Suchergebnisse

In March 2020 the European Commission adopted exceptional state aid rules in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Its goal is to enable member states to support their economy using aid measures, which under current state aid rules are either not possible to be issued at all or only after time consuming notification procedures. This so-called Temporary Framework1 is being presented as a significant tool with several possibilities such as aid for research and development projects and research infrastructures. Since its adoption, dozens of measures across the whole European Union have been notified, using different sections of the Temporary Framework according to their focus. This article is concerned with the practical use and impact of such sections regarding R&D aid, with the underlying questions as to what extent the presentation of the Temporary Framework is justified.

This paper aims to review the existing debate on the relations between national and European levels in the EU and identify existing gaps. It aims at showing the current compartelization of the academic debate and suggesting a possible remedy. It discusses the current trends in Europeanization studies and shows that one of the dimensions (bottom-up) remains understudied. Similarly, the concept has been applied in the area of foreign policy in a very limited way to the detriment of our understanding of reality. Following these findings, the article suggests, firstly, that the relationship between the adjustment to European integration and the ability to pursue one's interest should be studied, both in terms of form and results, and, secondly, that foreign policy should be included in this research framework. ; This paper aims to review the existing debate on the relations between national and European levels in the EU and identify existing gaps. It aims at showing the current compartelization of the academic debate and suggesting a possible remedy. It discusses the current trends in Europeanization studies and shows that one of the dimensions (bottom-up) remains understudied. Similarly, the concept has been applied in the area of foreign policy in a very limited way to the detriment of our understanding of reality. Following these findings, the article suggests, firstly, that the relationship between the adjustment to European integration and the ability to pursue one's interest should be studied, both in terms of form and results, and, secondly, that foreign policy should be included in this research framework.

This article provides a look at the main turning points in research on educational inequalities, both at the level of the fi eld's subject matter and its methodology. The text focuses on authors and concepts that in their time constituted a major innovation, signifi cantly advancing analysis and knowledge in the fi eld of research on educational inequalities. In the article the authors propose viewing researchers in the fi eld of educational inequalities through the lens of their era and in relation to the major turning points between them, which can be identifi ed in terms of subject matter and methodology, and even chronologically. The authors define three basic periods, and for each one present two key concepts. The first period is represented by the basic model of the stratification process and by the socio-psychological model. The second period is characterised by the concept of educational allocation and the theory of 'maximally maintained inequality' (MMI). Presented for the third period are the multinomial transition model and the theory of 'effectively maintained inequality' (EMI). Across these stages of development the authors highlight three of the cited concepts as ground-breaking methodological innovations (the basic model of the stratification process, the concept of educational allocation, and the multinomial transition model) and the other three as innovations in subject matter (interpretive), though closely tied to the advancement of quantitative methods used in the analysis of educational inequalities (the socio-psychological model and the MMI and EMI theories).

Systemic corruption is not a failure of individuals, i.e. the result of their deviant behaviour, but a collective phenomenon shared mainly by public institutions as a whole. The phenomenon is based on an effort to establish a new set of corrupt norms inside such institutions affecting policymaking, administrative procedures, public procurements, and the behavior of employees etc. In spite of the fact that impacts of systemic corruption on the areas of government, civil freedoms, social cohesion, and public economy are well known, there is very little practical research involving concrete evidence of systemic corruption in particular cases. This paper attempts to clarify how to generate a set of indicators of systemic corruption and then identify and verify them in a real-life political environment – in our specific case, the administration and policymaking of Liberec City Council between 1998 and 2010. The research was based upon elaborated interviews (with politicians, public servants, prosecuting authorities etc.), document analysis (reports and papers of the city council and municipal government, contracts and invoices etc.), and political and media analysis. The results are significant, as only an understanding of how a corrupt system really works can lead to the implementation of suitable anticorruption measures. ; Systemic corruption is not a failure of individuals, i.e. the result of their deviant behaviour, but a collective phenomenon shared mainly by public institutions as a whole. The phenomenon is based on an effort to establish a new set of corrupt norms inside such institutions affecting policymaking, administrative procedures, public procurements, and the behavior of employees etc. In spite of the fact that impacts of systemic corruption on the areas of government, civil freedoms, social cohesion, and public economy are well known, there is very little practical research involving concrete evidence of systemic corruption in particular cases. This paper attempts to clarify how to generate a set of ...

This article is an attempt to present further results in the author's continuing qualitative
field work among the historical war re-enactment societies of the fortress towns of Josefstadt and
Theresienstadt (from 2010). Michael Foucaults Heterotopic theory of places is used to shed light
on a wide range of ritualised social behaviour, centred around key symbols from the monarchical
military culture of the Enlightenment. New categories for the analysis of local context have been
created which are clearly compatible with Braudel's theory of longue-duree, that is isophenomenological
historic-social objects, maintaining and transferring the original meaning of heterotopic
social-disciplination.

This paper focuses on "The Philadelphia Negro": a community study that stands at the start of American social research. This somewhat forgotten empirical study from 1899 describes the historical conditions and the economic and social causes and circumstances behind the formation and existence of the "Seventh Ward", a slum neighbourhood in Philadelphia inhabited by African-Americans. The study used survey and other methods of observation and analysis of historical, economic and social data. The study was written by the erudite Harvard University graduate William Edward Burghardt Du Bois, an African-American, and an economist, historian and sociologist. Using primary and secondary literature and archive sources this paper shows that Du Bois was the author of the first empirical social research study in the United States. It looks at his life, his research, and his opinions on racial issues. He created a programme of research on the African-American population and from 1898 to 1910 he headed the first school of sociology on the American continent at the University of Atlanta. He published the results of scientific analyses of the lives of African-Americans in the south of the United States in sixteen volumes of the Atlanta University Studies. Racial prejudices among the American sociological elites prevented both Du Bois and his work from receiving the attention they rightly deserve.