Giving content to the principle of proportionality: happiness and pain as the universal currency for matching offence seriousness and penalty severity

The principle of proportionality prescribes that the punishment should equal the crime. It is one of the most important principles of sentencing. Yet, despite its widespread acceptance it offers no meaningful guide to sentencing. Hence penalty levels fluctuate greatly between jurisdictions and within jurisdictions. This is because there is no universally agreed criterion for measuring offence seriousness or penalty severity. This article suggests that the appropriate criteria for matching offence seriousness and penalty severity is the level of unhappiness or pain stemming from each of these impositions. Thus, for example, the level of pain meted out to a rape offender should equal the level of pain caused to a rape victim. Emerging scientific studies on human well-being and happiness show that human beings are similarly built in terms of the experiences that are either conducive or inimical to well-being. This commonality provides a strong foundation to be confident to make reasonably accurate predictions concerning the extent to which adverse events, such as being the victim of a criminal offence or subjected to a form of criminal sanction will stifle human flourishing. This will then allow us to match accurately offence seriousness and penalty level.

Conceptualising the role of reciprocity in relationship marketing : an examination of its supporting virtues

One possible “kind” of marketing relationship occurs where a norm of reciprocity is upheld. The norm states that “we should return good for good, in proportion to what we receive; we should resist evil, but not do evil in return; we should make reparation for the harm we do;...furthermore that obligations should be felt in retrospect” (Becker, 1990, p.4). The appeal of this kind of exchange is that it provides the participants with traits that enable them to pursue excellence in moral behaviour. Making the assumption that societal goal is good moral citizenship; this could be the perfect relationship. It is therefore a good starting point toward examining other types. However, “Reciprocity, taken by itself is insufficient for its own purposes” (Becker, 1986, p.150). It relies on a number of supporting virtues. This paper builds on previous work that conceptualises the role of reciprocity in relationship marketing by examining these virtues. For the norm to effectively stabilize marketing relationships it relies on the presence of other virtues, these include, generosity, conviviality, empathy, and practical wisdom (Becker, 1986). These traits are explored within the context of reciprocity and supporting relationship marketing literature.

Conceptual framework of the precautionary principle approach in the decision-making process

This article reviews the precautionary principle as an approach in addressing decisions with far reaching environmental consequences under scientific uncertainty. The precautionary principle is intended to assist with structuring environmentally risky decisions toward sustainable development. It responds to the lack of scientific evidence of a potential environmental problem. There is currently no framework to assist with the process indicating the areas of importance and stages of decisionmaking. This paper suggests a framework to assist with the process of decision-making for complex environmental problems. The main areas of concern are the issues relating to the costs, risks, and benefits assessments. The main stages of the framework includes; definition of the problem, analysis of the potential environmental risks, assessments of specific anticipated legal, social, economic, political, and technological impacts, review of the key players (social, organisation and government) obligations, comparison of alternatives available, determination of accountability, implementation, decision making, monitoring and control processes.

Utility as a first principle for education research : reworking autonomy in Australian higher education

The focus of this paper is on the community impact of education research, as conceived specifically within a changing context of research assessment in Australia, first mooted by the previous Federal Coalition (conservative) Government within a new Research Quality Framework (RQF), and now to be reworked by the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) initiated by the incoming Federal Labour (progressive) Government. Convinced that a penchant for the utility of research will not go away, irrespective of the political orientations of government, our interest is in exploring: the assumption that research, particularly in areas such as education, should have an impact in the community (as this was first defined within the RQF); the difficulties much education research (despite its “applied” characterisation) has in complying with this ideal; and what a community impact requirement means for the kinds of education research that will be privileged in the future. In particular, we are concerned about the potential narrowing of education research directed at or by community impact and what is lost in the process. One potential loss or weakening is in the positional autonomy of higher education to conduct independent education research.