Does Active Labour Market Policy have an Impact on Social Marginalization?

Countless evaluations of active labour market policy (ALMP) have been conducted in the last decade. The common denominator for most of these evaluations is a focus on employment (self‐sufficiency) as the dependent variable, where the success of ALMP is measured in terms of the number of unemployed finding ordinary employment after (or immediately before) participating in an activation programme. The main argument in this article is that this focus is inadequate. For many long‐term unemployed people, it would be an understatement to describe the road to employment as merely ‘bumpy’. Research must take this into consideration. This article therefore deals with the Danish activation policy from a new perspective by analyzing the impact on different aspects of social marginalization, focusing on long‐term social assistance recipients. Using data from a comprehensive, representative quantitative survey of Danish unemployed conducted in 2007, the first analysis convincingly reveals that we fail to find any systematic correlation between participation in ALMP and any of the social marginalization indicators. The second analysis presents a more mixed picture of the participant's own assessment of the impact of ALMP on their self‐esteem; some are quite positive, while others are more neutral or even rather negative. Taking the existing research into account, these results leave us with conceptual and methodological questions for further research.     

当代中国文学为何退出公共领域

近15年,当代中国文学从中心走向边缘.文学边缘化的问题不在于失去"公众性",而是失去"公共性".20世纪80年代,曾经存在文学公共领域.文学工作者不仅关注公共问题,并且以文学形式把这些思考表达出来.但是近15年,文学逐渐与公共生活无关.文学公共领域的消失不能归咎于文学市场,也不能完全归咎于行政体制,主要原因在于文学工作者无法摆脱道德永动机和纯文学的二元框架.道德永动机的原则,从深层来说是注重"信念伦理",忽略"责任伦理";从浅层来说就是以道德评判代替文学评判,它严重阻碍了文学公共领域的构建.     

联合发展应对图书馆边缘化

在认识图书馆边缘化的表象基础上,深刻剖析了导致图书馆边缘化的原因,并对扭转边缘化趋势提出了联合发展的措施:与用户联合,与资源联合,与搜索引擎矛和先进技术联合.     

产业创新的极化与边缘化效应分析——基于长江上游地区第二产业的实证

基于长江上游地区第二产业,以理论假设和实证分析为线索进一步研究了产业创新问题。产业创新是指一个构成产业自身发展所需的各要素的创新和系统与环境创新的集合;产业创新的实现更多地表现为一种极化和边缘化效应:产业创新兴起与产业成长循环互动使产业集聚萌芽并优化;产业创新极化与产业繁荣循环互动使产业集聚强化;产业创新边缘化与产业衰退循环互动使产业集聚衰落分化。     

客家文化性质与类型新说——客家文化属于移民文化说质疑

人们常常把客家文化视为移民文化,实际上移民文化有明确的定义和范畴,客家人已经在赣闽粤交界区域定居了数百上千年,客家社会早已是一个稳定的定居社会,说客家文化是移民文化,其理论前提既不能成立,所举例证又经不起事实的检验.我们认为,客家文化是一种多元复合的山区农耕文化.客家文化的基本特征可概括为:山林性、边缘性、向心性.客家文化的这些特征辩证统一,其表现在不同的时期有不同的侧重,不同的片区也有不同的特点,并且动态发展、与时俱进.     

基于报童模型的两级供应链回购契约协调研究

研究具有单一供应商和单一销售商的供应链系统回购契约协调机制。分析了报童模型下两级供应链双边际化效应,建立了基于报童模型的分散式系统、集中式系统的供应商、销售商利润模型,讨论了如何通过回购契约来消除"双边际化效应"。结果表明:回购契约的采用使批发价格比不采用契约时的批发价格低,且使订货量增加,从而使供应链的总利润增加,并且减少了缺货带来的损失,同时更好的满足了顾客需要。最终实现了独立个体最优决策与系统最优决策一致化的供应链协调。     

论当代社科杂志编辑主体精神的重建

“知识经济”和“全球化”的到来,使社科杂志无法正常地发挥角色作用,显得无所适从,趋向于边缘化。边缘化的直接结果便是编辑主体意识的迷失。重建编辑主体精神成了当前刻不容缓的任务。这种重建包括敏感心、责任感、理论素养和数字化技术意识及能力,同时,这也是社科杂志重返社会文化中心的基础和前提。     

微空间主流意识形态边缘化危机及消解策略

微空间的主体多样性、信息碎片化、文化多元性为各种思想观念、价值理念的传播提供了平台,对微空间主流意识形态的主导性形成挑战、权威性产生冲击、理论性带来消解,导致主流意识形态出现边缘化危机.要克服微空间中淡化意识形态思潮渗透、主流意识形态“失语”、传播信息整合能力弱化的影响,必须增强微空间主流意识形态的主导向心力和辐射凝聚力意识,通过更新话语体系提升微空间主流意识形态的话语效力,强化人文关怀改进微空间主流意识形态的话语方式,重视培养微空间主流意识形态队伍的媒介素养与隐性传播方式的运用,建立和完善微空间信息评估反馈监管机制,加强主流意识形态对微空间信息的整合力度,以消解微空间主流意识形态边缘化危机.     

The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami: The highest casualties and largest reconstruction funds—Characteristics of major disasters and future challenges in developed countries

The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake was a disaster that led to the greatest number of casualties related to any form of natural disaster seen in developed countries since World War II. Furthermore, this earthquake occurred in an area where tsunami countermeasures had been prioritized. This disaster, therefore, led to the question “Is it impossible to reduce the number of victims of huge catastrophes, even in cases in which advanced disaster prevention measures have been taken?” Part of the reason this particular earthquake caused the largest number of deaths was because the tsunami that followed — which exceeded the “design load” of the seawall — hit the urban area. In addition, the tsunami, which also exceeded the “estimated loads” of the established disaster prevention plan, caused many “evacuation failures.” Another factor that contributed to the deaths was that the disaster prevention measures, up to that point, had relied primarily on the recognition that disasters could be prevented by the development of “hard,” or tangible, disaster prevention facilities in addition to “soft,” or intangible, measures, such as issuing warnings, without imposing space restrictions. Another characteristic of the Great East Japan Earthquake was that the largest reconstruction budget associated with any disaster in postwar Japan was compiled for it. Although the reconstruction project was over-specified for the disaster-afflicted area in terms of scale, cost, and duration of reconstruction, many unused land areas were also created in the new urban areas created during the reconstruction project. Furthermore, the reconstruction projects undertaken with the huge reconstruction budget were not based on the “choice to rebuild the lives” of the disaster-afflicted areas and the victims, but were rather implemented while simultaneously “marginalizing” said victims and areas as a whole. The over-specified reconstruction projects and the associated marginalization of disaster victims tend to exist in a mutually regulated relationship. Therefore, there are concerns about the future sustainability of the noted disaster-afflicted areas, which are already suffering from a severe population decline. Based on the previously presented discussion, it is possible to highlight various issues associated with disaster measures implemented in developed countries. First, regardless of how advanced disaster measures are, a “surge in disaster damage” can occur, which can lead to a “black swan” event. Therefore, it is necessary to formulate disaster prevention measures based on the assumption that such crises will occur in the future. Second, it is necessary for developed countries to determine how best to formulate reconstruction policies to avoid marginalizing disaster victims as well as to prevent over-specified reconstruction. In examining these two issues, the common problem that arises is how to conduct “risk assessment and enable its acceptance” most calmly immediately after a disaster and then formulate disaster prevention measures based on such assessment. Finally, the future of disaster sociology is detailed in this work. More specifically, in order for disaster sociology to escape its “marginal” status in sociology, it is necessary to consider “disaster” in the context of both a social structure and a social change—similar to how risk theory views the issue.