Search results

In a knowledge economy, it is interesting to see that the concept of knowledge cohesion is a fertile soil for research. Despite the ongoing interest in investigating whether economic cohesion has been achieved in Europe there is no work that looks at knowledge cohesion. Though it is difficult to investigate such an abstract concept one can look at a more concrete concept such as convergence. Using the European Union Framework Programme data from 1984 to 2016 we show that there are signs of knowledge convergence within the NUTS2 regions. Despite the fact, the top performers persist over the years the convergence is much stronger among the less developed regions. The results also show that Turkey enhanced its position in knowledge exchange considerably where some of its developed regions are emergent knowledge hubs. These results indicate that Turkish knowledge system is tied strongly to the European Research Area which reduces the probability of conflict scenario. ; Bilgi uyumu konusunun içinde yaşadığımız bilgi çağında bu kadar az çalışılıyor olması ilginçtir. Avrupa'da ekonomik uyum ve yakınlaşma konusunda pek çok araştırma yapılırken bilgi uyumu konusunda hemen hiç bir çalışma bulunmamaktadır. Her ne kadar bilgi uyumu konusu soyut bir kavram gibi dursa da daha somut bir kavram olan bilgi yakınlaşması kavramına bakılabilir. Bu çalışmada 1984-2016 arasında Avrupa Çerçeve Programı verisi kullanarak, Avrupa NUTS2 bölgelerinde bilgi yakınlaşması olduğunu gösteriyoruz. En iyi performans sağlayan bölgeler yıllar içinde pek değişmese de, daha az gelişmiş bölgeler arasında bir bilgi yakınlaşmasından söz edilebilir. Sonuçlar aynı zamanda Türkiye'nin bilgi paylaşımındaki pozisyonunu zaman içinde geliştirdiğini gösteriyor, öyle ki bazı bölgeleri yeni doğan ve gelişen bilgi merkezleri arasında yer alıyor. Bu sonuçlar Türkiye bilgi sisteminin Avrupa Bilgi Alanına güçlü bir şekilde bağlı olduğunu göstermesi nedeniyle çatışma senaryosunun olasılığını düşürmektedir ; Publisher's Version

Item 378-H-1 ; S/N 008-020-00972-5 ; Bibliography: p. 99-103. ; Mode of access: Internet.

This paper discusses the role of medium towns as crucial anchors in achieving the policy goal of Territorial Cohesion. It highlights the need to counterbalance market trends to favour the continuous channelling of investment and people into larger metropolitan areas by way of proactive measures focused on attracting investment into medium towns, and as an alternative to dispersing public and private investment in lagging territories. Iberian and Nordic cases are examined in order to illustrate the possibilities and challenges of using 'Territorial Cohesion Cities' as development hubs in lagging regions, in order to achieve Territorial Cohesion at a national level.

The Open Access version of this book, available at http://www.tandfebooks.com/doi/view/10.4324/9781315401867, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 3.0 license. This book brings together academics, members of European institutions, and regional and national level policymakers in order to assess the performance and direction of EU Cohesion policy against the background of the most significant reforms to the policy in a generation. Responding to past criticisms of the effectiveness of the policy, the policy changes introduced in 2013 have aligned European Structural and Investment Funds with the Europe 2020 strategy and introduced measures to improve strategic coherence, performance and integrated development. EU Cohesion Policy: Reassessing performance and direction argues that policy can only be successfully developed and implemented if there is input from both academics and practitioners. The chapters in the book address four important issues: the effectiveness and impact of Cohesion policy at European, national and regional levels; the contribution of Cohesion policy to the Europe 2020 strategy of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; the importance of quality of government and administrative capacity for the effective management of the Funds; and the inter-relationships between institutions, territory and place-based policies. The volume will be an invaluable resource to students, academics and policymakers across economics, regional studies, European studies and international relations.

FEUTURE Online Paper No. 10 In a knowledge economy, it is interesting to see that the concept of knowledge cohesion is a fertile soil for research. Despite the ongoing interest in investigating whether economic cohesion has been achieved in Europe there is no work that looks at knowledge cohesion. Though it is difficult to investigate such an abstract concept one can look at a more concrete concept such as convergence. Using the European Union Framework Programme data from 1984 to 2016 we show that there are signs of knowledge convergence within the NUTS2 regions. Despite the fact, the top performers persist over the years the convergence is much stronger among the less developed regions. The results also show that Turkey enhanced its position in knowledge exchange considerably where some of its developed regions are emergent knowledge hubs. These results indicate that Turkish knowledge system is tied strongly to the European Research Area which reduces the probability of conflict scenario. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 692976. This publication reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Die Bertelsmann Stiftung führt seit 2012 das Projekt "Radar gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt" durch. Das Ziel besteht darin, die Güte gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalts in verschiedenen Gemeinwesen zu erfassen. Die hier vorgelegte Studie erweitert den Erkenntnisstand durch eine Betrachtung der kommunalen Ebene. Hierzu wurden im Herbst 2015 2.605 repräsentativ ausgewählte Bremer* zu den Dimensionen des sozialen Zusammenhalts in 78 der insgesamt 88 Ortsteile Bremens befragt. Die Erhebung beinhaltet Fragen zu Bedingungen von Zusammenhalt, Fragen zu Auswirkungen von Zusammenhalt, Bremen-spezifische Fragen und Fragen zur aktuellen Flüchtlingssituation in Bremen.

Themen: Wohndauer im Ortsteil (Einzugsjahr); Zufriedenheit im Ortsteil; Verbundenheit mit der Stadt, dem Stadtteil, dem Ortsteil und der Nachbarschaft (geopolitische Identität); Umzugswunsch oder Zugehörigkeitsgefühl zum Ortsteil; subjektives Nachbarschaftskonzept; Wohnung: Wohnstatus; sozialer Wohnungsbau; Wohnungsgröße in qm; Anzahl der Wohnräume; Einschätzung der Miethöhe; soziales Netzwerk: Größe des Freundes- und Bekanntenkreises im Ortsteil; Häufigkeit privater Treffen mit Freunden, Verwandten und mit Arbeitskollegen; Häufigkeit zufälliger Treffen von Freunden auf der Straße; private Treffen mit Nachbarn; Vertrauen in Mitmenschen: allgemeines Personenvertrauen; Einschätzung Hilfsbereitschaft allgemein; Vertrauen in Fremde; Vertrauen auf Rückgabe einer in der Nachbarschaft verlorenen Geldbörse; Akzeptanz von Diversität: Ortsteil ein guter Ort für Kinder, Menschen mit anderem Tagesrhythmus, Ausländer, Migranten, Homosexuelle, Menschen anderer Hautfarbe, Flüchtlinge; Zuwanderer bereichern kulturelles Leben in Deutschland; Zufriedenheit mit der Zusammensetzung der Nachbarschaft; Zufriedenheit mit den Nachbarschaftsaktivitäten im Ortsteil; Zufriedenheit mit den Bemühungen der Lokalpolitiker um die Nachbarschaft; Institutionenvertrauen: Vertrauen in Parteien vor Ort bzw. auf Bundesebene, Justiz und Stadtverwaltung; Gerechtigkeitsempfinden: gerechter Anteil am Lebensstandard; Infrastruktur im Ortsteil: Ausstattung des Ortsteils mit Tagesstätten für Senioren, öffentlichen Grünanlagen sowie Sport- oder Freizeitanlagen im Vergleich zu anderen Ortsteilen; Investitionen in Straßeninstandhaltung im Vergleich zu anderen Ortsteilen; Stadt kümmert sich nicht genug um den Ortsteil; Solidarität und Hilfsbereitschaft: persönliche Hilfsbereitschaft gegenüber Unbekannten; Häufigkeit persönlicher Hilfsbereitschaft allgemein sowie in der Nachbarschaft; Häufigkeit des Verleihens an Nachbarn; Einschätzung der Hilfsbereitschaft im Ortsteil allgemein; Einverständnis mit der Unterbringung von Flüchtlingen im Ortsteil; Verantwortung der Stadt Bremen für Flüchtlinge; Befragter bietet selbst Hilfe für Flüchtlinge an; Anerkennung sozialer Regeln: verschiedene Probleme im Ortsteil (z.B. Hundekot auf der Straße, Falschparker, etc.); Sicherheitsgefühl nachts in der Umgebung und in der Wohngegend; Kriminalität im Ortsteil; gesellschaftliche Teilhabe: Politikinteresse; Interesse an Lokalpolitik; persönlicher Einsatz für die Wohngegend; Art des politischen Engagements in den letzten zwölf Monaten (z.B. Übernahme eines politischen Amts, Beteiligung an einer Demonstration, etc.); Beurteilung der Flüchtlingssituation in Bremen; Häufigkeit der Internetnutzung für private Zwecke; Anzahl der Bücher im Haushalt; Selbsteinschätzung der Religiosität; persönliche Werte (neue Ideen entwickeln, Reichtum, Sicherheit, Amüsieren, Gutes tun, Erfolg, Risikofreude, Richtiges tun, Umwelt, Traditionen); allgemeines Glücksgefühl; allgemeine Lebenszufriedenheit;; Zustimmung zu verschiedenen Aussagen (eigenes Leben kommt dem Ideal nahe, Lebensbedingungen sind hervorragend, zufrieden mit dem Leben, bisher die wichtigsten vom Leben gewünschten Dinge bekommen, würde fast nichts ändern, falls ich mein Leben noch einmal leben könnte); Selbsteinschätzung Gesundheitszustand allgemein; Beeinträchtigung beim Treppensteigen durch den Gesundheitszustand; chronische Krankheiten.

Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (Geburtsjahr, Geburtsmonat); Alter gruppiert; Anzahl der Festnetznummern im Haushalt; Haushaltsgröße; Anzahl der Kinder im Haushalt; Familienstand; Erwerbstätigkeit; Gruppenzugehörigkeit wenn nicht vollzeit- oder teilzeiterwerbstätig; höchster beruflicher Bildungsabschluss; Bezug von Sozialhilfe; Haushaltsnettoeinkommen; Staatsbürgerschaft; Geburt des Befragten und seiner Eltern in Deutschland (Migrationshintergrund); zu Hause gesprochene Sprache.

Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: Befragten-ID; Straße genannt; Ortsteil genannt; Eintrag im Telefonnummernverzeichnis; Gewichtungsfaktor; Gesamtheit der Probleme im Ortsteil; Gesamtheit des politischen Engagements; Nachbarschaft: nur eigenes Haus, unmittelbare Nachbar-Häuser, Häuser in eigener Straße, Häuser in weiteren Straßen; abgeleitete Variablen.

The Open Access version of this book, available at http://www.tandfebooks.com/doi/view/10.4324/9781315401867, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 3.0 license. This book brings together academics, members of European institutions, and regional and national level policymakers in order to assess the performance and direction of EU Cohesion policy against the background of the most significant reforms to the policy in a generation. Responding to past criticisms of the effectiveness of the policy, the policy changes introduced in 2013 have aligned European Structural and Investment Funds with the Europe 2020 strategy and introduced measures to improve strategic coherence, performance and integrated development. EU Cohesion Policy: Reassessing performance and direction argues that policy can only be successfully developed and implemented if there is input from both academics and practitioners. The chapters in the book address four important issues: the effectiveness and impact of Cohesion policy at European, national and regional levels; the contribution of Cohesion policy to the Europe 2020 strategy of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; the importance of quality of government and administrative capacity for the effective management of the Funds; and the inter-relationships between institutions, territory and place-based policies. The volume will be an invaluable resource to students, academics and policymakers across economics, regional studies, European studies and international relations.

Oversimplification of the concept of social cohesion as a singularly identifiable marker of social growth has lead to obscured understanding of the nuances necessary for achievement of the term's true potential. This book thus provides a critique of a popular concept and an example of engaged philosophical criticism of social research and policy.

The existence of noticeable 'unified' parties is central to the theory and practice of democracy in general, and to parliamentary democracy in particular. However, legislative studies scholars have good reason to cease treating parties as monolithic, unitary actors, for they evidently are not. The first step in this direction is to ask why one of the distinguishing features of modern political parties is their legislative unity. Do parties enter parliament as unified actors, or are they moulded into this model by the legislature? The answer depends on whether one is looking at cohesion or at d