Search

In the recent decades, privacy scholarship has made significant progress. Most of it was achieved in monodisciplinary works. However, privacy has a deeply interdisciplinary nature. Most importantly, societies as well as individuals experience privacy as being influenced by legal, technical, and social norms and structures. In this article, we hence attempt to connect insights of different academic disciplines into a joint model, an Interdisciplinary Privacy and Communication Model. The model differentiates four different elements: communication context, protection needs, threat and risk analysis, as well as protection enforcement. On the one hand, with this model, we aim to describe how privacy unfolds. On the other hand, the model also prescribes how privacy can be furnished and regulated. As such, the model contributes to a general understanding of privacy as a theoretical guide and offers a practical basis to address new challenges of the digital age.

Im Kontext von Migration und globaler Interdependenz ist das Verhältnis zwischen Demokratie und politischer Zugehörigkeit zu einem schwierigen und umstrittenen Terrain geworden. Als normatives Konzept der Demokratietheorie ist die "Erfindung des Volkes" eng verbunden mit der‚ Erfindung (politischer) Bürgerschaft‘. Dieser Artikel argumentiert, dass die Beziehung zwischen moderner Demokratie und (politischem) Volk durch ein fundamentales Dilemma geprägt ist: Die Konstitution und gleichzeitige Kontingenz von Grenzen. Dieses Dilemma spiegelt sich in den Dynamiken moderner Bürgerschaft wider, welche in zwei Richtungen weisen: Vertiefung auf der einen, Ausweitung auf der anderen Seite. Um die Frage anzugehen, wie diese Dynamiken vermittelt werden können, unterscheidet der Artikel zwischen Bürgerschaft als Institution und Bürgerschaft als sozialer Praxis. Die Überlegungen zu Formen und Ebenen politischer Zugehörigkeit, die demokratische Bürgerschaft ermöglichen, führen zu der Schlussfolgerung, dass Debatten über institutionelle Reformen die sozialisierende Funktion von Institutionen berücksichtigen und sorgfältiger auf die Frage eingehen sollten, ob und wie transnationale Formen von Demokratie in der Lage sein können, die Bürger hervorzubringen, die nötig sind, um diese auch aufrechtzuerhalten., In the context of migration and global interdependence the relationship between democracy and peopleness has become a difficult and contested terrain. As a normative concept of democratic theory the, invention of the people' is tied to the "invention of citizenship". This paper argues that the relation of modern democracy and peopleness is shaped by a foundational dilemma: the constitution and contingency of boundaries. This dilemma is reflected in the dynamics of modern citizenship, which are moving in two directions: deepening on the one hand, broadening on the other. In order to address the question of how to mediate these movements the paper distinguishes between citizenship as institution and citizenship as social practice. The reflection on forms of peopleness that democratic citizenship might require is related to questions of institutionshaping and culture-building.

This article discusses freedom of movement under the lens of shifting boundaries of membership and traces the tension between the political and the economic rationale of European integration. It first reflects on the normativity of free movement and links it to the foundations of modern democratic citizenship. Subsequently, it discusses the role of free movement in the construction of EU citizenship and argues that the genesis in market integration casts a long shadow which hinders EU citizenship's potential to fully display the logic of political and social equality. Under current conditions of huge wealth discrepancies between member states, the prevailing form of horizontal integration necessarily brings about a tension between mobility and solidarity, which in turn creates a barrier for further developing EU citizenship. It is concluded that strengthening an intra‐European dimension of solidarity is needed in order to substantiate the right to move as an equal European citizenship right.