Search

Historians generally depict the Italian peninsula after the Congress of Vienna as primarily under the influence of the Habsburg Empire. It is surprising, therefore, that some 150 years after the death of one of the most influential figures of the period, the Austrian Chancellor Clemens Wenzel Lothar Nepomuk Prince von Metternich (d. 1859), there is still no comprehensive study of his Italian policies, even though such a study would throw important new light on the final stage of Metternich's career at the Viennese Chancellery from 1830 to 1848. This paper addresses only a few months in this period, but it draws on the archives in Vienna, London, Moscow, Berlin, Munich, Brussels, Prague and Decin to show that, although Metternich's Austria played a critically important role in the Italian politics, its influence in the southern part of the peninsula was considerably lower than is generally assumed. In fact, as will be shown, in this region the conservative central European monarchy had to share its influence with Great Britain and France. Nor did the two liberal powers automatically regard this area as an exclusive sphere of Habsburg influence, as became evident a quarter a century after the Congress during the so-called Sulphur Crisis in 1840, when a dispute between Great Britain and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies about the control over the production of the Sicilian sulphur led to a serious crisis that was finally solved by the mediation of France. As we shall see, Austria was excluded from the management of this crisis both because the British foreign Secretary, Henry John Temple Lord Palmerston, did not want to allow Metternich to play the role of arbitrator and because the Austrian influence over the court of Naples was in reality very weak. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: A number of European countries have expanded their screening programme considerably during the last decade. Other countries have, however, not expanded their programme substantially. In this paper, I will compare UK and Austria, two countries representing two ends of the European spectrum. Focussing on the decision-making processes behind the design and expansion of newborn screening, I draw on Sheila Jasanoff''s concept of “civic epistemology” (Jasanoff, S. (2005). Designs on Nature. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.) to investigate how the chosen countries provide information in order to give account for their respective screening policies. In particular, I analyse how key institutions in the UK and Austria use scientific expertise to explain and justify national screening programmes. For this purpose, I compare the material that is made available to the public, including policy documents, scientific studies, medical guidelines, legal regulation, advisory committee reports and public engagement exercises. It was found that the observed differences in the accountability practices are rooted in nationally traditional forms of policy making. However, whether or not these repertoires become indeed realised is a more contingent matter and is often triggered by events which evoke a response from the medical and policy-making actors. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]