Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (30) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (30)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (30)
Keywords
- Arbeitsethik (2)
- Garantiertes Mindesteinkommen (2)
- Sozialstaat (2)
- Absatzweg (1)
- Alternative Wirtschaft (1)
- Arbeit (1)
- Arbeitsgesellschaft (1)
- Arbeitsmotivation (1)
- Arbeitsvolumen (1)
- Basic Income (1)
Institute
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (30) (remove)
Zur Tagungsbegleitung und als virtueller Abstractroom stehen auf dem Bretterblog nun die Beiträge der Jungen AFK-Konferenz „Welches Wissen(-)schafft Praxis?“ bereit, um sie im Vorfeld, parallel und im Nachhinein zu diskutieren und barrierefrei über die Tagungsgrenzen hinaus, thematische Anregungen zu liefern.
Wie sieht die Zukunft der Wertschöpfung aus? Lässt sich eine "Demokratisierung" der Wertschöpfung beobachten? Befinden wir uns inmitten eines Paradigmenwechsels von der Industriellen Produktion hin zur Bottom-up-Ökonomie? Und wenn ja, was bedeutet das für die Gesellschaft?
Um diese Fragen aus verschiedenen wissenschaftlichen Perspektiven zu betrachten und gemeinschaftlich die damit zusammenhängenden gesellschaftlichen Chancen und Herausforderungen zu diskutieren, wurde das neue Konferenzformat "Interdisziplinäre Konferenz zur Zukunft der Wertschöpfung" geschaffen. Neben dem themenübergreifenden fachlichen Austausch ist auch die Vernetzung zwischen Wissenschaftlern/innen und Experten aus der Praxis ein Ziel dieser Reihe.
Der vorliegende Konferenzband beinhaltet die Beiträge der teilnehmenden Wissenschaftlicher/innen aus den Technik-, Wirtschafts-, Sozial- und Rechtswissenschaften und gibt einen Überblick über die aktuellen Forschungsschwerpunkte in den jeweiligen Fachgebieten. Die akademische Qualitätssicherung erfolgte mit Hilfe eines Peer-Review-Verfahrens. ...
With the Open Conference "Being a Citizen in Europe" in Zagreb (Croatia, 29-30 June 2015) external scholars were invited to connect to the bEUcitizen-project and to explore theoretical foundations and political as well as practical realities of today’s European citizenship. The structuring idea was to highlight potential core barriers towards EU citizenship and to do so by way of conceptual discussions as well as empirical analyses mapping a variety of citizenship practices in the EU. This was reflected in four thematic streams gathering contributions from both external and bEUcitizen researchers. The streams reflected on different kinds of barriers, conceptual and practical ones. They revolve around the normative promise of citizenship, the diversity of practices and possible paths of future development.
While stream 1 reflected on the dynamic of (re)configuring citizenship as a bounded or unbounded concept, stream 2 applied a comparative perspective on the diversity of rights-based citizenship practices. Stream 3 addressed the political dimension of EU-Citizenship and discussed a lack of citizenship participation as a farreaching barrier as well as possible remedies. Finally, stream 4 focused on linguistic diversity and the difficulties it creates regarding the conceptual and practical dimension of EU-citizenship. Taken together the contributions lucidly reflect the variety of disciplines cooperating in the bEUcitizen-project and their different points of view on EU-citizenship.
The crucial lesson from the contributions to the Open Conference for the theoretical task of WP 2 and the bEUcitizen-project more generally is that without conceptual clarity about the meaning of EU-citizenship the task of identifying practical barriers and evaluating the latter’s effects remains ambivalent. A shared understanding of the meaning of a (future) EU citizenship is still missing. What shall EU citizenship be or become: a fully-fledged democratic citizenship or a market-citizenship, bundling certain rights implied by the internal market freedoms? This undecided question is at the core of the debate on EU citizenship. In order to prevent citizens from turning their backs on the EU a public contestation of our understanding of the EU is needed. European democracy à venir requires an ongoing public debate about what European integration is all about and where it should lead us to – even and especially when there is no consensus about it.
D2.1. provides further elaboration of the original research design and informs about ideas for the final Volume II of bEUcitizen. It is closely connected to task 1 of work package 2: specifying various concrete tasks for the different work packages and formulating overarching questions suitable to provide substantive cohesion and integration of the overall project. The elaboration of 10 crosscutting topics (to become chapters in the “horizontal” book, D2.3.) is a first step towards this goal. Discussing these cross-cutting topics is supposed to feed, infuse and inspire the work done in the different work packages and to build cross-cutting connections between them. Themes 1-10 merge into a valuable overview of the multi-faceted research on (EU) citizenship. They access the main issues of EU-citizenship and citizenship in general from different angles and different disciplines. Taken together these contributions help to identify barriers towards EU citizenship and ways to overcome them. Each Theme formulates questions how it might feed and be fed by further information and findings in the other work packages.
D2.1. is mainly meant for internal use. Its functions are firstly to inform about preliminary ideas, eventual contributions to planned final results and secondly to make out some more of less specific guiding questions that connect the work done by the single researchers in every different work package to the project as a whole. This task implies a normative yardstick, a clear picture of what would be a "good" EU citizenship practice. Elaborating on such a normative yardstick is a meta-topic that cuts across the range of cross-cutting topics presented in this working paper.
This report was written by the organizers of the workshop "Accounting for Combat-Related Killings," which took place at the Goethe University Frankfurt in July 2014. Scholars from Israel, the United Kingdom, the United States,, Canada, and Germany came together to present and discuss case studies on the discourse practices involved in accounting for combat-related killings in different national and transnational contexts. Intending to reflect on the methodological skills needed to analyze newly available process data, the workshop brought together scholars using different methodological approaches (here mainly ethnomethodology and critical discourse analysis). In regard to the global trend towards increasing numbers of so called permanent, asymmetric, small, and permanent wars, the report turns to concepts, methods, and empirical findings that foster understandings of the difficulties war generates at social, cultural and political levels as well as the manner in which these predicaments are negotiated, denied, or deflected. The report summarizes the workshop by presenting the papers in a specific order, beginning with accounting in combat, followed by tribunals of accounting, and finally the sedimentation of accounting in cultural representations.