Prekäre (Kultur-)Kämpfe? Die Verhandlung gesellschaftlicher Verhältnisse im Diskurs zu Prekarisierung

Precarity became an issue in public discourse in German speaking media throughout 2006. In this article the author takes a closer look on the symbolic negotiations on precariousness/precarity and its references to neo-conservative reasoning undertaken in the public media discourse. Who is designated as the precarious subject -- and to what extent do discursive designations legitimate social inequalities? Public discourse is to be understood as an ambivalent and multifaceted field of negotiations on society and social justice. As such, it is a field where interpretations of societal changes try to gain a hegemonic position and where they are at the same time challenged, disrupted and irritated. Thus, the article points out some hegemonic and counter-hegemonic moments within the public discourse on precarity

Vom Recht auf Stillen zur Pflicht der Mutter: Elemente eines globalen Stilldiskurses

"Im Beitrag wird die historische Entwicklung des gegenwärtigen globalen Stilldiskurses dargestellt. Zentrales Merkmal dieser Diskurs- Formation innerhalb der letzten 40 Jahre ist die Verschiebung des Stillens aus dem privaten Bereich der Mutter in die öffentliche Sphäre der Gesundheitsförderung. Grundlage dieser Untersuchung sind ausgewählte Policy- Dokumente der internationalen Gesundheitsorganisation WHO sowie der EU, die den Diskurs über das Stillen im Wesentlichen regulieren. Durch die Festsetzung von Stillen als „normal“ und „natürlich“ sind Mütter zahlreichen problematischen Fremdbeschreibungen ausgesetzt, die ihre Entscheidungsund Handlungsfähigkeit beschneiden. Der Beitrag zeigt die Fallstricke dieser versteckten Re-Biologisierung der Mutterrolle für aktuelle Debatten um moderne Elternschaft auf." (Autorenreferat)"This paper outlines the historical development of the current global breastfeeding discourse. Within the last 40 years the discourse formation has moved the question of breastfeeding from the private domain of the mother into the public sphere of health promotion. This article examines several WHO and EU policy documents that regulate discourse on breastfeeding in public. Mothers face several harmful imputations based on the fact that breastfeeding is pictured as “normal” and “natural”: Most importantly, they restrict women’s decision-making ability and capacity to act. This article exposes the pitfalls of this hidden re-biologization of the mother’s role for contemporary debates on modern parenthood." (author's abstract

A holistic assessment of greenhouse gas dynamics from forests to the effects of wood products use in Austria

<p>Anthropogenic GHG emissions add a fast reinforcing feedback cycle to global carbon dynamics which continues to influence GHG concentrations in the Earth's atmosphere. When looking at forest carbon cycles there is potential in utilizing another feedback cycle, namely the carbon cycle involving harvested wood products. To assess the potential of the mitigation options arising from these carbon flows, the forest-based sector in Austria was modelled to assess causal links, dependencies and dynamics involved in GHG-relevant processes. Carbon dynamics were investigated in forests and forest soil carbon, the forest product chain and life-cycle analyses for substitution of conventional products with wood products in a cascade of different modelling approaches and paradigms, and the results synthesized. It was found that material use of products from domestic timber sources has the highest climate change mitigation efficiency when originating from sustainably managed forests regarding biomass stocks. The emissions saved through building up a carbon stock from harvested wood products and through emissions substitution can be as high as ∼20 years of total annual Austrian emissions in 90 years. Additional conservation measures while sustaining sawnwood production and the related GHG benefits at a high level had the highest contribution to an overall carbon sink.</p

Assessing forest availability for wood supply in Europe

The quantification of forests available for wood supply (FAWS) is essential for decision-making with regard to the maintenance and enhancement of forest resources and their contribution to the global carbon cycle. The provision of harmonized forest statistics is necessary for the development of forest associated policies and to support decision-making. Based on the National Forest Inventory (NFI) data from 13 European countries, we quantify and compare the areas and aboveground dry biomass (AGB) of FAWS and forest not available for wood supply (FNAWS) according to national and reference definitions by determining the restrictions and associated thresholds considered at country level to classify forests as FAWS or FNAWS. FAWS represent between 75 and 95 % of forest area and AGB for most of the countries in this study. Economic restrictions are the main factor limiting the availability of forests for wood supply, accounting for 67 % of the total FNAWS area and 56 % of the total FNAWS AGB, followed by environmental restrictions. Profitability, slope and accessibility as economic restrictions, and protected areas as environmental restrictions are the factors most frequently considered to distinguish between FAWS and FNAWS. With respect to the area of FNAWS associated with each type of restriction, an overlap among the restrictions of 13.7 % was identified. For most countries, the differences in the FNAWS areas and AGB estimates between national and reference definitions ranged from 0 to 5 %. These results highlight the applicability and reliability of a FAWS reference definition for most of the European countries studied, thereby facilitating a consistent approach to assess forests available for supply for the purpose of international reporting

The distribution of single recombination events across the long arm of 21q by population.

<p>21q was divided into 66 500</p

Soil atlas of Europe

Soil maps of Europe, published by the EU and the European Soil Bureau Network; with varying scales 1:1.500.000 1:1.750.000 1:2.000.000 1:2.200.000 1:2.500.000 1:3.000.000 1:6.500.00