Search

Over the last fifteen years, and especially following the economic crisis, the Southern European states have introduced a large number of reforms, on the one hand, to increase their competitiveness and encourage economic development and, on the other, to rationalize the «state's side» of the welfare state, so as to reduce their public spending, as required by the austerity policies. Justice is certainly one of the state sectors which has been deeply impacted by the reforms adopted in response to the influences exercised by European Council, Commission's Directorate-general for competition, Troika, European Court of Human Rights, and European judicial networks. The paper, which focuses on labour justice in Portugal, Spain, and Italy, analyses, from a quantitative point of view, the effects of this long «season of reforms» both at the macro (national) and meso level (judicial districts). This choice is driven by the desire to compare three states characterized by a high internal and external independence of the judiciary -- the so-called Southern European Model -- and, at the same time, to highlight the impact of different levels of organizational autonomy enjoyed by the local territories. The fundamental hypothesis of this paper is that the reforms introduced in recent years -- both on the supply and demand side of justice -- have, on the whole, increased the efficiency of the judicial systems, but have not been able to reduce the inequalities, in terms of citizens' opportunities to access to justice. The article, which fills a gap in the literature on these topics, discusses the variables that may explain the persistence of the territorial differences and proposes to re-define the very way of conceiving and practicing the governance not only of the justice systems, but of all the public structures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Reti Medievali is the property of Firenze University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Archeologia Medievale: Cultura Materiale, Insediamenti, Territorio is the property of All'Insegna del Giglio s.a.s. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Reti Medievali is the property of Firenze University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The aim of this paper is Ito examine the case of the castle cabeça de terra of Refojos. On this castle there are very few written documents, dated between XI and XIII centuries and labile and uncertain material evidence. Due to the scarcity of sources, a comparative analysis will be carried out based on the castles cabeça de terra provided with more documentation, demonstrating how the multidisciplinary and comparative approach can be an appropriate methodology for the study and understanding of medieval defensive elements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione is the property of FrancoAngeli srl and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Talia Dixit is the property of Talia Dixit and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this paper, the authors seek to explore a tendency in current sociological thought to highlight notions of choice and autonomy in writings about contemporary Western societies. Their purpose is to demonstrate how empirical research is able to provide other ways of theorising than the individualisation one. It's essential that the research takes account of the complexity and diversity of people's lives through the lens of the agency-structure dynamic and the relationship between biography and history. Brannen and Nilsen wish to draw attention to some of the consequences of leaving out discussions of the structural aspects of societies and people's lives, for individuals as well as for the development and application of sociological theory and its ability to understand the connection between history and individual biography. For the authors, the domination of the concept of individualisation in sociological theory causes many misunderstandings because to ignore the structure is to ignore the possibility of inequalities and differences in resources which are systemic and systematic rather than individual and random. It's to say, the individualisation theory emphasises the agency side of the classical sociological dynamic - the individual and society link - and downplays structure. Consequently, discussing about how people construct their life course trajectories, how they make choices, the individualisation route stresses the individual agency power without arguing the structure conditions. The discussion is based on qualitative research that the authors have conducted in recent years, and draws on focus groups with young people in Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom, Ireland and Portugal. From this critique, the two authors seek to demonstrate how concepts that take account of context and structure as well individual subjectivities can create a better 'fit' with complex and diverse realties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The leading question of this paper is whether it makes any sense, is credible or feasible to adopt aims of sensibleness and rationalization in the health care system (so strictly connected to the social and economical sector) while the criteria used by the social, economical and cultural contexts (nationally and internationally) are based on the denial of evidences, on misinterpretation of data. Some arbitrary and difficult to justify decisions are glossed over with labels of rigour and planning. Four scenarios (the role of the evidences; the global health, the mental health and the role of citizens-leading or passive role) allow to propose some provocative reflections, backed up by the most recent articles published on the most important international medical journals.