<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
 xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/"
 xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/basic/2.0/"
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
    <channel rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/rss/journal/laws">
		<title>Laws</title>
		<link>http://www.mdpi.com/journal/laws</link>
		<description>Latest open access articles published in Laws at http://www.mdpi.com/journal/laws</description>
								<items>
			<rdf:Seq>
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/2/69" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/2/51" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/1/33" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/1/20" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/1/1" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/64" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/39" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/4" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/1" />
                    	</rdf:Seq>
		</items>
				<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
	</channel>

        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/2/69">
	<title><![CDATA[Laws, Vol. 2, Pages 69-98: The Structure of European Food Law]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/2/69</link>
	<description>This contribution lays bare the structure of EU food law as it appears from scholarly analysis at Wageningen University in the Netherlands. The structure of EU food law can be used as a framework for teaching, application, further analysis and comparison to food law approaches in other parts of the world. From this analysis, food law emerges as a functional area of law. Core elements are: (1) the objectives of EU food law to protect consumers’ interests; (2) the principles of risk analysis and precaution; (3) obligations on businesses regarding the products they place on the market, the processes they apply and their communication towards consumers; and (4) public powers of law enforcement and incident management.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Laws</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-04-16</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/laws2020069</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>69</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>98</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2075-471X</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[The Structure of European Food Law]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-04-16</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/laws2020069</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Bernd van derMeulen</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/2/51">
	<title><![CDATA[Laws, Vol. 2, Pages 51-68: Sodomy Laws and Gender Variance in Tahiti and Hawai‘i]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/2/51</link>
	<description>In both Hawaiian and Tahitian, the central meaning of mahu denotes  gender-variant individuals, particularly male-bodied persons who have a significant investment in femininity. However, in Hawai‘i, unlike Tahiti, the word mahu is now more commonly used as an insult against gay or transgender people. The negative connotation of the term in Hawaiian indexes lower levels of social acceptability for mahu identity on O‘ahu (Hawai‘i’s most populous island) as compared to Tahiti. The article argues that these differences are partly due to a historical legacy of sexually repressive laws. The article traces the history of sodomy laws in these two Polynesian societies and argues that this history supports the hypothesis that sodomy laws (in conjunction with such social processes as urbanisation and Christianisation) are partially to blame for the diminished social status of mahu on O‘ahu. A different social and legal history in Tahiti accounts for the fact that the loss of social status experienced by Tahitian mahu has been lesser than that of their Hawaiian counterparts.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Laws</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-04-09</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/laws2020051</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>51</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>68</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2075-471X</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Sodomy Laws and Gender Variance in Tahiti and Hawai‘i]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-04-09</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/laws2020051</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Aleardo Zanghellini</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/1/33">
	<title><![CDATA[Laws, Vol. 2, Pages 33-50: The Imposition of the Death Penalty on Mexican Nationals in the United States and the Cultural, Legal and Political Context]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/1/33</link>
	<description>This paper reviews death penalty perspectives from the United States, Mexico and international law. The United States practices the death penalty on not only its citizens, but those of other nations who commit capital crimes. Mexico is a death penalty abolitionist state that takes significant issue with the United States over executing Mexican nationals. The paper analyzes the cultural, legal and political conflict between the two countries surrounding the application of the death penalty on Mexican nationals.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Laws</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-03-20</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/laws2010033</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>33</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>50</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2075-471X</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[The Imposition of the Death Penalty on Mexican Nationals in the United States and the Cultural, Legal and Political Context]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-03-20</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/laws2010033</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>James Olivero</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/1/20">
	<title><![CDATA[Laws, Vol. 2, Pages 20-32: Examining the Infractions Causing Higher Rates of Suspensions and Expulsions: Racial and Ethnic Considerations]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/1/20</link>
	<description>This study investigated school discipline infractions leading to suspensions and expulsions in Louisiana to determine patterns and trends, particularly among racial/ethnic groups. Discipline incident data rather than student discipline data were used to provide a more accurate reflection of the number of infractions and dispositions occurring. Findings included that black students and American Indian students had a higher percentage of  out-of-school suspensions and were more likely to commit an infraction in the violent discipline infractions category, but the overwhelming majority of offenses for all groups were for non-violent and non-drug offenses. Links to juvenile delinquency and zero tolerance policies are discussed.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Laws</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-03-20</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/laws2010020</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>20</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>32</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2075-471X</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Examining the Infractions Causing Higher Rates of Suspensions and Expulsions: Racial and Ethnic Considerations]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-03-20</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/laws2010020</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Craig Forsyth</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Holly Howat</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Lai Pei</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>York Forsyth</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Gary Asmus</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Billy Stokes</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/1/1">
	<title><![CDATA[Laws, Vol. 2, Pages 1-19: Public and Private Food Safety Standards: Facilitating or Frustrating Fresh Produce Growers?]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/2/1/1</link>
	<description>Global private food safety and quality standards have undergone some major overhauls during the past two decades, and these will continue to evolve with the recent emphasis on harmonization. The Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) attempts to ensure that harmonize retail standards are commendable and elegant in principle, but in practice, retailers continue to demand their own standard, whilst supporting GFSI’s benchmarking program. It is difficult to see such retailers giving up their own standards and the control they currently exert as chain captains. There is also the risk that too much harmonization will result in these standards losing their individuality and uniqueness. Amidst the struggle for private standard dominance, alternative approaches to risk management (e.g.,  self-assessment of risk, independent audits and risk ranking) may be the way forward, similar to how insurance risks are calculated for businesses. Furthermore, this risk-based approach could also lead to the effective implementation of co-regulation, where both public and private sector compliances are addressed together—a win-win situation. This paper considers the implications and future trends of fresh produce farming, and identifies five interventions (i.e., assurance schemes), which include the do-nothing scenario to underpinning one’s brand or label with an existing scheme.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Laws</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-01-22</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/laws2010001</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>19</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2075-471X</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Public and Private Food Safety Standards: Facilitating or Frustrating Fresh Produce Growers?]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-01-22</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/laws2010001</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Jan Soon</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Richard Baines</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/64">
	<title><![CDATA[Laws, Vol. 1, Pages 64-68: The State of Contracts Scholarship in the United States]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/64</link>
	<description>This paper reports on the state of contracts scholarship in the United States, utilizing two methods of approximating where scholarship has focused since 2007 and where it is headed in the future.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Laws</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-10-18</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Communication</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/laws1010064</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>64</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>68</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2075-471X</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[The State of Contracts Scholarship in the United States]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-10-18</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/laws1010064</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Ethan J. Leib</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/39">
	<title><![CDATA[Laws, Vol. 1, Pages 39-63: Achieving Ecological Objectives]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/39</link>
	<description>The legal objective for surface water in the EU is ‘good ecological status’, as established by the Water Framework Directive, with a timeframe of 15, 21 or 27 years. To reach this objective, suitable legal instruments are needed, and quality standards are among the instruments intended to improve the ecological status. However, both the Directive and quality standards are founded on reductionism, risking an over-application of over-simplified concepts, probably reducing biological diversity. A realistic and more appropriate timeframe for river basin rehabilitation would be around 100 years, emphasizing several concerns, such as the importance of encompassing the entire life history of species, the shift in human perceptions, the systemic unity of humans and ecosystems, environmental irreducibility, site-specific reference points, and the divergence of the assessment of water quality and the general ecological status of a river basin. From a legal standpoint, a century emphasizes a temporal agreement and a normative commitment to the generations to come. Ecologically, a century time-scale gives enough time for the processes of evolution, dispersal and recolonization and succession to re-establish stable, more diverse biological communities in physically rehabilitated habitats and river basins, whereas the present timetable for achievement of the ecological objectives does not.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Laws</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-07-02</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/laws1010039</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>39</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>63</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2075-471X</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Achieving Ecological Objectives]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-07-02</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/laws1010039</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Henrik Josefsson</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/4">
	<title><![CDATA[Laws, Vol. 1, Pages 4-38: One Health, One World—The Intersecting Legal Regimes of Trade, Climate Change, Food Security, Humanitarian Crises, and Migration]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/4</link>
	<description>Today’s global health challenges require a multi-sectoral approach in which health is a fundamental value within global governance and international law. “One Health, One World” provides a unified, harmonious vision of global health governance that supports the wellbeing of humans and animals living in a clean and temperate environment. This article focuses on five legal regimes—trade law, food security law, environmental law, humanitarian law, and refugee law—that play a pivotal role in influencing health outcomes and are integral to achieving the One Health, One World vision. International trade, for example, opens markets not only to life-saving products such as vaccines, medicines, and medical equipment, but also to life-threatening products such as tobacco and asbestos. If strengthened and enforced, environmental law can decrease air and water pollution, major causes of death and disability. World hunger has been exacerbated by the global economic crisis and climate change, increasing the urgency for international law to enhance food security. Humanitarian law must similarly be strengthened to protect civilians adequately as the nature of warfare continues to change. Refugee law plays a pivotal role in protecting the health of deeply vulnerable people who lack food, shelter, and social stability. Higher standards and more effective compliance are necessary for international law to realize its full potential to safeguard the world&#039;s population.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Laws</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-04-04</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/laws1010004</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>4</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>38</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2075-471X</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[One Health, One World—The Intersecting Legal Regimes of Trade, Climate Change, Food Security, Humanitarian Crises, and Migration]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-04-04</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/laws1010004</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Kelli K. Garcia</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Lawrence O. Gostin</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/1">
	<title><![CDATA[Laws, Vol. 1, Pages 1-3: Laws Editorial]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/1/1/1</link>
	<description>My life’s work has positioned me in two diverse worlds’ one in science and one in law [1]. I publish in both fields, and the traditions are very different. Law journals typically have narrow readerships, principally those in the legal academy. The law review tradition, particularly in North America, is student edited, non-peer reviewed, and characteristically long and detailed. Law libraries often spend large portions of their budgets on journal subscriptions, which they store in scarce space. [...]</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Laws</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-05-31</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Editorial</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/laws1010001</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>3</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2075-471X</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Laws Editorial]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2011-05-31</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/laws1010001</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Lawrence O. Gostin</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
    
<cc:License rdf:about="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">
	<cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Reproduction" />
	<cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Distribution" />
	<cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#DerivativeWorks" />
</cc:License>

</rdf:RDF>
