Suchergebnisse

Abstract: Four approaches to drug enforcement are appraised. Three of these are characterised as the conventional approaches which have been dominant through most of the past decade. The arguments for and the limitations of each are considered. It is argued that the shortcomings of these conventional approaches has led to renewed interest in enforcement aimed at the street or retail level of the market. Drawing on economic models of the drug market and the behaviour of drug buyers, the arguments for low level drug enforcement are described, and some problems with this approach indicated.

Introduction : situating the present / Karim Murji and John Solomos -- Race and the science of difference in the age of genomics / Sandra Soo-Jin Lee -- Color-blind egalitarianism as the new racial norm / Charles A. Gallagher -- Getting over the Obama hope hangover : the new racism in 'post-racial' America / Eduardo Bonilla-Silva (with Victor E. Ray) -- Does a recognition of mixed race move us toward post-race? / Miri Song -- Acting 'as' and acting 'as if' : two approaches to the politics of race and migration / Leah Bassel -- Can race be eradicated? The post-racial problematic / Brett St. Louis -- Superseding race in sociology : the perspective of critical rationalism / Michael Banton -- Critical race feminism / Adrien K. Wing -- Performativity and 'raced' bodies / Shirley Anne Tate -- Racism : psychoanalytic and psychoanalytic and psychosocial approaches / Simon Clarke -- The sociology of whiteness : beyond good and evil white people / Matthew W. Hughey -- (Sexual) whiteness and national identity : race, class and sexuality in colour-blind France / Éric Fassin -- Racial comparisons, relational racisms : some thoughts on method / David Theo Goldberg -- Conclusion : back to the future / Karim Murji and John Solomos

This article aims to offer a preliminary theorization of some of the on-going effects of the global COVID-19 pandemic on minorities. Drawing on Antonio Gramsci's famous characterization of the crisis as an 'interregnum' in which various 'morbid phenomena' appear, we suggest that one of the main underpinning logics of the current crisis could be thought of in terms of racist morbidities. Framing the article within Stuart Hall's reading of Gramsci, we discuss two empirical cases: the disproportionate morbid effects of the pandemic on Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) in the UK – that we name 'political morbidities', and the Moscow municipality's measures addressing migrant workers during the pandemic – that we name 'socio-spatial morbidities'. The concept of racist morbidities, we conclude, can be a useful exploratory concept to analyse the current and other moments and structures of crisis.

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue on race and place.


Design/methodology/approach
The approach used by the authors is to combine an overview of sociological debates on place within a framework that makes the case for a relational approach to race, space and place.


Findings
The overview provides an account of place in sociology, of the relationality of race and place, and the making of race and place in sociological work.


Originality/value
The Introduction sets the papers in context, providing a short account of each of them; it also aims to present an argument for attention to race and place in sociology in a setting characterized by racism and reaction.

Abstract"Explain or change" was a key term that came into currency in the UK from 2016 onwards to put the onus on public institutions to account for disparities in outcomes on the basis of class, gender, and ethnicity in the main. One of the most prominent outcomes of this policy initiative was the government Race Disparity Audit. This article aims to go behind the headline figures to understand what it means to either "explain" or "change" figures and policies around race/ethnicity in particular. It outlines the findings of a survey and some interviews with staff working in the NHS in London and in universities in England. The findings point to difficulties with the quality of data generated by these organisations, as well as the uses of data. Practitioners feel that data is incomplete and do not provide the routes to policy measures that will make a clear difference to outcomes. At the same time, there is a feeling there is a lack of will to use data to either explain or change their organisation's response to race inequality. Thus, this article concludes that the use of ethnicity data remains the main concern for many participants in this study.

"Explain or change" was a key term that came into currency in the UK from 2016 onwards to put the onus on public institutions to account for disparities in outcomes on the basis of class, gender, and ethnicity in the main. One of the most prominent outcomes of this policy initiative was the government Race Disparity Audit. This article aims to go behind the headline figures to understand what it means to either "explain" or "change" figures and policies around race/ethnicity in particular. It outlines the findings of a survey and some interviews with staff working in the NHS in London and in universities in England. The findings point to difficulties with the quality of data generated by these organisations, as well as the uses of data. Practitioners feel that data is incomplete and do not provide the routes to policy measures that will make a clear difference to outcomes. At the same time, there is a feeling there is a lack of will to use data to either explain or change their organisation's response to race inequality. Thus, this article concludes that the use of ethnicity data remains the main concern for many participants in this study.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue on Race and Place. Design/methodology/approach The approach used by the authors is to combine an overview of sociological debates on place within a framework that makes the case for a relational approach to race, space and place. Findings The overview provides an account of place in sociology, of the relationality of race and place, and the making of race and place in sociological work. Originality/value The Introduction sets the papers in context, providing a short account of each of them; it also aims to present an argument for attention to race and place in sociology in a setting characterised by racism and reaction. Keywords Racism, Space, Relational, Post-racial, Racialization

When we started a conversation about putting together an edited collection on Theories of Race and Ethnicity, we had in mind the need for a more up-to-date overview of the field of race and ethnic studies than the one provided in John Rex and David Mason's (1986) Theories of Race and Ethnic Relations. That volume had come out in the mid 1980s, after a period of passionate, and often conflictual, debate about the changing boundaries of the study of race and ethnicity. Rex's opening statement to his chapter provided a sense of the contestation. He wrote, "The study of race relations, in common with other politically charged areas in the social sciences, seem beset with feuds and conflicts of a quite theological intensity" (Rex 1986:64). The book set out to provide an overview of key theoretical lines of analysis in the field and to engage with some new and emergent perspectives. It contained 14 chapters covering the disciplines of sociology, social anthropology and social psychology as well as sociobiology. There were macro-level approaches to race and ethnicity drawing on class analysis, the study of plural societies and Weberian and Marxist perspectives, alongside micro-level approaches such as rational choice theory and symbolic interactionism. In other words, it combined and crossed over from traditional sociological perspectives to views from related social science disciplines; it ranged across biology and sociology, and it considered ethnicity and race in a variety of settings.

In a climate marked by expanding scholarship in ethnic and racial studies alongside sweeping changes in universities and the conditions of academic work, we seek to explore the nature of and challenges for critically engaged research, teaching and scholarship on race and racism. In particular, we look at the connection between academic scholarship and political engagement and activity that we are calling race critical public scholarship. We situate the discussion within various recent debates about universities and 'publics', and the public orientation and reach of academic work. We set out three frames for these issues: the impact of social movements in establishing race and racism as legitimate topics of academic investigation and setting the agenda for race research; the differing role of academics as public intellectuals and scholar-activists in addressing and engaging with publics and race issues; and the scope and limits of public sociology in addressing the responsibilities and institutionalized power of the academy. We argue that each of these frames offers a partial insight, but that further work is needed based on cases and examples that explore the facility for and challenges of undertaking race critical scholarship.

This edited collection addresses the challenges for critically engaged research, teaching and scholarship on race and racism in a climate marked by sweeping changes in universities. Each chapter engages with debates about universities and 'publics', and the public orientation and reach of academic work. How do these factors play out in the work of scholars pursuing racial and social justice? What are the constraints of the marketised university or the bureaucratised political field or the celebrity-hungry arena of media culture? How can we use scholarly research and knowledge to create different and better meanings and outcomes in any of these places? With a focus on engaged and activist scholarship attuned to theory and practice, the chapters consider these issues in France, the UK, USA and Costa Rica. The chapters include discussions of teaching for social justice, collaborating and advocating for migrant and local communities and deploying scholarly knowledge in political work and the media.