Search

Two different plant strategies exist to deal with shade: shade avoidance and shade tolerance. All shade-exposed plants optimize photosynthesis to adapt to the decrease in light quality and quantity. When shaded, most species in open habitats express the shade-avoidance syndrome, a growth response to escape shade. Shade-tolerant species from forest understories cannot outgrow surrounding trees and adopt a tolerance response. Unlike shade avoidance, virtually nothing is known about regulation of shade tolerance. In this opinion article, we discuss potential modes of molecular regulation to adopt a shade-tolerance rather than a shade-avoidance strategy. We argue that molecular approaches using model and non-model species should help identify the molecular pathways that underpin shade tolerance, thus providing knowledge for further crop improvement.

Light signals are important signals for future and present competition. We used an architectural model of Arabidopsis development to show that vertical growth of neighboring vegetation is more important than proximity for early detection of competition. Self-signaling is greatly enhanced when own organs grow more vertically, and signal strength differs between signal perception at the apex compared to the leaves.

Who has the duty to guarantee that basic human rights are fulfilled globally? This is one of the central questions in the current global justice debate. The answer to this question must be based on some principle of justice that distributes rights and duties in the global sphere. This paper analyses Thomas Pogge’s answer to this question, which does not rest on notions of charity, benevolence, or supererogatory duties, but on the negative duty not to harm the global poor. His central claim is that "we, the citizens and governments of the affluent societies, in collusion with the ruling elites of many poor countries, are harming the global poor by imposing an unjust institutional order upon them." Although I am sympathetic to Pogge’s project, my discussion of it is mainly critical of his negative duty argument. Section 48.2 discusses Pogge’s explanatory globalism arguing that global poverty is caused by a global institutional order, and that affluent societies, by setting up this global institutional order in an unjust way, are responsible for global poverty. Section 48.3 describes and discusses Pogge’s argument that we, the citizens and governments of affluent societies, have a negative duty not to cause global poverty. Although Pogge’s explanatory globalism is convincing, his negative-duty argument cannot be sustained. The main problemin his argument is the unspecified "we" that have a duty: does it refer to governments of affluent societies, their citizens, or both?

From the mid-1990s onward, cultural diversity and multiculturalism have become a subject of major interest in the social sciences and philosophy. Proponents argue that contemporary societies are characterized by cultural pluralism, and that this important fact has long been ignored or even denied in mainstream debates.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has concluded that the mandatory display of crucifixes in public school classrooms does not violate the European Convention. Many have questioned whether a supra-national court like the ECtHR is entitled to interfere in issues that are so intimately linked to the national identity of state parties. However, even if one agrees that the Court’s Grand Chamber was in the end correct not to interfere (by employing the margin of appreciation), one can still question whether a constitutional democracy like Italy is justified in enforcing an explicit Christian symbol in public schools.In this chapter, I analyze the Lautsi case from the perspective of state neutrality. It is generally acknowledged in legal and political philosophy that contemporary constitutional democracies cannot be formally linked to some religious confession, except in a vestigial and largely symbolic sense. As Rajeev Bhargava argues, the idea of neutrality requires a "principled distance" between religion and the state, two entities that should be seen as distinct spheres with their own respective areas. In this chapter, I analyze whether the wish to hold on to such a religiously inspired tradition is consistent with the idea of state neutrality, a central value of contemporary constitutional democratic states.

Liberal theories of political philosophy inform the practice and tradition of non-state actors and non-governmental organizations (together, ‘non-governmental actors’). Aspirations for global justice or a democratic peace, among other things, arise out of liberal thought from John Locke and Immanuel Kant to Jürgen Habermas and John Rawls. Their work underscores an enduring role for private actors in the public sphere as a necessary element for progressive political development. This chapter analyses the role of non-governmental actors in liberal political philosophy from Kant to Rawls.

Is it possible and desirable to translate the basic principles underlying cosmopolitanism as a moral standard into effective global institutions. Will the ideals of inclusiveness and equal moral concern for all survive the marriage between cosmopolitanism and institutional power? What are the effects of such bureaucratisation of cosmopolitan ideals? This volume examines the strained relationship between cosmopolitanism as a moral standard and the legal institutions in which cosmopolitan norms and principles are to be implemented. Five areas of global concern are analysed: environmental protection, economic regulation, peace and security, the fight against international crimes and migration.

Is it possible and desirable to translate the basic principles underlying cosmopolitanism as a moral standard into effective global institutions. Will the ideals of inclusiveness and equal moral concern for all survive the marriage between cosmopolitanism and institutional power? What are the effects of such bureaucratisation of cosmopolitan ideals? This volume examines the strained relationship between cosmopolitanism as a moral standard and the legal institutions in which cosmopolitan norms and principles are to be implemented. Five areas of global concern are analysed: environmental protection, economic regulation, peace and security, the fight against international crimes and migration.