By Reinhard Slepcevic
This publication is the results of doctoral experiences that i began in October 2004. on the outset, I in basic terms knew that i needed to paintings on curiosity teams and litigation within the context of the ecu Union. at the moment, i wouldn't have believed that i might locate myself your time later traveling part Western Europe to interview environmental businesses, nor that i might learn French, German and Dutch courtroom rulings at the safeguard of endangered species whose names have been thoroughly unknown to me. but I by no means regretted my number of subject, and expectantly the subsequent chapters will persuade the reader that it truly is certainly an issue that advantages our cognizance. i wouldn't were capable of focus on all of the pitfalls of an extended learn undertaking with no the robust and enduring aid of my acquaintances and co-workers. either in my view and academically, i've got profited greatly from my 3 years as a doctoral scholar on the division of political technological know-how on the Institute for complex stories (Institut für Höhere Studien) in Vienna, Austria. i'm greatly indebted to Gerda Falkner, Oliver Treib, Sylvia Kritzinger and Irina Michalowitz for setting up the sort of nice programme which allowed me and my colleagues to interact in in depth discussions with striking educational students reminiscent of Alec Stone-Sweet, Paul Pierson, James Caporaso, Frank Schimmelfennig, Klaus Goetz, Andrea Lenschow, Katharina Holzinger and Hellen Wallace.
Read or Download Litigating for the Environment: EU Law, National Courts and Socio-Legal Reality PDF
Similar jurisprudence books
Interpreting the strategies of purpose and causation in euthanasia, this well timed new publication explores a extensive number of disciplines, together with felony and scientific legislation, clinical ethics, philosophy and social coverage and indicates another way to the single at the moment utilized by the courts, in response to grading diversified different types of killing right into a formalized justificatory defence.
The Development of Persistent Criminality
The advance of power illegal activity addresses some of the most urgent difficulties of contemporary criminology: Why do a little members turn into power, chronic offenders? simply because persistent offenders are answerable for nearly all of severe crimes dedicated, figuring out which people becomes power offenders is a vital step in assisting us enhance interventions.
- Judicial Review in EU Law (Elgar European Law)
- Fault in American Contract Law
- La "causa" y la comprensión en el derecho
- European Union Law for the Twenty-First Century: Volume 2 (Essays in European Law)
- Doing Security (Crime Prevention and Security Management)
Extra resources for Litigating for the Environment: EU Law, National Courts and Socio-Legal Reality
Example text
4: The larger the support an existing national institution to be changed by European law enjoys, the more limited the effects of public interest group litigation on the implementation of European law will be. Finally, it needs to be emphasised that the four variables do not determine the potential effect of law enforcement through the courts independently of each other. Although each variable may be the reason why litigation has failed, the overall effect of litigation depends on the characteristics of all the variables.
Here, the term ‘institution’ is understood broadly, and means a formal or informal system of rules. Examples of institutions range from very formalised ones, such as law, to rather informal ones, such as traditions or normative understandings of ‘how things should be done’ (for an extensive discussion, see Voss 2001). Drawing on economic theory, institutional theory emphasises the fact that institutions may become ‘locked in’ as more and more actors adapt their behaviour to them. This creates so-called increasing returns, or self-reinforcing, positive feedback processes.
The literature closest to my topic is work on interest group litigation. g. Olson 1990; DeGregorio/Rossotti 1995; Epstein/Kobylka/Stewart 1995; de Figueiredo/de Figueiredo 2002; Kritzer/Silbey 2003). However, the main problem with this literature is that it has great difficulty in explaining cross-national differences as it only focuses on one country. With regard to group-specific explanatory factors (resources, access to courts) that could also be relevant to my focus, they have largely been covered in the literature on interest group litigation discussed below.