Suchergebnisse

"At the time of this book's publication, almost seven years have passed since the dramatic and brutal terror attacks at Norway's Government Headquarters in Oslo and the island of Utøya on 22 July 2011. How have we coped during this time? Which values have been important? Have we managed to protect the ideals of democracy, openness and humanity? And not least: Who is this ""we"" that we are referring to?

This scholarly anthology includes articles from researchers associated with the project NECORE (Negotiating Values: Collective Identities and Resilience after 22 July) and other researchers whose work is closely associated with the project. They give us insights, opinions and sharp perspectives on not just 22 July, but also about Norway today, about values, identities and resilience in Norwegian society in the wake of the terror attacks. An important backdrop for the book and the project is the assertion that, as the events themselves recede into the past, it is even more important to focus on what the terror events have led to and how we can learn from them. In a world where terrorism has become an all too common part of political reality, it is crucial that we understand how we ought to think about terror, and how we as a society encounter it."

Russia was the first Arctic coastal state to make an official submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) in 2001. The purpose of Russia's submission was the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles in the Arctic Ocean in accordance with UNCLOS Article 76. The area claimed by Russia is a large portion of the seabed extending even to the exclusive economic zones of Denmark and Canada. However, Russia's actions regarding delineation in the Arctic Ocean have led to criticism from several Russian experts in the field of international law. This paper is a response to a series of articles by Ivan Zhudro and Alexander Vylegzhanin. It argues against their assertion that Russia and the other Arctic states could have established the outer limits of their continental shelf in the absence of CLCS recommendations through the delimitation procedure in accordance with UNCLOS Article 83. The article rejects the argument that during the delimitation the Arctic states could have used meridian lines (sectors) to exclude the existence of an international seabed area in the Central Arctic Ocean. The author challenges the position that the result of delineation under UNCLOS Article 76 would not be fair since the US has not ratified UNCLOS.

"The health sector is a complex and dynamic conglomerate of services at local, regional and national levels. How to balance different considerations between new medical-professional knowledge, controlling expenses and local interests are among the permanent challenges facing political bodies when planning and structuring the services. The book is based upon institutionalist organisation theories, referring back to classic texts as well as present-day analyses. By taking a long-term perspective, and analysing one Norwegian county as a case study, the author addresses questions about how conflicts on hospital structure seemingly have been solved, and how the introduction of new management forms have changed the sector.
One of the issues is how, in a 40 years' perspective, different interest groups have seen their influence over health services and management forms have changed. In contrast to hypotheses that medical doctors would see their influence becoming reduced, the analyses show how medical actors, in an alliance with management consultants, have become more influential when innovations in health work and eventually organisation models are introduced. Regional political bodies and local community interests have lost much of their former role in restructuring processes. At the end of the book, the author makes some hypotheses about how health services will develop in the interface between ideas of a centralised, modern, high tech hospital model on one hand, and local and home based services on the other. These developments will in a nearby future most likely restructure the health sector once more.
" - "Helsesektoren er i stadig endring. Utfordringene sektoren står overfor, dreier seg blant annet om å finne balansen mellom medisinsk-faglig utvikling, økonomiske rammer og geografiske hensyn. Organisasjons-, styrings- og ledelsesformer påvirker forholdet mellom disse hensynene, som ofte trekker tjenestene i ulike retninger.

Et av de mest kontroversielle spørsmålene er hvilken sykehusstruktur som er mest hensiktsmessig. De siste årene har en på ny opplevd at protestene mot sentralisering av sykehussektoren er blitt sterkere. I debatten er det igjen blitt søkelys på de helsepolitiske spill og strategier som kjennetegner sektoren. Samtidig påvirkes tjenestene hele tiden av medisinsk-teknologiske innovasjoner, nye økonomistyringssystemer og innføring av «moderne» styrings- og ledelsesformer.

I denne boken diskuteres hvordan en i Østfold håndterte utfordringene knyttet til sykehusstruktur, og hvordan det er skapt tilsynelatende ro om dette tidligere så betente spørsmålet. Forfatteren analyserer først de strategiene som førte til at sykehusdriften i fylket ble sentralisert og et nytt «supersykehus» på Kalnes ble bygget. Deretter blir noen kjennetegn ved organisasjons- og ledelsesformer i det nye sykehuset drøftet.

Avslutningsvis diskuteres de underliggende utviklingstendenser som kan peke mot fremtidens sykehustjenester innenfor et mer helhetlig «helsesystem», som også omfatter lokale helsetjenester. Analysen er basert på moderne organisasjons- og ledelsesteorier. Et sentralt spørsmål her er hvordan institusjonelle særtrekk ved sektoren har betydning for de endringene som har skjedd de siste 40 -50 årene.

Målgruppen for boken er forskere, universitets- og høgskoleansatte og studenter i samfunnsvitenskapelige fag relatert til helsesektoren. Boken vil også gi ny kunnskap til ansatte i sektoren, og andre som er opptatt av helse- og velferdspolitiske spørsmål."

In a world marked by surging international conflicts, labour market globalisation, ever-widening economic inequities, steady improvement in the flow of information, and increasing possibilities for mobility over greater distances, the number of migrants on a worldwide basis is hardly likely to decrease in coming years. Immigration regulations are devised within a confluence of national interests, international laws, and attention to migrants' individual rights. The tension between these disparate considerations begs the question: How can we best safeguard both universal rights issues and European economic integration, as well as the Norwegian state's obligation, vis-à-vis the distribution of benefits, to its own citizens. We are moving into extremely complex ethical and legal territory, where there are no easy answers. In this book, the author puts Norway's immigration policy under a moral-philosophical loupe for a thorough analysis of various answers to key questions in the Norwegian immigration debate.

This book is aimed at anyone interested in immigration policy issues, but especially persons working professionally in the field, such as political philosophers, politicians, lawyers, case managers and political scientists. - I en verden der internasjonale konflikter stadig blusser opp, arbeidsmarkedet globaliseres, økonomiske ulikheter blir stadig større, informasjonsflyten kontinuerlig forbedres og mulighetene for å forflytte seg over store avstander er gode, vil antallet migranter på verdensbasis ikke bli lavere i årene som kommer. Innvandringsregulering finner sted i spenningen mellom statlige interesser, internasjonal rett og hensynet til migranters individuelle rettigheter. I lys av disse spenningene må vi stille spørsmålet om hvordan vi best mulig kan ivareta både universelle rettighetshensyn og europeisk økonomisk integrasjon, samt den norske stats forpliktelse overfor egne innbyggere i fordeling av goder. Vi beveger oss inn i et etisk og juridisk felt med stor kompleksitet, hvor ingen enkle svar er gitt. I denne boken legger forfatteren norsk innvandringspolitikk under en moralfilosofisk lupe, og drøfter grundig ulike svar på en rekke sentrale spørsmål i norsk innvandringsdebatt.

Boken retter seg mot alle med interesse for innvandringspolitiske spørsmål, men særskilt personer som arbeider profesjonelt innenfor feltet, slik som politiske filosofer, politikere, jurister, saksbehandlere og statsvitere.