Book reviews

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/45789/1/11153_2005_Article_BF01313791.pd

Framing Social Justice: The Ties That Bind a Multinational Occupational Community

The notion of a frame is central to the conceptualisation of social justice and the grounding of social justice claims. Influential theories of social justice are typically grounded in national or cosmopolitan framings. Those entitled to raise claims of injustice are identified as citizens of states or the globe, respectively. The re-visioning of understandings of space and belonging, incumbent in the processes of globalisation, problematises static geographical framings. We offer an alternative lens and argue for the inclusion of sociological data in accounts of social justice to identify the relevant framing of the community of entitlement. Drawing on secondary analysis of a qualitative dataset, we explore the case of multinational seafarers caught at the intersection of competing appeals to nationality and commonality as an exemplar of transnational workers. And, argue that there are compelling grounds to treat this group of multinational seafarers as a community of entitlement

Towards a Performative Understanding of Deservingness: Merit, Gender and the BBC Pay Dispute

Drawing largely on a high profile case of unequal pay at the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) as an illustrative example, this conceptual paper considers differences and interrelationships between merit and deservingness, where the latter captures how, through appropriate performances, merit is given recognition and value. We propose a performative understanding of deservingness that highlights its gendered and embodied dimensions. Informed by Judith Butler’s account of gender performativity, we show that, while merit is conventionally conceptualized as a relatively fixed set of attributes (qualifications, skill) ‘attached’ to the individual, deservingness captures how, in gendered terms, value and recognition are both claimed and conferred. As we argue, a gendered, deserving subject does not pre-exist but is performatively constituted through embodied practices and performances of what is seen as worthy in a particular time and place

Interfacial Profile and Propagation of Frontal Photopolymerization Waves

We investigate the frontal photopolymerization of a thiol–ene system with a combination of experiments and modeling, focusing on the interfacial conversion profile and its planar wave propagation. We spatially resolve the solid-to-liquid front by FT-IR and AFM mechanical measurements, supplemented by differential scanning calorimetry. A simple coarse-grained model is found to describe remarkably well the frontal kinetics and the sigmoidal interface, capturing the effects of UV light exposure time (or dose) and temperature, as well as the front position and resulting patterned dimensions after development. Analytical solutions for the conversion profile enable the description of all conditions with a single master curve in the moving frame of the front position. Building on this understanding, we demonstrate the design and fabrication of gradient polymer materials, with tunable properties <i>along</i> the direction of illumination, which can be coupled with lateral patterning by modulated illumination or grayscale lithography

Hunting down the chimera of multiple disciplinarity in conservation science

The consensus is that both ecological and social factors are essential dimensions of conservation research and practice. However, much of the literature on multiple disciplinary collaboration focuses on the difficulties of undertaking it. This review of the challenges of conducting multiple disciplinary collaboration offers a framework for thinking about the diversity and complexity of this endeavor. We focused on conceptual challenges, of which 5 main categories emerged: methodological challenges, value judgments, theories of knowledge, disciplinary prejudices, and interdisciplinary communication. The major problems identified in these areas have proved remarkably persistent in the literature surveyed (c.1960–2012). Reasons for these failures to learn from past experience include the pressure to produce positive outcomes and gloss over disagreements, the ephemeral nature of many such projects and resulting lack of institutional memory, and the apparent complexity and incoherence of the endeavor. We suggest that multiple disciplinary collaboration requires conceptual integration among carefully selected multiple disciplinary team members united in investigating a shared problem or question. We outline a 9‐point sequence of steps for setting up a successful multiple disciplinary project. This encompasses points on recruitment, involving stakeholders, developing research questions, negotiating power dynamics and hidden values and conceptual differences, explaining and choosing appropriate methods, developing a shared language, facilitating on‐going communications, and discussing data integration and project outcomes. Although numerous solutions to the challenges of multiple disciplinary research have been proposed, lessons learned are often lost when projects end or experienced individuals move on. We urge multiple disciplinary teams to capture the challenges recognized, and solutions proposed, by their researchers while projects are in process. A database of well‐documented case studies would showcase theories and methods from a variety of disciplines and their interactions, enable better comparative study and evaluation, and provide a useful resource for developing future projects and training multiple disciplinary researchers

Two Concepts of Basic Equality

It has become somewhat a commonplace in recent political philosophy to remark that all plausible political theories must share at least one fundamental premise, ‘that all humans are one another's equals’. One single concept of ‘basic equality’, therefore, is cast as the common touchstone of all contemporary political thought. This paper argues that this claim is false. Virtually all do indeed say that all humans are ‘equals’ in some basic sense. However, this is not the same sense. There are not one but (at least) two concepts of basic equality, and they reflect not a grand unity within political philosophy but a deep and striking division. I call these concepts ‘Equal Worth’ and ‘Equal Authority’. The former means that each individual’s good is of equal moral worth. The latter means that no individual is under the natural authority of anyone else. Whilst these two predicates are not in themselves logically inconsistent, I demonstrate that they are inconsistent foundation stones for political theory. A theory that starts from Equal Worth will find it near impossible to justify Equal Authority. And a theory that starts from Equal Authority will find any fact about the true worth of things, including ourselves, irrelevant to justifying legitimate action. This helps us identify the origin of many of our deepest and seemingly intractable disagreements within political philosophy, and directs our attention to the need for a clear debate about the truth and/or relationship between the two concepts. In short, my call to arms can be summed up in the demand that political philosophers never again be allowed to claim ‘that all human beings are equals’ full stop. They must be clear in what dimension they claim that we are equals—Worth or Authority (or perhaps something else)