Rule-making and dispute resolution are essential functions of online platforms. Many of these platforms have traditionally adopted a centralized model of governance to create and enforce rules for platform participants. However, a large number of online platforms, particularly those in China, have recently experimented with various schemes in order to decentralize their governance. This paper represents the first systematic effort to explore the phenomenon of platform decentralization, with a particular focus on innovations from China. Contrary to the existing literature, which suggests that current Chinese innovations have been spurred by the authoritarian government’s undersupply of private law, I will show that these new decentralization initiatives are driven more by the increased demand to address market failures, particularly the rampant fraud plaguing China’s e-commerce industry. Platform decentralization has proved advantageous, helping Chinese online marketplaces tackle information failures in their own reputation systems more efficiently. Decentralization has also enabled platform operators to better respond to enforcement failures through increased engagement with users and by facilitating the exploration of community norms. The promising results of China’s experience in platform decentralization has shown how technology can be employed to enable user-generated justice to govern the digital economy. They further reveal the prospects for Chinese tech giants to take the leap to create more innovations in order to remedy weak market conditions.
{"title":"Decentralizing Platform Governance: Lawlessness, Fraud and Innovation","authors":"A. Zhang","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3777697","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3777697","url":null,"abstract":"Rule-making and dispute resolution are essential functions of online platforms. Many of these platforms have traditionally adopted a centralized model of governance to create and enforce rules for platform participants. However, a large number of online platforms, particularly those in China, have recently experimented with various schemes in order to decentralize their governance. This paper represents the first systematic effort to explore the phenomenon of platform decentralization, with a particular focus on innovations from China. Contrary to the existing literature, which suggests that current Chinese innovations have been spurred by the authoritarian government’s undersupply of private law, I will show that these new decentralization initiatives are driven more by the increased demand to address market failures, particularly the rampant fraud plaguing China’s e-commerce industry. Platform decentralization has proved advantageous, helping Chinese online marketplaces tackle information failures in their own reputation systems more efficiently. Decentralization has also enabled platform operators to better respond to enforcement failures through increased engagement with users and by facilitating the exploration of community norms. The promising results of China’s experience in platform decentralization has shown how technology can be employed to enable user-generated justice to govern the digital economy. They further reveal the prospects for Chinese tech giants to take the leap to create more innovations in order to remedy weak market conditions.","PeriodicalId":48724,"journal":{"name":"Law Probability & Risk","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75137451","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper explores the question whether the normativity of tradition gives us reasons to preserve the norms of equity (more or less) in their historical form, i.e., as separate from neighboring common law doctrines. The main target of the paper are arguments that call for the replacement of equity with other, arguably more successful, means for attaining the goals equity sets to achieve. It begins by showing that even liberal, progressive and rationalist people should see traditions as making a normative claim on us, as they can potentially possess both instrumental and non-instrumental value that goes over and above the content of the beliefs, rituals or forms of action which they uphold. The second part asks whether equity qua legal tradition exemplifies such value. I find that the unique combination of legal and moral tradition that we find in equity endows it with a great value as an agent for social cohesion, an instrument of coordination and a source of invaluable know-how knowledge. With reference to two concrete examples of alternatives to equity—the continental doctrine of abuse of rights and a good faith principle—I argue that the fact that equity has been the way we do things around here for so long makes it a better platform for reform than an implant from foreign system or a newly devised set of norms. If reform is needed, we should take equity as its starting point rather than wiping the slate clean and starting from scratch.
{"title":"On Tradition and the Conservation of Equity","authors":"Irit Samet","doi":"10.1093/AJJ/AUAA009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/AJJ/AUAA009","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the question whether the normativity of tradition gives us reasons to preserve the norms of equity (more or less) in their historical form, i.e., as separate from neighboring common law doctrines. The main target of the paper are arguments that call for the replacement of equity with other, arguably more successful, means for attaining the goals equity sets to achieve. It begins by showing that even liberal, progressive and rationalist people should see traditions as making a normative claim on us, as they can potentially possess both instrumental and non-instrumental value that goes over and above the content of the beliefs, rituals or forms of action which they uphold. The second part asks whether equity qua legal tradition exemplifies such value. I find that the unique combination of legal and moral tradition that we find in equity endows it with a great value as an agent for social cohesion, an instrument of coordination and a source of invaluable know-how knowledge. With reference to two concrete examples of alternatives to equity—the continental doctrine of abuse of rights and a good faith principle—I argue that the fact that equity has been the way we do things around here for so long makes it a better platform for reform than an implant from foreign system or a newly devised set of norms. If reform is needed, we should take equity as its starting point rather than wiping the slate clean and starting from scratch.","PeriodicalId":48724,"journal":{"name":"Law Probability & Risk","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84023439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We propose a method that yields a probability distribution for the net weight of drug powder resulting from a seizure of stamp bags. The technique involves the posterior predictive distribution of a beta distribution under a conjugate prior. The convolution of two distributions is computed for two visually distinct groups of stamp bags from the same seizure.
{"title":"Extrapolating the weight of a homogeneous retail drug seizure using packing weight","authors":"J. Kadane, E. Wilkinson, Joshua C. Yohannan","doi":"10.1093/LPR/MGAA013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LPR/MGAA013","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 We propose a method that yields a probability distribution for the net weight of drug powder resulting from a seizure of stamp bags. The technique involves the posterior predictive distribution of a beta distribution under a conjugate prior. The convolution of two distributions is computed for two visually distinct groups of stamp bags from the same seizure.","PeriodicalId":48724,"journal":{"name":"Law Probability & Risk","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/LPR/MGAA013","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48609460","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The analysis of inferential interactions plays an important role in the description of the line of reasoning for a forensic evaluator in a case involving the cross-transfer of evidence. It is possible the two items of evidence may mean more to an evaluator when considered jointly than they do if considered separately. An approach to the evaluation of evidence, with particular attention to the factors that need to be considered, is described for a case involving the cross-transfer of evidence. A formula is given which may be used to define the possible interactions between the evidence transferred in each direction and hence ease the interpretation of such evidence. Numerical examples are given from a classical fibre evidence scenario.
{"title":"A probabilistic account of the concept of cross-transfer and inferential interactions for trace materials","authors":"F. Taroni, P. Juchli, C. Aitken","doi":"10.1093/lpr/mgaa015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgaa015","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The analysis of inferential interactions plays an important role in the description of the line of reasoning for a forensic evaluator in a case involving the cross-transfer of evidence. It is possible the two items of evidence may mean more to an evaluator when considered jointly than they do if considered separately. An approach to the evaluation of evidence, with particular attention to the factors that need to be considered, is described for a case involving the cross-transfer of evidence. A formula is given which may be used to define the possible interactions between the evidence transferred in each direction and hence ease the interpretation of such evidence. Numerical examples are given from a classical fibre evidence scenario.","PeriodicalId":48724,"journal":{"name":"Law Probability & Risk","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43663783","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The symposium held in Mostar in 1966, where the communists from Bosnia and Herzegovina publicly discussed the national issue of Croats, admitting also the wrong politics implemented after 1945 towards the Croats of West Herzegovina, aimed at the integration of West Herzegovina into the BiH framework, with the ultimate goal of integrating BiH for the purpose of achieving its equal status in the Yugoslav federation. After an extensive analysis of the situation in West Herzegovina that showed a mass emigration of Croats from the area to Western Europe, due to the negative political and economic situation, where they joined various immigrant groups mostly hostile towards Yugoslavia, the communist authorities had tried to end this trend and integrate the West Herzegovina area primarily around the regional center (Mostar), and then to open the perspective of a wider integration of Bosnia and Herzegovina around the centre of the republic (Sarajevo), for the purpose of imposing Bosnia and Herzegovina as an equal member of the Yugoslav federation. Although the attitudes presented at the 1966 symposium opened certain perspectives to Croats of West Herzegovina, some high-ranking politicians also showed resistance. Critics appeared who thought that opening of West Herzegovina, liberalization of the political attitude towards Croats and the removal of the ustaša legacy imposed to the area opened space for revitalization of the ustaša movement. The Belgrade press was at the forefront of such claims, using several terrorist activities that had taken place in that period in Yugoslavia (the movie theatre and the railway station attacks in Belgrade, planting explosives at the Zagreb Mirogoj Cemetery, etc.) as an argument, since the accused were Croats from West Herzegovina. BiH political leadership claimed that the attacks were orchestrated by political and intelligence circles who opposed the Mostar symposium, and that certain groups outside Bosnia and Herzegovina used those events as an opportunity to interfere into the political events in Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to compromise the politics of creation of national equality, which was the main political orientation of BiH communists.
{"title":"Walking on Thorns: The Mostar Symposium of 1966","authors":"Husnija Kamberović","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3750343","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3750343","url":null,"abstract":"The symposium held in Mostar in 1966, where the communists from Bosnia and Herzegovina publicly discussed the national issue of Croats, admitting also the wrong politics implemented after 1945 towards the Croats of West Herzegovina, aimed at the integration of West Herzegovina into the BiH framework, with the ultimate goal of integrating BiH for the purpose of achieving its equal status in the Yugoslav federation. After an extensive analysis of the situation in West Herzegovina that showed a mass emigration of Croats from the area to Western Europe, due to the negative political and economic situation, where they joined various immigrant groups mostly hostile towards Yugoslavia, the communist authorities had tried to end this trend and integrate the West Herzegovina area primarily around the regional center (Mostar), and then to open the perspective of a wider integration of Bosnia and Herzegovina around the centre of the republic (Sarajevo), for the purpose of imposing Bosnia and Herzegovina as an equal member of the Yugoslav federation. Although the attitudes presented at the 1966 symposium opened certain perspectives to Croats of West Herzegovina, some high-ranking politicians also showed resistance. Critics appeared who thought that opening of West Herzegovina, liberalization of the political attitude towards Croats and the removal of the ustaša legacy imposed to the area opened space for revitalization of the ustaša movement. The Belgrade press was at the forefront of such claims, using several terrorist activities that had taken place in that period in Yugoslavia (the movie theatre and the railway station attacks in Belgrade, planting explosives at the Zagreb Mirogoj Cemetery, etc.) as an argument, since the accused were Croats from West Herzegovina. BiH political leadership claimed that the attacks were orchestrated by political and intelligence circles who opposed the Mostar symposium, and that certain groups outside Bosnia and Herzegovina used those events as an opportunity to interfere into the political events in Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to compromise the politics of creation of national equality, which was the main political orientation of BiH communists.","PeriodicalId":48724,"journal":{"name":"Law Probability & Risk","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85263465","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Letter to the Editors regarding Neumann, C. ‘Defence against the modern arts: the curse of statistics: Part 1—FRStat.’ Law, Probability and Risk, (2020) 19(1), 1–20","authors":"H. Swofford, F. Zemp, A. Liu, M. Salyards","doi":"10.1093/lpr/mgaa014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgaa014","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48724,"journal":{"name":"Law Probability & Risk","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42536206","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This study tests whether cooperation between securities regulators influences global market integration. I measure cooperation using arrangements between securities regulators that enable enhanced cross-border enforcement, better regulatory decisions, and reduced compliance obligations for cross-border activities. These arrangements—formed at different times for different country pairs—are associated with an 11% increase in cross-border investment. I find similar increases using other proxies for market integration. Cross-border investment and market integration thus depend, in part, on regulators working together to extend legal and institutional capacities across borders. This reframes our understanding of the role of institutions in global capital markets.
{"title":"Does Regulatory Cooperation Help Integrate Equity Markets?","authors":"R. Silvers","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3761435","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3761435","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study tests whether cooperation between securities regulators influences global market integration. I measure cooperation using arrangements between securities regulators that enable enhanced cross-border enforcement, better regulatory decisions, and reduced compliance obligations for cross-border activities. These arrangements—formed at different times for different country pairs—are associated with an 11% increase in cross-border investment. I find similar increases using other proxies for market integration. Cross-border investment and market integration thus depend, in part, on regulators working together to extend legal and institutional capacities across borders. This reframes our understanding of the role of institutions in global capital markets.","PeriodicalId":48724,"journal":{"name":"Law Probability & Risk","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79887089","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Bayesian perspective is based on conditioning related to reported evidence that is considered to be certain. What is called ‘Radical Probabilism’ replaces such an extreme view by introducing uncertainty on the reported evidence. How can such equivocal evidence be used in further inferences about a main hypothesis? The theoretical ground is introduced with the aim of offering to the readership an explanation for the generalization of the Bayes’ Theorem. This extension—that considers uncertainty related to the reporting of evidence—also has an impact on the assessment of the value of evidence through the Bayes’ factor. A generalization for such a logical measure of the evidence is also presented and justified.
{"title":"Coherently updating degrees of belief: Radical Probabilism, the generalization of Bayes’ Theorem and its consequences on evidence evaluation","authors":"F. Taroni, Paolo Garbolino, S. Bozza","doi":"10.1093/LPR/MGAB001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LPR/MGAB001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The Bayesian perspective is based on conditioning related to reported evidence that is considered to be certain. What is called ‘Radical Probabilism’ replaces such an extreme view by introducing uncertainty on the reported evidence. How can such equivocal evidence be used in further inferences about a main hypothesis? The theoretical ground is introduced with the aim of offering to the readership an explanation for the generalization of the Bayes’ Theorem. This extension—that considers uncertainty related to the reporting of evidence—also has an impact on the assessment of the value of evidence through the Bayes’ factor. A generalization for such a logical measure of the evidence is also presented and justified.","PeriodicalId":48724,"journal":{"name":"Law Probability & Risk","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44750034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Over the past decade, with increasing scientific scrutiny on forensic reporting practices, there have been several efforts to introduce statistical thinking and probabilistic reasoning into forensic practice. These efforts have been met with mixed reactions—a common one being scepticism, or downright hostility, towards this objective. For probabilistic reasoning to be adopted in forensic practice, more than statistical knowledge will be necessary. Social scientific knowledge will be critical to effectively understand the sources of concern and barriers to implementation. This study reports the findings of a survey of forensic fingerprint examiners about reporting practices across the discipline and practitioners’ attitudes and characterizations of probabilistic reporting. Overall, despite its adoption by a small number of practitioners, community-wide adoption of probabilistic reporting in the friction ridge discipline faces challenges. We found that almost no respondents currently report probabilistically. Perhaps more surprisingly, most respondents who claimed to report probabilistically, in fact, do not. Furthermore, we found that two-thirds of respondents perceive probabilistic reporting as ‘inappropriate’—their most common concern being that defence attorneys would take advantage of uncertainty or that probabilistic reports would mislead, or be misunderstood by, other criminal justice system actors. If probabilistic reporting is to be adopted, much work is still needed to better educate practitioners on the importance and utility of probabilistic reasoning in order to facilitate a path towards improved reporting practices.
{"title":"Mt. Everest—we are going to lose many: a survey of fingerprint examiners’ attitudes towards probabilistic reporting","authors":"H. Swofford, S. Cole, V. King","doi":"10.1093/LPR/MGAB003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LPR/MGAB003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Over the past decade, with increasing scientific scrutiny on forensic reporting practices, there have been several efforts to introduce statistical thinking and probabilistic reasoning into forensic practice. These efforts have been met with mixed reactions—a common one being scepticism, or downright hostility, towards this objective. For probabilistic reasoning to be adopted in forensic practice, more than statistical knowledge will be necessary. Social scientific knowledge will be critical to effectively understand the sources of concern and barriers to implementation. This study reports the findings of a survey of forensic fingerprint examiners about reporting practices across the discipline and practitioners’ attitudes and characterizations of probabilistic reporting. Overall, despite its adoption by a small number of practitioners, community-wide adoption of probabilistic reporting in the friction ridge discipline faces challenges. We found that almost no respondents currently report probabilistically. Perhaps more surprisingly, most respondents who claimed to report probabilistically, in fact, do not. Furthermore, we found that two-thirds of respondents perceive probabilistic reporting as ‘inappropriate’—their most common concern being that defence attorneys would take advantage of uncertainty or that probabilistic reports would mislead, or be misunderstood by, other criminal justice system actors. If probabilistic reporting is to be adopted, much work is still needed to better educate practitioners on the importance and utility of probabilistic reasoning in order to facilitate a path towards improved reporting practices.","PeriodicalId":48724,"journal":{"name":"Law Probability & Risk","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49367245","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：