Employment 'Miracles'

Why did some economies experience a boom in the 1990s? Employment 'Miracles' comparatively analyses select miracle economies. The contributors to the volume critically analyze how the small size and institutional structure of seven countries like the Netherlands, Denmark and Ireland accounted for their success and status as economic models. Comparisons with the American and German markets reveal how differing policies - liberal versus corporatist/social democratic - determine job growth and levels of income inequality and poverty. The book also stresses the explanatory relevance of lucky circumstances such as the housing price bubble. Employment 'Miracles' is an important resource for political scientists and economists in their study of employment development.Was de 'miraculeuze' ontwikkeling van de werkgelegenheid in de jaren '90 en net na de eeuwwisseling in onder andere Australië, Nederland en Denemarken inderdaad een wonder, of lag hieraan een uitgekiende strategie ten grondslag? Meestal wordt de oorzaak gezocht in het economisch beleid en de loonmatiging zoals vastgelegd in cao's, die een toenemende export en een afnemende werkloosheid tot gevolg zouden hebben gehad. Dit vijfde deel in de serie "http://www.aup.nl/do.php?a=show_visitor_booklist&b=series&series=29">Changing Welfare States laat zien dat toevallige omstandigheden minstens zo belangrijk zijn voor de banengroei als een weloverwogen beleid. Opvallend is vooral de invloed van een sterke huizenmarkt op de economische groei en werkgelegenheid. Loonmatiging, vaak beschouwd als doorslaggevende factor, maakt daarentegen weinig verschil. Hetzelfde geldt voor neoliberale stokpaardjes als het snijden in de uitkeringen en flexibilisering van de arbeidsmarkt om een sterke concurrentiepositie te behouden. Becker en Schwartz laten zien dat de meeste van de onderzochte landen, vooral Scandinavische, door de handhaving van een genereus sociaal bestel een reëel alternatief bieden voor de dominante liberale weg naar werkgelegenheidsgroei

Governança multisetorial e o processo de governança da internet : um estudo de caso sobre crime cibernético e filtragem na internet entre 1990 e 2010

Tese (doutorado)—Universidade de Brasília, Instituto de Relações Internacionais, 2012.Texto em inglês, com os elementos pré-textuais, introdução e conclusão em português.Com o desenvolvimento do código HTML e do primeiro browser no começo dos anos 90, a internet deixou de ser uma rede acessada somente por um grupo relativamente pequeno de pessoas distribuídas por alguns países. A partir do momento em que houve a comercialização da internet, um número crescente de pessoas e atores começou a utilizar esse meio de forma a desenvolver suas próprias visões, ideias e interesses. O que começou como uma rede fundamentalmente usada por programadores e acadêmicos com o objetivo de criar acesso rápido a informações independentes da localização física do usuário se tranformou em uma rede de negócios, um meio de divulgação de direitos básicos, um fórum para qualquer tipo de informação, mas também um espaço para atividades mal intencionadas, crime cibernético ou ataques virtuais. Face a essa alta quantidade de problemas e oportunidades, um grande número de atores do setor público, do setor privado e da sociedade civil criou um novo fenômeno chamado governança de internet, baseado no conceito multi-setorial. A institucionalização desse processo aconteceu quando, em 2005, foi criado o Fórum de Governança de Internet pela Organização das Nações Unidas. Esta tese busca analisar o processo que criou o ambiente multi-setorial da governança de internet com foco nos dois fenômenos de crime cibernético e filtragem da internet. _______________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACTWith the development of HTML and the first browser in the beginning of the 1990s, the Internet was no longer a network exclusively for a relatively small group of individuals in a number of countries. With the commercialization of the Internet a growing number of individuals and actors started using this means to develop and follow their own visions, ideas and interests. What had started as a network basically used by programmers and scientists aiming at creating fast access to information independently of the physical location of the user, turned into a business network, a place to divulge basic rights, a forum for any kind of information but also a place for malicious activities, cybercrime, and virtual attacks. Given the high quantity of problems and opportunities a large number of actors from the public sector, the private sector and civil society developed a new phenomenon called Internet governance, based on a multi-stakeholder approach. The institutionalization of this process happened in 2005 when the United Nations Internet Governance Forum was set up. This thesis is analysing the process that built the multi-stakeholder Internet governance environment, with a focus on the two phenomenons cybercrime and Internet filtering

Universal Burdens : Stories of (Un)Freedom from the Unitarian Universalist Association, The MOVE Organization, and Taqwacore

Zen Buddhists have long given the following advice to attain liberation: “Eat when you’re hungry. Sleep when you’re tired.” In other words: “Freedom” is the “knowledge of necessity” (Hegel, Marx, and Engels). Early Islamic communities dealt with the challenge of internal warfare and tyranny and concluded that, “sixty years of tyranny is better than one day’s anarchy.” In other words, the worst-case scenario is a war “of every man against every man,” (Thomas Hobbes) and all theories of statecraft are built upon that premise. Ever since the dawn of colonialism, indigenous peoples have been struggling for self-determination. Many, such as Comanche thinker Parra-Wa-Samen, lived and died for the right to move across a land without state or borders. In other words, “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!” (Patrick Henry). How is it then that an English textbook could possibly focus on “freedom” as a universal value and simultaneously exclude all non-European traditions and perspectives? Why should conversations about “freedom” begin with Hegel, Hobbes, and Henry rather than the earlier examples of Zen, Islam, and indigenous peoples? If “freedom” concerns everybody then do not the conversations in academia about “freedom” by scholars (as well as rising economists, planners, and politicians) affect everybody? If democratic inclusivity entails the demand that all people affected by decisions are to be included in those very decision-making processes then contemporary academia has a problem when talking about “freedom.” In selling the term “freedom” as a universally applicable but uniquely European (and sacrosanct) idea most of the planet has been excluded from these conversations. This means that control over the idea and how it is interpreted has been determined by a very narrow range of persons, from the mid-1600s to mid-1900s: almost exclusively white, male, heterosexual, property-owning, able-bodied, and, not uncommonly, racist. This thesis argues that the problem goes deeper than white supremacy and patriarchy and cannot be resolved with quota systems to ensure inclusion on the basis of race or gender. Instead, the problem is two-fold: (1) dominant conceptions of “freedom,” as the opposite of “slavery,” “tyranny,” or “constraint,” are seen here as bound to a mentality and language of domination, and (2) “freedom,” as a central value in social orders, perpetuates white supremacy and patriarchy. Focus on “freedom” contra “unfreedom” obscures, disguises, or denies those “unfreedoms” upon which “freedom” is necessarily bound. Once those “unfreedoms” are exposed or recognized (whether violence, obligation, responsibility, dependency and interdependency, equality and inequality, needs, justice, limitations, etc.) the conversations about “freedom” can be spoken in a language that all cultures can understand in order to participate as equal parties. Toward these ends, this dissertation engages in stories from three contemporary empirical contexts in the U.S.: the Unitarian Universalist Association, the MOVE Organization, and taqwacore. Through a blend of text analysis, ethnography, storytelling, and personal experience, the purpose of this thesis is to imagine what more inclusive conversations might look like. Using the term (un)freedom to transcend the false binary of “freedom” and “unfreedom,” three potential types of (un)freedom are conceived to further the aim of democratic inclusivity: Negotiating the Limits of Language, Shouldering Incalculable Responsibility in Community, and Feeling an Obligation to Challenge Injustice