Last 7 days
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
See detailEuralens, an Innovative Local Tool to Redevelop Pas-de-Calais Former Mining Basin?
Blondel, Cyril UL

Report (2019)

Background The Pas-de-Calais mining basin is a predominantly urban conurbation of approximately 650,000 inhabitants, situated in the North of France, about 35 km south of Lille and at a reasonable ... [more ▼]

Background The Pas-de-Calais mining basin is a predominantly urban conurbation of approximately 650,000 inhabitants, situated in the North of France, about 35 km south of Lille and at a reasonable distance of Paris, London and Brussels. The territory have been facing since the end of the mining activity in the 1980s an alarming socio-economic situation, ranked last in France for most of the indicators. Against this background, local and regional actors have created in 2009 a local association, Euralens, in order to use the implementation of the antenna of the Louvre in Lens as a catalyst for territorial development. The association has today two main missions: to prepare and to facilitate the emergence of a metropolis institution; to foster local development by supporting innovative local initiatives through a label process. Findings Created in 2009 at the regional level, Euralens is neither a classical (in France) top-down State intervention nor a genuine bottom-up local initiative. The association has taken a rising importance in the organisation of the territory, favouring the cooperation between local authorities, but also between institutional stakeholders at different levels, the civil society and private actors. Doing so, it gives the Pas-de-Calais mining basin a clearer and louder voice. The recent creation of a specific state policy towards the Mining Basin is a good example of such an assertion and demonstrates the clear redistributive impact of Euralens for the benefit of the locality in the national space. On the question of the distribu-tion of territorial engineering, another accomplishment of Euralens is its the capacity to mobilise external national and international expertise to imagine with local stakeholders policies supporting social and territorial development. Outlook However, the effort seems still insufficient over time. The enormous environmental impact of mining activity as well as the deep social impact of the collapse of this activity have let the territory dry. Albeit positive, the action of Euralens is relatively modest in comparison to the extent of the needs. At the social level in particular, the rebuilding of individuals trust is a long-term policy that deserves more attention. Too often, Euralens disregard the social and the procedural dimensions of injustice. It does not pay sufficient attention to the integration of the civil society to the decision-making in a time of democratic crisis. Yet, symbols, power balance, transparency should be cornerstones of Euralens action in the territory in order to better exemplify change in the locality. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 9 (1 UL)
See detailThe real problem with Rawlsian reasonableness
Burks, Deven UL

Scientific Conference (2019, February 16)

Rawlsian “reasonableness” has been the object of considerable and varied criticism. Reactions range from its being “loaded” (Stout 2004: 184) or “chimerical” (Young 2005: 308) to “entirely circular” ... [more ▼]

Rawlsian “reasonableness” has been the object of considerable and varied criticism. Reactions range from its being “loaded” (Stout 2004: 184) or “chimerical” (Young 2005: 308) to “entirely circular” (Mulhall and Swift 2003: 483). Yet more critical reactions often employ external standards or equivocal senses of reasonableness to their detriment (Freeman 2004: 2045, 2063-5) or marshal apparently conflicting materials from Rawls’s broader theory (Young 2005, 2006). In this paper, I put forward a narrow, immanent criticism whereon the two basic aspects of reasonableness are shown to be in tension: the “burdens of judgment” may give the person reason to disagree over the need to propose and to abide by a common basis of fair terms of cooperation. My aims in doing so are threefold. First, I try to make sense of and set on firmer ground Stout’s (2004) critique of reasonableness as being epistemologically untenable. My second and third aims stem from the first. The second consists in carving out a middling conceptual space wherein the negation of Rawlsian “reasonableness” is not merely “unreasonable” in the sense of being willing to impose one’s comprehensive doctrine on others as the terms of political justification and coercion (Rawls 1996: 60-1; Freeman 2004: 2049) nor “unreasonable” in the sense of persons’ culpably endorsing a doctrine inconsistent with acceptance of the burdens of judgment (Rawls 2001: 184, 190; Freeman 2004: 2064) but, instead, “reasonably unreasonable” in the sense of the person’s nonculpably or justifiably rejecting the requirement to offer and to abide by fair terms of cooperation in view of the burdens of judgment. Third, I attempt to salvage a minimal core of reasonableness from the two-conjunct Rawlsian reasonableness, a core which contemporary political philosophers are hard-pressed to do without: the second conjunct consisting in the person’s acknowledgement of the burdens of judgment (Rawls 1996: 54-8). To that end, I proceed in two steps. First, I shall recall the two aspects of reasonableness and hold that their conjunction is necessary for a person to qualify as “reasonable”. In particular, this involves showing that a biconditional obtains: a person is reasonable if and only if the two basic aspects of reasonableness obtain, i.e. if and only if she is willing to propose fair terms of cooperation and she is willing to recognize the burdens of judgment. I also briefly define the site wherefrom one checks a person’s reasonableness: the “you and me” standpoint (Rawls 1996: 28). Secondly, I shall examine whether any burden gives reason to doubt the need to propose and to abide by a common basis of fair terms of cooperation. I find that each of the burdens, in its own way, leaves room to doubt whether reasonable persons in a well-ordered society would assent to such a need. For the first burden (complexity of evidence), the evidence backing the requirement of shared terms of cooperation defined ex ante is not obviously less complex than that contained in reasonable comprehensive doctrines. Regarding the second (relative weight of reasons), even supposing agreement on which reasons are relevant to deciding questions of justice, there may be still be disagreement over the relative priority of those reasons in deciding a given question. As to the third (conceptual indeterminacy and hard cases), such concepts as justice and fairness, cooperation and equality are all subject to the difficulties of identifying hard cases and probing a concept’s limits. Of the fourth (divergent total life experience), it is clear that, through her life experience, a person acquires a set of beliefs (political, moral, epistemological, religious, etc.) which could give the person reason to doubt or otherwise reject the first basic aspect of reasonableness, especially given its significant complexity. Finally, for the fifth burden (conflicting distinct normative considerations), persons may disagree over whether the first basic aspect in fact realizes these different considerations, the priority ordering to be fixed for such considerations and whether a common currency might be found so as to make such considerations commensurable, any of which may suffice for persons to be unable to reach agreement on the requirement, not simply on the reasons why it holds, but also on whether it holds at all. In reaching these findings, I parallel Clarke’s (1999: 639-41) claim that the burdens of judgment apply both to contractarianism’s “reasonable rejection procedure” and principles but do so from narrower, immanent grounds rather than the stronger claim that Rawls’s approach must be committed to substantive epistemological positions. This analysis yields two striking conclusions: First, public reason – the demand to present others with reasons which the person could reasonably expect them to accept – becomes looser and shifts to the domain of politics where one sees what public reasons others may in fact accept (Laden 2001). Seen from a different angle, one need not accept the idea that the first basic aspect and, hence, Rawlsian reasonableness are necessary conditions of political justification under conditions of reasonable pluralism (contra Krasnoff 2014: 696-7): rejecting this aspect and reasonableness in no way means that there can be no political justification under conditions of (reasonable) pluralism. Second, when conceiving justification and discourse, Rawls may be committed, despite himself, to accepting “reasonableness pluralism”, i.e. the view that there exist distinct, possibly irreconcilable accounts of reasonableness to which one may appeal when conceiving justification and discourse. Their combination may lead to a public reason liberalism framework which is at once looser and more actionable. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 4 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailL'écopoésie d'Anise Koltz
Thiltges, Sébastian UL

in Ergal, Yves-Michel; Finck, Michèle (Eds.) Anise Koltz l'inapaisée. La poésie entre les langues (2019)

Detailed reference viewed: 6 (0 UL)
See detailCan Rawlsians be constitutional deliberative democrats?
Burks, Deven UL

Scientific Conference (2019, January 31)

Most see Rawls as a “constitutionalist” rather than a “proceduralist”. He insists that the basic schedule of freedoms, rights and governing procedures, once established, be removed from the table of ... [more ▼]

Most see Rawls as a “constitutionalist” rather than a “proceduralist”. He insists that the basic schedule of freedoms, rights and governing procedures, once established, be removed from the table of governmental and democratic decision-making. Pragmatically, that schedule must be fixed to avoid majoritarian domination, acrimonious bargaining and gridlock and to realize the stabilizing effect of a permanent public set of institutional arrangements and values. Morally, one must affirm only those institutional principles which one would choose in perpetuity, for past, present and future generations. Accordingly, Rawlsians might wonder what good can come of constitutional deliberative democracy, i.e. enabling citizens to formulate and modify the constitution, potentially undermining its stability? Though a necessary element of any just political order and a great political good, stability is only such when stable institutions are also just and guarantee the “fair value of political liberty”, namely that “citizens similarly gifted and motivated have roughly an equal chance of influencing the government’s policy and of attaining positions of authority irrespective of their economic and social class” (Rawls 2005: 358). Formal equality is no replacement for effective equality. Despite lamenting that “one of the main defects of constitutional government has been the failure to insure the fair value of political liberty” (Rawls 1999: 198), Rawls’s institutional vision remains largely within familiar representative and electoral logics. His threefold view of deliberative democracy is similarly limited: an idea of public reason, an institutional framework including a deliberative legislature, and public uptake of the public reason idea(l) (Rawls 2005: 448). Accordingly, I argue that Rawls and his “fair value guarantee” are better served by promoting both freestanding and embedded citizen deliberation on constitutional arrangements. This vehicle for the fair value guarantee is more easily attainable than the transition to a his preferred alternative for political economy, “property-owning democracy” (Rawls 2001: §41) and may fulfill similar aims. Finally, I review two remaining objections from Rawlsians concerning compelled participation and institutional pluralism. All in all, given Rawls’s prominence in political theory, showing that Rawlsians can be constitutional deliberative democrats may help bring another piece to the constitutional deliberative democratic coalition. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 8 (0 UL)
See detailA minority pulls the sample mean: on the individual prevalence of robust group-level cognitive phenomena - the instance of the SNARC effect
Cipora, Krzysztof; van Dijck, Jean-Philippe; Georges, Carrie UL et al

Presentation (2019, January)

Detailed reference viewed: 8 (1 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailTRIDENT: A Three-Steps Strategy to Digitise an Industrial System for Stepping into Industry 4.0
Benedick, Paul-Lou UL; Robert, Jérémy UL; Le Traon, Yves UL

in Proceedings of 45th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (2019)

Detailed reference viewed: 20 (3 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailTheater - zum Staunen
Heimböckel, Dieter UL; Bloch, Natalie UL

in Zeitschrift für Interkulturelle Germanistik (2019), 10(2), 149-150

Detailed reference viewed: 7 (1 UL)
See detailEssays on Convertibles and Stock Markets
Abed Masror Khah, Sara UL

Doctoral thesis (2019)

Detailed reference viewed: 15 (5 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailSustainable Security and Safety: Challenges and Opportunities
Paverd, Andrew; Volp, Marcus UL; Brasser, Ferdinand et al

in OpenAccess Series in Informatics (OASIcs) (2019), 73

A significant proportion of today's information and communication technology (ICT) systems are entrusted with high value assets, and our modern society has become increasingly dependent on these systems ... [more ▼]

A significant proportion of today's information and communication technology (ICT) systems are entrusted with high value assets, and our modern society has become increasingly dependent on these systems operating safely and securely over their anticipated lifetimes. However, we observe a mismatch between the lifetimes expected from ICT-supported systems (such as autonomous cars) and the duration for which these systems are able to remain safe and secure, given the spectrum of threats they face. Whereas most systems today are constructed within the constraints of foreseeable technology advancements, we argue that long term, i.e., sustainable security & safety, requires anticipating the unforeseeable and preparing systems for threats not known today. In this paper, we set out our vision for sustainable security & safety. We summarize the main challenges in realizing this desideratum in real-world systems, and we identify several design principles that could address these challenges and serve as building blocks for achieving this vision. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 15 (3 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailZeitschrift für interkulturelle Germanistik
Amann, Wilhelm UL; Dembeck, Till UL; Heimböckel, Dieter UL et al

in Zeitschrift für Interkulturelle Germanistik (2019), 10(1),

Detailed reference viewed: 6 (1 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailZeitschrift für interkulturelle Germanistik
Amann, Wilhelm UL; Dembeck, Till UL; Heimböckel, Dieter UL et al

in Zeitschrift für Interkulturelle Germanistik (2019), 10(2),

Detailed reference viewed: 15 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailKrisenrhetorik und Legitimationsritual. Einsprüche gegen Deutungsmonopole (nicht nur) in der Germanistik
Heimböckel, Dieter UL

in Zeitschrift für Interkulturelle Germanistik (2019), 10(2), 23-38

Detailed reference viewed: 8 (0 UL)
See detailHealth and Labor Markets
Polachek, Solomon; Tatsiramos, Konstantinos UL

Book published by Emerald (2019)

Detailed reference viewed: 12 (1 UL)
Full Text
See detailGerman Emigration and Remigration Panel Study (GERPS). Neue GERPS-Daten über deutsche Aus- und Rückwandernde
Ette, Andreas; Decieux, Jean Philippe Pierre UL; Erlinghagen, Marcel et al

in Bevölkerungsforschung aktuell (2019), 4

Migration zwischen hoch entwickelten Staaten stellt heute einen zentralen Bestandteil des globalen Wanderungsgeschehens dar (OECD 2015). Dennoch wissen wir über die internationale Migration der ... [more ▼]

Migration zwischen hoch entwickelten Staaten stellt heute einen zentralen Bestandteil des globalen Wanderungsgeschehens dar (OECD 2015). Dennoch wissen wir über die internationale Migration der Bevölkerungen eben jener Wohlstandsgesellschaften vergleichsweise wenig, da bisher vor allem die Migration aus weniger in höher entwickelte Staaten untersucht wurde. Ziel der German Emigration and Remigration Panel Study (GERPS) ist es, dieses Thema am Beispiel Deutschlands zu untersuchen und neue Daten zu den individuellen Konsequenzen internationaler Mobilität zu erheben [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 32 (2 UL)
See detailVorwort
Neumann, Sascha UL

in ElFo - Elementarpädagogische Forschungsbeiträge (2019)

Detailed reference viewed: 116 (1 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAn Efficient Machine Learning Method to Solve Imbalanced Data in Metabolic Disease Prediction
Cecchini, Vania Filipa UL; Nguyen, Thanh-Phuong UL; Pfau, Thomas UL et al

in Cecchini, Vania Filipa (Ed.) An Efficient Machine Learning Method to Solve Imbalanced Data in Metabolic Disease Prediction (2019)

Detailed reference viewed: 38 (4 UL)