300 Sozialwissenschaften
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (5) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Agency (1)
- Alternativkino (1)
- Amnestie (1)
- Anpassung (1)
- Asylbewerberunterkunft (1)
- COVID-19 (1)
- Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) (1)
- Coping strategies (1)
- Counter-Globalization (1)
- Covid-19 (1)
Institut
- Soziologie (2)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (2)
- Medienwissenschaft (1)
The global spread of the coronavirus pandemic has particularly dramatic consequences for the lives of migrants and refugees living in already marginalised and restricted conditions, whose ongoing crisis is at risk of being overlooked. But refugees are not only extremely vulnerable and at risk of infection, as several reports show, quickly develop their own protection measures like the production of hygienic products, the publication of their situation and calls for action and help. Therefore, this paper aims to research the effects of the coronavirus crisis on refugees in camp settings with a special ethnographic focus on how refugees actively deal with this crisis and if they, through already developed resilience, are capable of adapting to the restrictions as well as inventing strategies to cope with the difficult situation. To account for the variety of refugee camps as well as the different living conditions due to their locality, history and national asylum politics, we will look at three different locations, namely refugee asylum homes in Germany, hotspots on the Greek islands as well as one refugee camp in Kenya. The main questions will be how, under structurally and institutionally framed conditions of power and victimisation in refugee camps, forms of agency are established, made possible or limited. The goal is to show which strategies refugees apply to cope with the enhanced restrictions and exclusion, how they act to protect themselves and others from the virus and how they present and reflect their situation during the coronavirus pandemic. Finally, this discussion offers a new perspective to consider refugees not only as vulnerable victims, but also as actively engaged individuals.
Currently, new business models created in the sharing economy differ considerably and they differ in the formation of trust as well. If and how trust can be created is shown by a comparison of two examples which diverge in their founding philosophy. The chosen example of community-based economy, Community Supported Agriculture (CSA), no longer trusts the capitalist system and therefore distances itself and creates its own environment including a new business model. It is implemented within rather small groups where trust is created by personal relations and face-to-face communication. On the contrary, the example of a platform economy, the accommodation-provider company Airbnb, shows trust in the system and pushes technological innovations through the use of platform applications. It promotes trust and confidence in the progress of technology. For the conceptual analysis, the distinction between personal trust and system trust defined by Niklas Luhmann is adopted. The analysis describes two different modes of trust formation and how they push distrust or improve trust. Grounded on these analyses, assumptions on the process of trust formation within varying models of the sharing economy are formulated as well as a hypothesis about possible developments is introduced for further research.
Chapter 2: Using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel, this study examines the relation-ship between immigrant residential segregation and immigrants" satisfaction with the neighbor-hood. The estimates show that immigrants living in segregated areas are less satisfied with the neighborhood. This is consistent with the hypothesis that housing discrimination rather than self-selection plays an important role in immigrant residential segregation. Our result holds true even when controlling for other influences such as household income and quality of the dwelling. It also holds true in fixed effects estimates that account for unobserved time-invariant influences. Chapter 3: Using survey data from the German Socio-Economic Panel, this study shows that immigrants living in segregated residential areas are more likely to report discrimination because of their ethnic background. This applies to both segregated areas where most neighbors are immigrants from the same country of origin as the surveyed person and segregated areas where most neighbors are immigrants from other countries of origin. The results suggest that housing discrimination rather than self-selection plays an important role in immigrant residential segregation. Chapter 4: Using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) and administrative data from 1996 to 2009, I investigate the question whether or not right-wing extremism of German residents is affected by the ethnic concentration of foreigners living in the same residential area. My results show a positive but insignificant relationship between ethnic concentration at the county level and the probability of extreme right-wing voting behavior for West Germany. However, due to potential endogeneity issues, I additionally instrument the share of foreigners in a county with the share of foreigners in each federal state (following an approach of Dustmann/Preston 2001). I find evidence for the interethnic contact theory, predicting a negative relationship between foreign-ers" share and right-wing voting. Moreover, I analyze the moderating role of education and the influence of cultural traits on this relationship. Chapter 5: Using data from the Socio-Economic Panel from 1998 to 2009 and administrative data on regional ethnic diversity, I show that ethnic diversity inhibits significantly people- political interest and participation in political organizations in West Germany. People seem to isolate themselves from political participation if exposed to more ethnic diversity which is particularly relevant with respect to the ongoing integration process of the European Union and the increasing transfer of legislative power from the national to European level. The results are robust if an instrumental variable strategy suggested by Dustmann and Preston (2001) is used to take into account that ethnic diversity measured on a local spatial level could be endogenous due to residential sorting. Interestingly, participation in non-political organizations is positively affected by ethnic diversity if selection bias is corrected for.
Legalisation cannot be fully explained by interest politics. If that were the case, the attitudes towards legalisation would be expected to be based on objective interests and actual policies in France and Germany would be expected to be more similar. Nor can it be explained by institutional agency, because there are no hints that states struggle with different normative traditions. Rather, political actors seek to make use of the structures that already exist to guar-antee legitimacy for their actions. If the main concern of governmental actors really is to accumulate legitimacy, as stated in the introduction, then politicians have a good starting position in the case of legalisation of illegal foreigners. Citizens" negative attitudes towards legalisation cannot be explained by imagined labour market competition; income effects play only a secondary role. The most important explanatory factor is the educational level of each individual. Objective interests do not trigger attitudes towards legalisation, but rather a basic men-tal predisposition for or against illegal immigrants who are eligible for legalisation. Politics concerning amnesties are thus not tied to an objectively given structure like the socio-economic composition of the electorate, but are open for political discretion. Attitudes on legalising illegal immigrants can be regarded as being mediated by beliefs and perceptions, which can be used by political agents or altered by political developments. However, politicians must adhere to a national frame of legitimating strategies that cannot be neglected without consequences. It was evident in the cross-country comparison of political debates that there are national systems of reference that provide patterns of interpretation. Legalisation is seen and incorporated into immigration policy in a very specific way that differs from one country to the next. In both countries investigated in this study, there are fundamental debates about which basic principles apply to legalisation and which of these should be held in higher esteem: a legal system able to work, humanitarian rights, practical considerations, etc. The results suggest that legalisation is "technicized" in France by describing it as an unusual but possible pragmatic instrument for the adjustment of the inefficient rule of law. In Germany, however, legalisation is discussed at a more normative level. Proponents of conservative immigration policies regard it as a substantial infringement on the rule of law, so that even defenders of a humanitarian solution for illegal immigrants are not able to challenge this view without significant political harm. But the arguments brought to bear in the debate on legalisation are not necessarily sound because they are not irrefutable facts, but instruments to generate legitimacy, and there are enough possibilities for arguing and persuading because socio-economic factors play a minor role. One of the most important arguments, the alleged pull effect of legalisation, has been subjected to an empirical investigation. In the political debate, it does not make any dif-ference whether this is true or not, insofar as it is not contested by incontrovertible findings. In reality, the results suggest that amnesties indeed exert a small attracting influence on illegal immigration, which has been contested by immigration friendly politicians in the French par-liament. The effect, however, is not large; therefore, some conservative politicians may put too much stress on this argument. Moreover, one can see legalisation as an instrument to restore legitimacy that has slipped away from immigration politics because of a high number of illegally residing foreigners. This aspect explains some of the peculiarities in the French debate on legalisation, e.g. the idea that the coherence of the law is secured by creating exceptional rules for legalising illegal immigrants. It has become clear that the politics of legalisation are susceptible to manipulation by introducing certain interpretations into the political debate, which become predominant and supersede other views. In this study, there are no signs of a systematic misuse of this constellation by any certain actor. However, the history of immigration policy is full of examples of symbolic politics in which a certain measure has been initiated while the actors are totally aware of its lack of effect. Legalisation has escaped this fate so far because it is a specific instrument that is the result of neglecting populist mechanisms rather than an ex-ample of a superficial measure. This result does not apply to policies concerning illegal immi-gration in general, both with regard to concealing a lack of control and flexing the state- muscles.
Globalization and Divergence: Dynamics of Dissensus in Non-Dominant Cinema Cultures of South India
(2002)
Based on her field studies between 1999 and 2003 in the South Indian State Kerala, the author critically reflects about Habermas's concept of the (bourgeois) public sphere, and also about later critiques of Habermas (eg. Eley). Schulze adds the new dimensions of human emotionality and humane ethics to the discussion of today's public (spheres) and civil societies which are part of globalising modernisations. It is poor and marginalized women's strongly felt compassion and love practised in their daily lives, which Schulze focusses on: these Marginalized ethics of the 'Good life' do sharply contrast the dominant societies' value systems; these latters consequently don't provide to the Marginaliezed a 'model'. However, Kerala, which is widely refered to as a development model - particularly with respect to the situation/ education of its women - is thus analysed by the author as a historically and culturally specific kind of 'modernity', which follows are rather violent and aggressive path of development in consonance with the general ruling anti-human/ nature philosophy of 'globalization'. Schulze's tool in her field work is 'participatory action research' and also her 'empathic camera' (camcoder). She mixed with local women who had organized themselves in women's groups with the urge to truly represent themSelves and their own ethics and goals in life - without the usual intervention of men/ of nationalist politics ruling Kerala's public sphere(s). In the course of Schulze and the local women groups becoming acquainted with each other, the scholar and the Marginalized felt the desire to support each other in their respective struggles for empowerment and for being respected as a human being. The author finally understood the fallacy and cynicism which lies in applying as a scholar the term 'women in Kerala' as if there wasn't the day to day particular violence which women of dalit ('untouchable'), or of adivasi (indigenous) background experience. Women's lives are moulded by networks of violence which are inherent to Kerala's castes, classes, and ethnicities, parallel to the basic oppression which women face because they are women. A group of dalit women in Kerala became particularly close companions in Schulze's quest for unravelling seemingly contradictory facts: Kerala's official claim to provide to women and other persons who were generally discriminated against in the larger Indian context, a supportive social and educational environment, on the one hand, and on the other hand the comparatively high number of suicides among Keralite women (and men), and the absence of women in what appears as Kerala's public sphere and 'civil society'. In several analytical steps which always centre around the experiences and feelings of the many poor and marginalized women, their life-worlds, their daily life philosophies, their views, voices, their ethics, dreams, Schulze unfolds these Marginalized visions, and tries to interpret them on their own terms. In this manner not only the mainstream society's propaganda about the 'Kerala development model' is demystified, but also to the reader insights become possible into a totally different set of ethics held by these women. They transgress notions of competition, of the 'necessary' monetarisation of all spheres of human life and of nature, of caste, religious, or gender conflicts. By means of 13 small video films the women together with Schulze showed and reflected upon their philosophy of an empowered 'Good life'.