Warum Unternehmen sich (nicht) an Recht und Gesetz halten | Datenschutz und Datensicherheit - DuD
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Warum Unternehmen sich (nicht) an Recht und Gesetz halten

... und was dies für den Datenschutz bedeutet

  • Schwerpunkt
  • Published:
Datenschutz und Datensicherheit - DuD Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Ein Ziel der DSGVO ist, die Grundrechte und Grundfreiheiten natürlicher Personen besser zu schützen. Entscheidend hierfür ist eine wirkungsvolle Durchsetzung der rechtlichen Vorgaben. Dazu sieht die DSGVO deutlich härtere Sanktionen vor, die laut Art. 83 Abs. 1 wirksam und abschreckend sein sollen. Ist die Verhängung hoher Bußgelder solch ein wirksames und abschreckendes Mittel? Wir gehen der Frage nach, was die Wissenschaft darüber weiß, warum sich Unternehmen überhaupt an Recht und Gesetz halten und was man daraus für Schlüsse für das künftige Sanktionsregime der DSGVO ziehen kann.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  1. Bamberger, K. A. (2006): Regulation as Delegation. Private Firms, Decision making, and accountability in the Administrative State. In: Duke Law Journal 56, Nr. 2, S. 377-468.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bamberger, K. A.; Mulligan, D. K. (2015): Privacy on the ground: Driving corporate behavior in the United States and Europe. Cambridge, Mass.; London: The MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Bamberger, K. A.; Mulligan, D. K. (2008): Privacy Decisionmaking in Administrative Agencies. In: University of Chicago Law Review 75, Nr. 1, S. 75-108.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bamberger, K. A. and Mulligan, D. K. (2011): New Governance, Chief Privacy Officers, and the Corporate Management of Information Privacy in the United States. An Initial Inquiry. In: Law & Policy 33, Nr. 4, S. 477-508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Becker, G. S. (1968): Crime and Punishment. An Economic Approach. In: Journal of Political Economy 76, Nr. 2, S. 169-217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Becker, G. S. (1976): The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Burby, R. J.; Paterson, R. G. (1993): Improving Compliance with State Environmental Regulations. In: Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 12, Nr. 4, S. 753-772.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Craig Smith, N.; Simpson, S. S.; Huang, C.-Y. (2007): Why Managers Fail to do the Right Thing. An Empirical Study of Unethical and Illegal Conduct. In: Business Ethics Quarterly 17, Nr. 4, S. 633-667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cyert, R. M.; March, J. G. (1992): A behavioral theory of the firm. 2. Aufl. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Edelman, L. B.; Talesh, S. A. (2011): To Comply or Not to Comply – That Isn’t the Question. How Organizations Construct the Meaning of Compliance. In: Parker, C.; Lehmann Nielsen, V. et al. (Hrsg.): Explaining Compliance: Business Responses to Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, S. 103-122.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Faure, M.; Ogus, A.; Philipsen, N. (2009): Curbing Consumer Financial Losses. The Economics of Regulatory Enforcement. In: Law & Policy 31, Nr. 2, S. 161-191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gilad, S. (2011): Institutionalizing fairness in financial markets. Mission impossible? In: Regulation & Governance 5, Nr. 3, S. 309-332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gioia, D. A. (1992): Pinto fires and personal ethics. A script analysis of missed opportunities. In: Journal of Business Ethics 11, Nr. 5-6, S. 379-389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gunningham, N.; Kagan, R. A.; Thornton, D. (2004): Social License and Environmental Protection. Why Businesses Go Beyond Compliance. In: Law & Social Inquiry 29, Nr. 2, S. 307-341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gunningham, N.; Thornton, D.; Kagan, R. A. (2005): Motivating Management. Corporate Compliance in Environmental Protection. In: Law & Policy 27, Nr. 2, S. 289-316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kagan, R. A.; Gunningham, N.; Thornton, D. (2011): Fear, Duty, and Regulatory Compliance. Lessons from Three Research Projects. In: Parker, C.; Lehmann Nielsen, V. et al. (Hrsg.): Explaining Compliance: Business Responses to Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, S. 37-58.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ko, K.; Mendeloff, J.; Gray, W. (2010): The role of inspection sequence in compliance with the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) standards. Interpretations and implications. In: Regulation & Governance 4, Nr. 1, S. 48-70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lewis-Beck, M. S.; Alford, J. R. (1980): Can Government Regulate Safety? The Coal Mine Example. In: American Political Science Review 74, Nr. 3, S. 745-756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. March, J. G.; Simon, H. A.; Guetzkow, H. (1994): Organizations. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Martin, N.; Bile, T.; Nebel, M. et al. (2019). Das Sanktionsregime der Datenschutz-Grundverordnung: Auswirkungen auf Unternehmen und Datenschutzaufsichtsbehörden. Forschungsbericht. Karlsruhe: Forum Privatheit.

    Google Scholar 

  21. May, P. J. (2005): Compliance Motivations. Perspectives of Farmers, Homebuilders, and Marine Facilities. In: Law & Policy 27, Nr. 2, S. 317-347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. May, P. J.; Winter, S. (1999): Regulatory enforcement and compliance. Examining Danish agro-environmental policy. In: Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 18, Nr. 4, S. 625-651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Parker, C. (2002): The Open Corporation. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Parker, C.; Lehmann Nielsen, V. (2011): Introduction. In: Parker, C.; Lehmann Nielsen, V. et al. (Hrsg.): Explaining Compliance: Business Responses to Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, S. 1-35.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Parker, C.; Gilad, S. (2011): Internal Corporate Compliance Management Systems. Structure, Culture and Agency. In: Parker, C.; Lehmann Nielsen, V. et al. (Hrsg.): Explaining Compliance: Business Responses to Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, S. 170-197

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Parker, C.; Nielsen, V. L. (2008): Corporate Compliance Systems. In: Administration & Society 41, Nr. 1, S. 3-37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Popitz, H. (1980): Die normative Konstruktion von Gesellschaft. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Simpson, S. S.; Piquero, N. L. (2002): Low Self-Control, Organizational Theory, and Corporate Crime. In: Law & Society Review 36, Nr. 3, S. 509-548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Simpson, S. S.; Rorie, M. (2011): Motivating Compliance. Economic and Material Motives for Compliance. In: Parker, C.; Lehmann Nielsen, V. et al. (Hrsg.): Explaining Compliance: Business Responses to Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, S. 59-77.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Spiekermann, S.; Korunovska, J.; Langheinrich, M. (2019): Inside the Organization: Why Privacy and Security Engineering Is a Challenge for Engineers. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 107, Nr. 3, S. 600-615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Stigler, G. J. (1970): The Optimum Enforcement of Laws. In: Journal of Political Economy 78, Nr. 3, S. 526-536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Thornton, D.; Gunningham, N. A.; Kagan, R. A. (2005): General Deterrence and Corporate Environmental Behavior. In: Law & Policy 27, Nr. 2, S. 262-288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Waldman, A. E. (2018): Designing Without Privacy. In: Houston Law Review 55, Nr. 3, S. 659-727.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Karlsruhe, Deutschland

    Nicholas Martin PhD

  2. Rumbach, Deutschland

    Michael Friedewald

Authors
  1. Nicholas Martin PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Friedewald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas Martin PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Martin, N., Friedewald, M. Warum Unternehmen sich (nicht) an Recht und Gesetz halten . Datenschutz Datensich 43, 493–497 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11623-019-1150-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11623-019-1150-2

Search

Navigation