程序正义与行政争议解决程序设计

IF 1.6 3区社会学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Social Justice Research Pub Date : 2023-10-26 DOI:10.1007/s11211-023-00428-4

Marc Wever, Jan Fekke Ybema

{"title":"程序正义与行政争议解决程序设计","authors":"Marc Wever, Jan Fekke Ybema","doi":"10.1007/s11211-023-00428-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Are certain characteristics of dispute resolution procedures associated with higher levels of procedural justice? We address this question through a quantitative analysis of real-world experiences of 194 professional legal representatives with the objection procedures of 81 Dutch administrative authorities. In our analysis, two general procedural characteristics are taken into account: the involvement of an independent third party and the extent to which the procedure is focused on the conciliation of competing interests. The involvement of an independent third party was not associated with higher levels of procedural justice. Procedures that were perceived to be more focused on the conciliation of competing interests were evaluated as more procedurally just, even more so in disputes where the administrative authority was perceived to have a higher degree of discretion and in disputes that ended in a negative result for the litigant.","PeriodicalId":47602,"journal":{"name":"Social Justice Research","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Procedural Justice and the Design of Administrative Dispute Resolution Procedures\",\"authors\":\"Marc Wever, Jan Fekke Ybema\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11211-023-00428-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Are certain characteristics of dispute resolution procedures associated with higher levels of procedural justice? We address this question through a quantitative analysis of real-world experiences of 194 professional legal representatives with the objection procedures of 81 Dutch administrative authorities. In our analysis, two general procedural characteristics are taken into account: the involvement of an independent third party and the extent to which the procedure is focused on the conciliation of competing interests. The involvement of an independent third party was not associated with higher levels of procedural justice. Procedures that were perceived to be more focused on the conciliation of competing interests were evaluated as more procedurally just, even more so in disputes where the administrative authority was perceived to have a higher degree of discretion and in disputes that ended in a negative result for the litigant.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Justice Research\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Justice Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-023-00428-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Justice Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-023-00428-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

争议解决程序的某些特征是否与更高水平的程序公正有关?我们通过对194名专业法律代表与81个荷兰行政当局的反对程序的实际经验进行定量分析来解决这个问题。在我们的分析中，考虑到两个一般的程序特征:独立第三方的参与和程序集中于调解相互竞争的利益的程度。独立第三方的参与与更高水平的程序公正无关。那些被认为更侧重于调解相互竞争的利益的程序被评价为在程序上更公正，在行政当局被认为具有更高程度的自由裁量权的争端中以及在对诉讼当事人不利结果的争端中更是如此。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Procedural Justice and the Design of Administrative Dispute Resolution Procedures

Abstract Are certain characteristics of dispute resolution procedures associated with higher levels of procedural justice? We address this question through a quantitative analysis of real-world experiences of 194 professional legal representatives with the objection procedures of 81 Dutch administrative authorities. In our analysis, two general procedural characteristics are taken into account: the involvement of an independent third party and the extent to which the procedure is focused on the conciliation of competing interests. The involvement of an independent third party was not associated with higher levels of procedural justice. Procedures that were perceived to be more focused on the conciliation of competing interests were evaluated as more procedurally just, even more so in disputes where the administrative authority was perceived to have a higher degree of discretion and in disputes that ended in a negative result for the litigant.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Social Justice Research Multiple-

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

4.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Social Justice Research, is an international multidisciplinary forum for the publication of original papers that have broad implications for social scientists investigating the origins, structures, and consequences of justice in human affairs. The journal encompasses the justice-related work (using traditional and novel approaches) of all social scientists-psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, economists, policy scientists, political scientists, legal researchers, management scientists, and others. Its multidisciplinary approach furthers the integration of the various social science perspectives. In addition to original research papers - theoretical, empirical, and methodological - the journal also publishes book reviews and, from time to time, special thematic issues.