migration status are liable to increase dependency in work relations, which can induce domination. However, this part also considers how those with secure migration status, namely EU citizens in the UK, are also vulnerable to forced labour. In light of this analysis, Section V then critiques the current legal responses to forced labour. These responses should be of concern to labour lawyers, as they obscure general labour rights concerns, and the regulatory conditions that are fertile for forced labour. The UK exemplifies the tendency to obscure labour law concerns, with a Bill on ‘modern slavery’ going through Parliament at the time of writing, proposing life sentences for those convicted of human trafficking, slavery, forced labour and domestic servitude. The criminal approach focuses on the outcome (the forced labour itself), rather than understanding the laws, practices and regulatory gaps that set up the vulnerability to forced labour. Accordingly, I contrast this criminal law approach with the labour law approach, taking into account the 2014 Protocol to the ILO Convention on Forced Labour. A third approach focuses on human rights law. As currently interpreted, the human rights approach is parasitic on the criminal law approach. I argue that a more progressive (ie orthodox labour law) interpretation of human rights law on forced labour is appropriate and necessary. A labour law approach should ideally entail three main elements, which are briefly sketched here. First, it should insulate labour rights from migration status. Secondly, it should regulate labour intermediaries. Thirdly, it should develop better collective and institutional protections for labour rights. Evidently this is not labour law as we find it in the UK today. However, the evidence of extreme labour exploitation and forced labour demands an urgent revisitation of the norms and institutions of labour law.
This book examines key aspects of European Union (EU) law on immigration and asylum, where EU standards overlap with human rights protections and international refugee law. It focuses on questions of migration status and security of residence, family migration, refugee protection, and immigration detention. The uniting theme is the interaction between established human rights norms, in particular the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and EU law. It thus provides a scholarly analysis of EU and ECHR migration and refugee law, including the post-Amsterdam legislative measures and their recasts, and the Court of Justice’s key post-Amsterdam rulings and corresponding Strasbourg case law. In so doing, it provides important insights into the roles of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) as generators of migrant rights, aiding understanding of their positions and interactions with each other. Integrating doctrinal, empirical, and theoretical material on social membership, global justice, and the construction of ‘illegality’ in migration law into the EU context, it provides a panoramic account of the EU’s role in determining who may reside in the EU, and under what terms.
The Autonomy of Labour Law
(2015)
To what extent is labour law an autonomous field of study? This book is based upon the papers written by a group of leading international scholars on this theme, delivered at a conference to mark Professor Mark Freedland’s retirement from his teaching fellowship in Oxford. The chapters explore the boundaries and connections between labour law and other legal disciplines such as company law, competition law, contract law and public law; labour law and legal methodologies such as reflexive governance and comparative law; and labour law and other disciplines such as ethics, economics and political philosophy. In so doing, it represents a cross-section of the most sophisticated current work at the cutting edge of labour law theory.