Why does cultural policy change? Policy discourse and policy subsystem : a case study of the evolution of cultural policy in Catalonia

This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published in International journal of cultural policy, Vol. 18, N. 1 (2012), p. 13-30 [copyright Taylor & Francis]Culture has come to play a fundamental strategic role in the territorial development that seeks to integrate knowledge economy with social cohesion, governance and sustainability. However, cultural policies have been unable to respond to the dilemmas and expectations that this new order presents. In order to appreciate the consequences of this process, it is essential to gain a better understanding of cultural policy change dynamics. This paper develops a framework for analysing cultural policy stability and change and applies it to the evolution of cultural policy in Catalonia. Both policy continuity and change are conditioned by the evolution of policy discourse on culture and the characteristics of the cultural policy subsystem. Within this framework, we also take into account the role of factors that are exogenous to the cultural domain. Lastly this paper addresses particular characteristics of cultural policy change in regions or stateless nations

Implicit trust in clinical decision-making by multidisciplinary teams

In clinical practice, decision-making is not performed by individual knowers but by an assemblage of people and instruments in which no one member has full access to every piece of evidence. This is due to decision making teams consisting of members with different kinds of expertise, as well as to organisational and time constraints. This raises important questions for the epistemology of medicine, which is inherently social in this kind of setting, and implies epistemic dependence on others. Trust in these contexts is a highly complex social practice, involving different forms of relationships between trust and reasons for trust: based on reasons, and not based on reasons; based on reasons that are easily accessible to reflection and others that are not. In this paper, we focus on what it means to have reasons to trust colleagues in an established clinical team, collectively supporting or carrying out every day clinical decision-making. We show two important points about these reasons, firstly, they are not sought or given in advance of a situation of epistemic dependence, but are established within these situations; secondly they are implicit in the sense of being contained or nested within other actions that are not directly about trusting another person. The processes of establishing these reasons are directly about accomplishing a task, and indirectly about trusting someone else’s expertise or competence. These processes establish a space of reasons within which what it means to have reasons for trust, or not, gains a meaning and traction in these team-work settings. Based on a qualitative study of decision-making in image assisted diagnosis and treatment of a complex disease called pulmonary hypertension (PH), we show how an intersubjective framework, or ‘space of reasons’ is established through team members forging together a common way of identifying and dealing with evidence. In dealing with images as a central diagnostic tool, this also involves a common way of looking at the images, a common mode or style of perception. These frameworks are developed through many iterations of adjusting and calibrating interpretations in relation to those of others, establishing what counts as evidence, and ranking different kinds of evidence. Implicit trust is at work throughout this process. Trusting the expertise of others in clinical decision-making teams occurs while the members of the team are busy on other tasks, most importantly, building up a framework of common modes of seeing, and common ways of identifying and assessing evidence emerge. It is only in this way that trusting or mistrusting becomes meaningful in these contexts, and that a framework for epistemic dependence is established

Implicit trust in clinical decision-making by multidisciplinary teams

In clinical practice, decision-making is not performed by individual knowers but by an assemblage of people and instruments in which no one member has full access to every piece of evidence. This is due to decision making teams consisting of members with different kinds of expertise, as well as to organisational and time constraints. This raises important questions for the epistemology of medicine, which is inherently social in this kind of setting, and implies epistemic dependence on others. Trust in these contexts is a highly complex social practice, involving different forms of relationships between trust and reasons for trust: based on reasons, and not based on reasons; based on reasons that are easily accessible to reflection and others that are not. In this paper, we focus on what it means to have reasons to trust colleagues in an established clinical team, collectively supporting or carrying out every day clinical decision-making. We show two important points about these reasons, firstly, they are not sought or given in advance of a situation of epistemic dependence, but are established within these situations; secondly they are implicit in the sense of being contained or nested within other actions that are not directly about trusting another person. The processes of establishing these reasons are directly about accomplishing a task, and indirectly about trusting someone else’s expertise or competence. These processes establish a space of reasons within which what it means to have reasons for trust, or not, gains a meaning and traction in these team-work settings. Based on a qualitative study of decision-making in image assisted diagnosis and treatment of a complex disease called pulmonary hypertension (PH), we show how an intersubjective framework, or ‘space of reasons’ is established through team members forging together a common way of identifying and dealing with evidence. In dealing with images as a central diagnostic tool, this also involves a common way of looking at the images, a common mode or style of perception. These frameworks are developed through many iterations of adjusting and calibrating interpretations in relation to those of others, establishing what counts as evidence, and ranking different kinds of evidence. Implicit trust is at work throughout this process. Trusting the expertise of others in clinical decision-making teams occurs while the members of the team are busy on other tasks, most importantly, building up a framework of common modes of seeing, and common ways of identifying and assessing evidence emerge. It is only in this way that trusting or mistrusting becomes meaningful in these contexts, and that a framework for epistemic dependence is established

Optimización de hornos industriales para deshidratado de ciruelas

Las ciruelas pasas son producidas mediante deshidratación en túneles. Para lograr que las empresas loca- les sean competitivas en el mercado externo, se requiere incrementar la cantidad y calidad de materia prima procesada, procurando no modificar las instalaciones existentes ni aumentar excesivamente los costos en la producción. Con el objetivo de optimizar el funcionamiento de las instalaciones y aumentar la capacidad de producción, se diseñaron dos ensayos. En el primero, se compararon dos túneles diferentes funcionando a 78o C y 82o C. En los cuales se determinaron temperatura y humedad alcanzada entre la fruta, temperaturas registradas en los indicadores de los hornos, tiempo de residencia de las ciruelas dentro de los hornos, hu- medad final, rendimiento y calidad de la pulpa. En el segundo ensayo se monitorearon 8 hornos funcionando a una temperatura fija de 82o C diferenciando calibres (pequeños y grandes). En ellos se evaluaron los pará- metros de temperatura y humedad entre la fruta durante el procesado y el tiempo de residencia de las ciruelas dentro de los hornos. En el ensayo 1, las temperaturas máximas entre las ciruelas dentro de los hornos nunca alcanzaron las temperaturas máximas registradas por los indicadores de los hornos. Los tiempos de residen- cia en los hornos a 78 y 82o C presentaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas. Ese aumento se tradujo en una disminución en el tiempo de residencia. No se observaron diferencias significativas en humedad final, rendimiento y calidad de la pulpa en el producto obtenido. En el ensayo 2, la temperatura máxima promedio entre las ciruelas de calibres pequeños fue 3o C mayor que la de calibres grandes, mientras que la humedad mínima promedio entre las ciruelas de calibres pequeños fue 3% menor que en los grandes. Se observaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en el tiempo de residencia según los calibres evaluados. Por lo tan- to, trabajar en hornos diferenciando calibres permite aumentar la temperatura en forma controlada acelerando el proceso de deshidratado sin sufrir pérdidas en la calidad

Questions of religion and cultural policy in France

This article explores how questions of religion have impinged on or informed various dimensions of culture-shaping policy in France. Firstly, it considers how religious references have been orchestrated in high-level attempts to frame secular national identities, but also how such processes have assumed quasi-religious forms and functions. Secondly, it analyses the changing place of religion in French educational curricula, and recent contested endeavours to introduce it as a cultural ‘fact’ into those curricula. Thirdly, the article examines influential framings of art policies in their relation to religion. It considers the pivotal function of religious fragments and debris in Malraux’s vision of the imaginary museum, and the use by Bourdieu of sustained religious metaphors to describe the sacralizing dynamics of secular artworlds. Finally the article examines in a long-term perspective the implicit and explicit cultural policies of religious bodies themselves in their attempts to act upon prevailing cultures

Decision rules, social norms and the expression of disagreement: the case of qualified majority voting in the Council of the European Union

When a group has to make a decision, one can assume that the members’ incentives to state their position vary according to the different decision rules. Decision-making in the Council of the European Union offers an opportunity to study how a decision rule influences the way members of a group state their position. Indeed, in several areas, decisions must be made by qualified-majority voting. But the combination of this rule and of social norms specific to the Council discourages the minority from expressing itself at different stages of decision-making. Decisions seem to be made without opposition at two main stages of the decision-making process: during the plenary sessions, representatives do not vote; according to the official Council records, a high proportion of measures are adopted without opposition

Dossier - L'administration sanitaire et sociale.

International audienceChapitres du dossier : 1) Politiques publiques et administrations sanitaires et sociales. 2) Les registres d'action : des outils, des savoirs et des dispositifs. 3) La diversité des corps professionnels : professionnalité et modes de coopérations