Gesellschaftswissenschaften
Refine
Year of publication
- 2017 (192) (remove)
Document Type
- Report (104)
- Article (53)
- Review (12)
- Contribution to a Periodical (9)
- Part of Periodical (6)
- Working Paper (3)
- Part of a Book (2)
- Bachelor Thesis (1)
- Book (1)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (192)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (192)
Keywords
- Adorno (6)
- global justice (5)
- Reconhecimento (4)
- Theodor W. Adorno (4)
- Axel Honneth (3)
- Donald Trump (3)
- Honneth (3)
- Recognition (3)
- Critical theory (2)
- Cuidado em saúde (2)
Institute
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (192)
- Philosophie (32)
- Institut für Sozialforschung (IFS) (31)
- Exzellenzcluster Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen (20)
- Präsidium (12)
- Hessische Stiftung für Friedens- und Konfliktforschung (HSFK) (3)
- Cornelia Goethe Centrum für Frauenstudien und die Erforschung der Geschlechterverhältnisse (CGC) (1)
- Kulturwissenschaften (1)
- Philosophie und Geschichtswissenschaften (1)
- Starker Start ins Studium: Qualitätspakt Lehre (1)
- Sustainable Architecture for Finance in Europe (SAFE) (1)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (1)
- Zentrum für Nordamerika-Forschung (ZENAF) (1)
Online reading behavior can be regarded as a "new" form of cultural capital in today’s digital world. However, it is unclear whether "traditional" mechanisms of cultural and social reproduction are also found in this domain, and whether they manifest uniformly across countries at different stages of development. This article analyzes whether the early home literacy environment has an impact on informational online reading behavior among adolescents and whether this association varies between countries with different levels of digitalization and educational expansion. Data from the 2009 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) were used for the empirical analyses. The results of regression models with country-fixed effects indicate a positive association between literacy activities in early childhood and informational online reading at age 15. This association was quite stable across countries. These findings are discussed in light of cultural and social reproduction theory and digital divide research.
Ein Jahr intensiver Vorbereitungen liegt nun hinter uns. Richtig, ein Jahr Vorbereitung für eine einwöchige Konferenz! Doch auch dieses Jahr hat sich wieder gezeigt wie wichtig diese intensive Vorbereitung ist: Die Studierenden haben sich vertiefte Kenntnisse über die Vereinten Nationen und die zu vertretenden Länder Israel und Frankreich angeeignet und neue Kompetenzen erworben. ...
National Model United Nations New York 2018 : Delegation der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main
(2017)
Seit ihrer Gründung im Jahr 1945 sind die Vereinten Nationen zur bedeutendsten und einflussreichsten internationalen Organisation avanciert. Mittlerweile arbeiten 193 Mitgliedsstaaten gemeinsam an dem ehrgeizigen Ziel, den Weltfrieden und die internationale Sicherheit zu wahren. Der in der Charta der Vereinten Nationen verankerte Grundsatz des Verzichts auf Gewaltanwendung und der friedlichen Beilegung aller Streitigkeiten macht sie zu einer weltweit einzigartigen Institution.
Die Beschäftigung mit den Vereinten Nationen ist für Studierende der Gesellschaftswissenschaften – insbesondere der Politikwissenschaft – essentiell für den späteren Berufsalltag. Da der Fokus im wissenschaftlichen Universitätsbetrieb häufig auf der Diskussion theoretischer Paradigmen und eher selten auf praktischen Fragestellungen liegt, ist die Teilnahme am National Model United Nations (NMUN) in New York eine willkommene Abwechslung mit einzigartigem Charakter. Innerhalb einer Simulation von UN-Verhandlungen versetzen sich Studierende als Mitglieder einer Delegation in die Lage von Diplomaten und vertreten die Interessen, Werte und Positionen des ihnen zugeteilten Landes. Dabei versuchen sie, dessen Standpunkte in Kooperation mit anderen Delegationen durchzusetzen. ...
This paper considers the trend towards megaregionalism (TTIP, TPP) that became prominent in the trade domain in the last years of the Obama administration. While megaregionalism has fallen by the wayside since Trump’s inauguration, the underlying rationale for such treaties will most likely reassert itself rather soon. So there are structural issues that need to be discussed from a standpoint of global justice. In all likelihood, megaregionalism is detrimental to global justice. TTIP in particular, or anything like it, might derail any possibility for a trade organization to aid the pursuit of justice at the global level, and any possibility that trade will be used to that end. From the standpoint of global justice one must hope that megaregionalism does not replace WTO multilateralism. The global-justice framework used here is the grounds-of-justice approach offered in the author’s 2012 On Global Justice.
Megaregional trade negotiations have become the subject of heated debate, above all in the context of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). In this article, I argue that the justice of the global order suffers from its institutional fragmentation into regime complexes. From a republican perspective, which aspires to non-domination as a guiding principles and idea of global justice, regime complexes raise specific and important challenges in that they open the door to specific forms of domination. I thereby challenge a more optimistic outlook in regime complexes, which paints a positive normative picture of regime complexes, arguing that they enable the enhancement of democracy beyond the state and, consequently, have the potential to reduce the democratic deficit in global governance. By drawing attention to how regime complexes reinforce domination-related injustice, this article contributes an original perspective on megaregionals and to exploring the implications of global justice as non-domination.
Recent trade negotiations such as TTIP include investor protection clauses. Against the background of an analysis of the case for trade, the paper asks whether such clauses can be justified from a normative perspective. More specifically, what is the impact of investor protection on the domestic distribution of the gains from trade between labour and capital, and how should we assess this impact from the perspective of justice? In order to answer this question, the paper develops a series of ideal-type scenarios that reflect the consequences of investor protection on employment on the one hand, and on the distributive conflict between labour and capital on the other. While no claim is made which of these scenarios corresponds to TTIP or other trade agreements, they provide a useful normative framework to analyse such agreements.
nvestor-state-dispute-settlement (ISDS) is an arbitration mechanism to settle disputes between foreign investors and host-states. Seemingly a technical issue in private international law, ISDS procedures have recently become a matter of public concern and the target of political resistance, due to the power they grant to foreign investors in matters of public policies in the countries they invest in. This article examines the practice of ISDS through the lenses of liberal-statist theories of international justice, which value self-determination. It argues that the investor-state arbitration system illustrates how liberal-statist theories of international distributive justice ought to care about relative socioeconomic disadvantage, contra the sufficiency principle that they typically defend. The sufficiency principle draws on a questionable conception of the freedom that self-determination consists in.
Readers of Hannah Arendt’s now classic formulation of the statelessness problem in her 1951 book The Origins of Totalitarianism abound at a moment when the number of stateless peoples worldwide continues to rise exponentially. Along with statelessness, few concepts in Arendt scholarship have spawned such a volume of literature, and perhaps none have provoked as much interest outside of the field of philosophy, as ‘the right to have rights.’ Interpreting this enigmatic term exposes the heart of our beliefs about the nature of the political and has important consequences for how we practice politics on a global scale because it implicitly takes plural human beings, and not the citizen, as its subjects. Arendt’s conceptualization of this problem remains unsurpassed in its diagnosis of the political situation of statelessness, as well as its intimate description of the human cost of what she refers to as ‘world loss,’ a phenomenon that the prevailing human rights and global justice discourse does not take into account. And yet, as an alternative framework for thinking about global politics, the right to have rights resists easy interpretation, let alone practical application.
The diagnosis that we are living in a world risk society formulated by Ulrich Beck 20 years ago (Beck, Kölner Z Soziol Sozialpsychol 36:119–147, 1996) has lost nothing of its power, especially against the background of the Anthropocene debate. “Global risks” have been identified which are caused by human activities, technology, and modernization processes. Microplastics are a by-product of exactly these modernization processes, being distributed globally by physical processes like ocean currents, and causing effects far from their place of origin. In recent years, the topic has gained great prominence, as microplastics have been discovered nearly everywhere in the environment, raising questions about the impacts on food for human consumption. But are microplastics really a new phenomenon or rather a symptom of an old problem? And exactly what risks are involved? It seems that the phenomenon has accelerated political action—the USA has passed the Microbead-Free Waters Act 2015—and industries have pledged to fade out the use of microbeads in their cosmetic products. At first sight, is it a success for environmentalists and the protection of our planet?
This chapter deals with these questions by adopting a social-ecological perspective, discussing microplastics as a global risk. Taking four main characteristics of global risks, we develop four arguments to discuss (a) the everyday production of risk by societies, (b) scientific risk evaluation of microplastics, (c) social responses, and (d) problems of risk management. To illustrate these four issues, we draw on different aspects of the current scientific and public debate. In doing so, we contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the social-ecological implications of microplastics.