Suchergebnisse

1. Einleitung und Überblick -- 2. Probleme -- 3. Voraussetzungen und Hintergründe von Heimrepubliken -- 4. Selbstregierung und Erziehung in der Republik -- 5. Selbstregierung als Charakterformung und Willensunterwerfung bei F. W. Foerster -- 6. Lanes erziehungsphilosophische und psychologische Grundlage -- 7. Psychoanalytische Heilerziehung -- 8. Selbstregierung als 'Geteilte Verantwortung' (shared responsibility) -- 9. Frühe Vorläufer -- 10. W. R. George und die Junior Republic -- 11. Exkurs: Selbstverwaltung in Schule und Gefängnis -- 12. Homer Lane in USA: Die Ford Republic -- 13. Homer Lane und das Little Commonwealth in England -- 14. David Wills im Q-Camp in Hawkspur 1936–1941 -- 15. David Wills im Barns House (1940 – ca. 1945) -- 16. Der frühe A. S. Neill in Großbritannien -- 17. Neils Schulgründung in Dresden -- 18. A. S. Neill in Summerhill -- 19. Siegfried Bernfeld im Kinderheim Baumgarten -- 20. Makarenko u. a. in Rußland und der Ukraine -- 21. Flanagan in Boys Town -- 22. Kriegs- und Nachkriegs-Republiken -- 23. Silva in Bemposta -- 24. Fazit: Die reformpädagogische Kinderrepublikbewegung -- Archivalien -- Orts- und Personenregister.

Rural population decline has been observed in most developed and emerging economies but has been especially apparent in postsocialist countries. In this paper, we investigate the spatial patterns and the determinants of the rural population dynamics during the transition period from 1991 to 2010 in Tyumen Province, Russia, with the aim of better understanding the forces underlying depopulation. We use descriptive and exploratory statistical tools to analyze data from population censuses and district-level statistics of agriculture. Our results reveal distinct differences in the spatial clusters of the population increase and decline in the first and second decades of the post-Soviet era. We argue that these differences reflect the penetration of market relations into the countryside. The emergence of market forces initially advantaged the areas that were more suited to agriculture, which experienced population growth in the 1990s. Later, the drop in agricultural output, market-driven restructuring of farms, and introduction of labor-saving technologies reduced employment in agriculture. During the 2000s, labor opportunities in agriculture were no longer statistically related to rural population dynamics, while population dynamics in the villages have increasingly been determined by transport accessibility to larger markets, especially to the provincial capital. Governments need to be sensitive to these spatial and temporal population dynamics to foster opportunities in the countryside, avoid the negative side effects of depopulation on local economies and ensure the provision of social services.

A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10 years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now.

A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now. ; Peer reviewed

A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10 years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now. ; peerReviewed