Refine
Year of publication
- 2017 (84) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (84) (remove)
Language
- German (57)
- English (21)
- Other Language (4)
- French (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (84)
Keywords
- DSGVO (4)
- Digitalisierung (4)
- Datenschutz (3)
- Kommunalfinanzen (3)
- Bankenaufsicht (2)
- EuGH (2)
- Europäische Zentralbank (2)
- Kommunalaufsicht (2)
- Once-only-Prinzip (2)
- Algorithmus (1)
Institute
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, insbesondere deutsches und europäisches Verwaltungsrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Ulrich Stelkens) (10)
- Lehrstuhl für Verwaltungswissenschaft, Staatsrecht, Verwaltungsrecht und Europarecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Mario Martini) (8)
- Lehrstuhl für Politikwissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Stephan Grohs) (7)
- Lehrstuhl für Sozialrecht und Verwaltungswissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Constanze Janda) (6)
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, Staatslehre und Rechtsvergleichung (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Karl-Peter Sommermann) (6)
- Lehrstuhl für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsmanagement (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Michael Hölscher) (5)
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, Finanz- und Steuerrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Joachim Wieland) (3)
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, insbesondere Europarecht und Völkerrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Weiß) (3)
- Lehrstuhl für Volkswirtschaftslehre, insbesondere Wirtschafts- und Verkehrspolitik (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Andreas Knorr) (2)
- Lehrstuhl für Personal, Führung und Entscheidung im öffentlichen Sektor (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Michèle Morner) (1)
Reputation systems are useful to assess the trustworthiness of potential transaction partners, but also a potential threat to privacy since rating profiles reveal users’ preferences. Anonymous reputation systems resolve this issue, but make it difficult to assess the trustworthiness of a rating. We introduce a privacy-preserving reputation system that enables anonymous ratings while making sure that only authorized users can issue ratings. In addition, ratings can be endorsed by other users. A user who has received a pre-defined number of endorsements can prove this fact, and be rewarded e.g. by receiving a “Premium member” status. The system is based on advanced cryptographic primitives such as Chaum-Pedersen blind signatures, verifiable secret sharing and oblivious transfer.
Der Aufsatz stellt zunächst die Rechtsprechung des EuGH und des BSG dar, um die Hintergründe der Neuregelung zu verdeutlichen (II.), sodann werden die wesentlichen Änderungen in § 7 SGB II und § 23 SGB XII vorgestellt (III.) und anschließend einer verfassungs- (IV.) und europarechtlichen Bewertung (IV.)
Zur Änderung des IZG SH
(2017)
In the field of public procurement EU law has deeply regulated not only the awarding procedures of public contracts of works, supplies or services (and since 2014 of concession contracts) but also the related review mechanisms. EU directives allow member states to decide upon the identification of the “bodies responsible for review procedures” (breviter “review bodies”) in charge of determining a possible breach of public procurement directives and whether such review bodies should or should not be judicial in character.
The essay focuses on the comparison between the implementation given to those rules by the German law, especially regarding the Vergabekammern (“Public procurement tribunals”), which are non-judicial review bodies in charge of first instance decisions, and by Italian law, where the new pre-litigation advice of ANAC (i.e. Italian Anti-Corruption Authority) has been introduced since 2016, in addition to the traditional judicial remedies, as an optional and ancillary non-judicial remedy.
The characteristics of creative educational interventions and the way they are implemented in the field often make their evaluation a challenging task. This article uses an exemplary intervention from a large-scale consumer education program on climate protection to present the design, method, and results of a two-step evaluation procedure which allows evaluators to cope with such a situation. Step 1 aims to answer the question of whether or not an intervention actually has the intended effects. Step 2 then assesses the factors that contribute to those effects. Thus, such a two-step evaluation yields information, not only on which interventions are effective and should therefore be maintained, but also on how they should be designed to achieve maximum effects.