Technological change and sociocultural models in China: A case study of train commuters in Beijing

ABSTRACT

China’s mobility turn has created the world’s largest public rail system, contributing extensively to citizens’ economic, social, and spatial mobility. Concurrently, this technological transformation has introduced many opportunities for individuation, which could potentially challenge the social, collectivistic, and Confucian foundations of China’s sociocultural and political ideology. While the notion that ‘mobility produces culture’ is readily accepted, research on train mobility in China is rare. In this study, we use Albert Bandura’s Model of Triadic Reciprocal Causation to conceptualize mobility as agency. We employ Hermeneutic Content Analysis, a mixed methods framework, to study how this rapidly evolving mobility environment connects to the lives of 31 regular train users living in Beijing. Studying agency in China enables us to systematize the sociocultural models within which mobility practices are embedded and how they manifest. We find that our interviewees embed agentive practices in a cultural model that is intertwined with collectivistic aspirations of the country. Technological developments are thus integrated into existing sociocultural models and political expectations, contradicting existing debates on the fracturing impact of disruptive technologies.     

Leistung, Unsicherbeit und Ohnmacht

The European research project SIREN analysed subjective perceptions and interpretations of changes in working life and their interrelation with political orientations. This article presents the results of the qualitative part of the research in Austria. The findings lead to a better understanding of the appeal to various population groups of rightwing populism and allow an empirical scrutiny of related theses. In particular, the contribution describes, by way of a typology, the variety of reasons as to why people take on authoritarian-exclusivist orientations and accept right-wing populist political propositions. The core question is how subjective perceptions and interpretations of socioeconomic change are transformed into political subjectivity.     

康德实践哲学中的法和伦理

本文是曼弗雷德·鲍姆(Manfred Baum)教授2008年10月3日在武汉大学哲学学院所作讲演的译稿.文中对康德<道德形而上学>一书划分成"法权论"和"德行论"的来由、理论根据和基础进行了分析,认为康德摧毁了传统的自然法学说,而把法权和德行全都建立在人的自由之上,视为人的义务的内外两方面.同样作为定言命令,康德的法权原则是分析命题,德行原则是综合命题,前者对人的目的不作要求,后者则要求人把人格和人性当作目的.但法权毕竟要以道德为前提和评价标准,而道德本身的评价标准则是从外部合法性向内部行动"转移"而来的,这是一个矛盾.     

Note on the bias in the estimation of the serial correlation coefficient of AR(1) processes

We derive approximating formulas for the mean and the variance of an autocorrelation estimator which are of practical use over the entire range of the autocorrelation coefficient ρ. The least-squares estimator ∑ ^{n −1} _{i =1}ε _i ε _{i +1} / ∑ ^{n −1} _{i =1}ε² _i is studied for a stationary AR(1) process with known mean. We use the second order Taylor expansion of a ratio, and employ the arithmetic-geometric series instead of replacing partial Cesàro sums. In case of the mean we derive Marriott and Pope's (1954) formula, with (n− 1)⁻¹ instead of (n)⁻¹, and an additional term α (n− 1)⁻². This new formula produces the expected decline to zero negative bias as ρ approaches unity. In case of the variance Bartlett's (1946) formula results, with (n− 1)⁻¹ instead of (n)⁻¹. The theoretical expressions are corroborated with a simulation experiment. A comparison shows that our formula for the mean is more accurate than the higher-order approximation of White (1961), for |ρ| > 0.88 and n≥ 20. In principal, the presented method can be used to derive approximating formulas for other estimators and processes. Received: November 30, 1999; revised version: July 3, 2000     

Antizipation und ihre Formalisierung. Zur Simulation sozialer Systeme nach Loet Leydesdorff

The paper in hand ventures to introduce a mathematical formalization of anticipation in social systems as suggested by Loet Leydesdorff on the background of the anticipatory-conception by Daniel Dubois and the Theory of Social Systems by Niklas Luhmann. The paper discusses a difference between Luhmann and Leydesdorff concerning their conceptions of information and hints at possibilities to overcome this difference by considering the medium-form-distinction as introduced by Luhmann.     

Harsanyi support levels solutions

Theory and Decision - We study the effect of scarcity on decision making by low income Swedes. We exploit the random assignment of welfare payments to study their borrowing decisions within the...     

Work–family reconciliation policies without equal opportunities? The case of Austria

This paper explores the main public work–family policies in Austria (parental leave in connection with the Childcare Benefit, parents’ entitlement to part-time work, the extension of the childcare infrastructure) from the perspective of social justice using the normative concepts of gender equality, recognition, and choice. The main results show that for the most part, these policies offer affirmative recognition of maternal care and limited employment of mothers but offer little support for transformative recognition, particularly in terms of increasing the social status of working mothers and fathers as carers. Austrian work–family policies also do little to redistribute incomes and career opportunities from men to women and childcare from women to men; instead, they grant only limited freedom to choose between parental duties and employment, and the (financial) support they do offer is strongly concentrated on early childhood. All in all, the construction of the parental leave system (together with the Childcare Benefit), the entitlement to work part time, shortfalls in public childcare structures, and the lack of awareness of gendered (cultural and material) structures on the labour market and within families do not actively encourage gender equality. Some aspects of these policies even stabilise and deepen gendered structures on the labour market and in families.