Social innovation acknowledges that alternative arrangements between state, market and civil society are called for if innovations are to be sustainable. This chapter examines grassroots-led processes of social innovation in the field of poverty in Flanders, inspired by Ibrahim’s model of grassroots-led development. Inspired by it, we discuss the paradoxes for a politicising approach in the practice of the Flemish grassroots-led social innovation practices, Where People in Poverty Speak Out (WPPSO). We address two central questions. First, we demonstrate that social innovations such as WPPSO that aimed to improve the voice of people in poverty cannot trust only in the quality of the process of grassroots-led social innovation. A process-oriented approach might be a necessary condition for social innovation, but the democratisation of policy processes such as WPPSO do not necessarily create the conditions for concrete enhancements of the living conditions of people in poverty. Our second question was if other factors, outside of the innovation process, also need to be considered. A key external factor was that of encapsulation tendencies in policy production. The participative way of policy making about poverty with the grassroots organisations of people in poverty has brought about a separate domain of poverty policy.
DOCUMENT
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is constantly gaining ground, both at domestic and international level. New forms of dispute settlement with a mix of public and private components are emerging in fields where this was not the case until recent times, as some contributions to this Zoom-out have attempted to demonstrate. In the field of investment law we have witnessed a somehow opposite trend. Traditionally, disputes in this field have been settled by means of arbitral tribunals established mostly on the basis of bilateral or multilateral investment agreements (IAs) under a variety of arbitration facilities, which are collectively referred to as investor-to-State dispute settlement (ISDS). Traditional ISDS presents many characteristics of ADR, starting from the strong role that private parties play in it (for example when it comes to the appointment of arbitrators). The practice has shown that the system has clear advantages but also undeniable disadvantages. The prevailing opinion in recent years has been that the latter considerably outweigh the former, resulting in what has been termed the backlash against investment arbitration in a volume appeared a few years ago. In this contribution, how-ever, I will not dwell on the details of the crisis that has affected investment arbitration, nor will I engage in a discussion of whether that backlash is entirely justified. My focus will be much more modest. One of the most tangible consequences of this growing dissatisfaction towards investment arbitration is the launch on the part of the EU of a court-like system to settle investment disputes –the now famous investment court system (ICS) –as a replacement to old-fashioned ISDS. The ICS now features in all EU IAs, and has become the standard position of the EU when it comes to dispute settlement in this field. Recently, the ICS has also received the green light of the European Court of Justice (ECJ),raising doubts as to whether traditional ISDS has conclusively been sent to oblivion, at least in the EU. From a political and policy perspective, it is undoubtful that there is a strong stance on the part of the EU and of its Member States against traditional ISDS. This article, however, will focus exclusively on the legal dimension, by examining whether the ECJ’s decision should be read as meaning that investment arbitration is incompatible with the EU legal system. While itis clear that Opinion 1/17 means that the ICS is compatible with EU law, it remains to be seen whether the Court’s finding allows an a contrario reading. Namely, whether it entails the incompatibility with EU law of traditional ISDS. The analysis will start with a brief summary of the events and developments that preceded the creation of the ICS and eventually led to the current situation (Section 2), followed by an examination of the relevant parts of Opinion 1/17 (Section 3). This part will be followed by an appraisal of the possible legal implications of the decision (Section 4). Some conclusions will be offered in the closing section (Section 5) in the attempt to look beyond the boundaries of EU law. Part of topic "The blurring distinction between public and private in international dispute resolution"
MULTIFILE
A tangible proof of the meaning and scope of human flourishing that can change not only organizations but also entire societies, is given by Robert Schuman, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs who launched the Schuman Declaration (1950) that gave birth to the EU. His leitmotiv was to be a faithful instrument in the hands of God in whichever circumstances. A strong personal relationship with God characterized his entire personal and professional life and implied the heroic practice of virtues. He strove for peace on the continent and therefore for reconciliation between France and Germany - countries that had been archenemies since the Treaty of Verdun (843). He previewed a peace project on coal and steel, former instruments of war. Schuman pursued a policy of reconciliation from the moment he became a member of the French Parliament (1919) and even during his captivity during the Second World War. His coherence of life was acknowledged by friend and foe and recognized also professionally. His profound Catholic faith brought human flourishing that changed not only French-German relationships, not only Europe, but the entire world. Schuman’s Europe would strive towards political unification through economic cooperation – as a means! – at the service of man and his transcendence so that man could flourish. These days man seems to be an instrument of the economy and politics instead of the other way round. A good moment to revive the person and thoughts of the Father of Europe.
DOCUMENT
The article engages with the recent studies on multilevel regulation. The starting point for the argument is that contemporary multilevel regulation—as most other studies of (postnational) rulemaking—is limited in its analysis. The limitation concerns its monocentric approach that, in turn, deepens the social illegitimacy of contemporary multilevel regulation. The monocentric approach means that the study of multilevel regulation originates in the discussions on the foundation of modern States instead of returning to the origins of rules before the nation State was even created, which is where the actual social capital underlying (contemporary) rules can be found, or so I wish to argue. My aim in this article is to reframe the debate. I argue that we have an enormous reservoir of history, practices, and ideas ready to help us think through contemporary (social) legitimacy problems in multilevel regulation: namely all those practices which preceded the capture of law by the modern State system, such as historical alternative dispute resolution (ADR) practices.
DOCUMENT
The Confederation of European Probation detects a clear need for a central record of training and qualification requirements, standards or curricula for probation and community supervision practitioners in EU Member States. Hogeschool Utrecht (UAS) has been commissioned to conduct a survey to collect an overview of qualification requirements and training of probation workers in order to set up a network to share knowledge, competencies and expertise among members’ states. The research question is: What kind of formation precedes the start of a career of a probation worker in the various EU Member states and how does it develop throughout his or her career? In order to answer this question, an online survey with closed and open questions has been send out among CEP members that provide or are responsible for probation services. Twenty of them filled out the questionnaire covering 18 different countries.
DOCUMENT
Refugees and internally displaced people who flee their homes due to environmental threats and far-going degradation which destroys their living conditions are not well-protected under international law. Refugee law focusses on political refugees. Establishing principals similar to the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) regime, (which is limited to genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing), could offer a solution for the lack of protection of environmental refugees. The obligation to establish this system could be based on the same obligation that forms the basis of the establishment of the R2P regime itself: the international obligation to prevent large scale suffering. This obligation corresponds with changed notions regarding state sovereignty and with the moral and legal obligations emanating from various human rights treaties. In first instance, according to R2P, the primary responsibility to take protective measures lies with the state itself. Secondly, the international community has a responsibility to assist. Lastly, the international community has a responsibility to respond duly and in a decisive manner when a state is unable or unwilling to provide protection for its citizens. The international community is equipped with a broad range of instruments under R2P that can be employed to protect environmental refugees. These instruments allow for custom-made solutions, which are absent in most traditional legal instruments
DOCUMENT
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to contribute to a better understanding of innovative forms of collaboration between different types of enterprises – aimed at scaling social impact – and address the challenges and complexities inherent to these specific types of partnerships. The particular focus is on strategic collaboration between workintegration social enterprises (WISEs) and mainstream, or for-profit enterprises (FPEs) with the shared objective to create more and better employment opportunities for disadvantaged individuals in the labour market. Design/methodology/approach – This study used a qualitative research design. The total sample consisted of 16 small- and medium-sized enterprises (both WISEs and FPEs), which were selected for their proven,business-to-business revenue model and their explicit ambition to create more inclusive jobs for disadvantaged individuals. Data collection and analysis took place between 2021 and 2023 and consisted of: semi-structured interviews with representatives of the participating enterprises to get a better understanding of the way in which current partnerships operate; and co-creative research methods to facilitate change processes – within and outside these partnerships – aimed at creating more social impact. Findings – Most collaborations between WISEs and FPEs start purely transactional, with the exchange of products or services, but once they become more familiarised with each other, the realisation of (joint) social impact becomes more significant. The ambition to further coordinate and integrate operations is prominent, but the partnership process is not without challenges and requires time, commitment and trust. So far, only few collaborations can be considered truly transformational. Originality/value – This study contributes to the discussion on strategic alliances and cross-sector collaborations by providing a conceptual framework and a practical instrument to shape strategic collaboration between social enterprises and FPEs that aim to create more social impact.
LINK
Background: On two Care Innovation Units in the Netherlands, staff, students and Lecturer Practitioners work intensively together to provide care, create a rich learning environment, and to foster innovation and research. In striving to advance the quality of care and to develop person centred cultures a preference is given to participative forms of research in which diverse experiences and different types of knowledge are valued. Aims and Objectives: The research described here had two overarching aims: the improvement of practice situations and the encouragement of the integration of work and learning. This article focuses on our actions and learning with respect to fostering participation during this project. Design and methods: Within the action research methodology used, participative work-forms and research methods were chosen. For example, a responsive approach to evaluation of practice, use of narratives and the stimulation and use of creativity to help in exploring and sharing feelings, values and different forms of knowledge. In this article we use Arnstein's ladder of citizen participation to frame our reflection on enabling participation within this project. Results Participation took various forms and vacillated throughout the project. In addition to particular facilitation strategies, four factors emerged as influential in enabling or inhibiting aspects of participation among stakeholders: individual motivations and interests, the make-up of and atmosphere within the group, and the time made available to engage in research activities. Conclusions Participation in research is both more complex and dynamic than Arnstein's typology suggests. Moving 'up' the ladder may not be appropriate as a goal in and of itself. Instead, meeting and responding to each other's situations, as stakeholders, seems a more appropriate focus. Taking responsibility, as facilitator, for certain research activities, can free other participants to focus on elements which interest them and from which they derive satisfaction.
LINK
Mediators generally find mediation of hierarchical workplace conflicts difficult, as it often involves structural power imbalances. This dissertation seeks to increase knowledge of how hierarchical conflict affects how parties and mediators perceive mediation across dyads and across time. Three questions are central to this: (a) How effective in the long-term is the mediation of hierarchical workplace conflicts? (b) How does perceived situational power in supervisor-subordinate dyads relate to mediation effectiveness? (c) Do supervisors and subordinates differ in their emotional experiences during mediation, and are mediators able to perceive these emotions accurately? To answer these questions, we rely on the literature on power, emotions, mediation, and conflict management. We introduce our research via a heuristic model (chapter one). We then present our quantitative empirical research in three chapters based on survey data we collected from supervisors, subordinates, and
DOCUMENT
Paperbijdrage conferentie EARLI SIG 14, 11-14 september 2018, Genève Although professional performance at the workplace is essential in VET, little is known about what educators do when assessing students’ performance. This study aims to explore how workplace educators inform their judgements of students’ performance by looking at strategies and potentially influencing factors.
DOCUMENT
