Search

The lack of formal regional security institutions and the persistence of national border controls seems to indicate that in North America, unlike Europe, a truly post-national approach to territorial security has failed to materialise. Recent policy experiments with territorial security in the USA, Canada and Mexico, however, are not as removed from their transatlantic counterparts as is often claimed. This paper contends that a kind of practical continentalism underlies the governance of territorial security on both sides of the Atlantic. This system of governance has not completely displaced the state-centric model upon which the modern approach to territorial security is based. It has, however, reformulated some of its core principles, resulting in a more complex and regionalised model of territorial security. To illustrate this argument, this paper first presents the key principles underlying the approach to territorial security that has emerged in North America after 9/11, highlighting the parallels with the European experience. It then considers some of this approach's most relevant policy applications and compares them to initiatives proposed on the other side of the Atlantic. This paper concludes by exploring possible future scenarios characterising relations between North America and Europe over territorial security, and, in particular, the prospect for further transatlantic convergence in this policy field. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

As a framework for empirical studies, global chains of care has become the favored theoretical lens to capture the global transfer of physical and emotional labor from less wealthy regions, whether in the South or the poorer regions of the North to wealthy regions. However, the global chains of care literature has tended to channel research into a narrow set of sectors, skills and sites. In particular, its analysis is framed in terms of flows between households, thus rendering invisible the other sites, external agents and institutions of care interacting with the household as well as the diversity of familial arrangements within the household. Moreover, the household in feminist analysis had moved from being a site of unpaid work to a site of unpaid care. In this article, I suggest we need to unpack what is actually happening in the household in a period of economic, social and political change in which inequalities have increased massively, and state intervention is reshaping how and what activities are undertaken in particular sites and institutions. In order to do this, I suggest in this paper that revisiting the concept of social reproduction would enable us to better appreciate the complexity of the transfer of labor, both in relation to different institutional arrangements and the spatial extension of social reproduction. I firstly briefly review the relationship between social reproduction and its relationship with care in the last 30 years and consider some of the initial North American analyses applying the concept of social reproduction to migrant labor and its increasingly globally extended reproduction. The analysis of specific developments of social reproduction in the household focuses on the European Union. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The emergence of inland ports took place in several regions around the world, notably where the growth of inland freight distribution required a massification of flows. Yet, there is no definitive consensus about how such inland facilities should be labeled, with terms such as dry ports being advocated. It is suggested in the paper that the term inland port is a more appropriate construct since it considers terminal activities as well as the crucial logistics activities taking place in co-location or in proximity of inland terminals. This perspective requires the investigation of how transport and supply chain functions and the various actors involved in their setting and operations are taking shape in inland ports. Case studies pertaining to European and North American inland ports are presented. Although inland ports are planned, set and operated by a wide variety of actors, ranging from public to private interests, transport and supply chain functions tend to label them as satellite terminals, load centers or transmodal centers. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The global freight distribution system has been impacted by convergence in terms of technology, infrastructure, modes and terminals. Still, in spite of strong converging forces, it can be argued that logistical practices are far from being uniform. This paper analyses the regionalism in freight transport systems by providing a comparative analysis of gateway logistics practices in North America and Europe. It is demonstrated that Europe and North America are not walking the same paths when it comes to the configuration of transport and logistics networks, via operational decisions and the setting of a regulatory framework. The attributes of gateways, corridors, hinterlands, regulation, governance, value chains and labor provide an analytical framework to understand the regionalism of freight distribution in the North American and European contexts, as well as anywhere else. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Between 1920 and 1940, fertility dropped below replacement level in many Western countries. In today's scholarly literature, the drop is usually explained as a temporary reaction to the exceptional conditions of the inter-war period. This paper confronts that interpretation with the interpretations offered by scholars writing between the wars. According to leading demographers of the time, low fertility was due not to war or economic crisis, but rather to processes that now tend to be associated with the Second Demographic Transition, including secularization, individualization, rising consumerism, and women's emancipation. Since these were seen as structural features of modernization, most inter-war scholars argued that subreplacement fertility would remain an obstinate feature of modern society for an extended period of time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Limited access to healthcare for vulnerable immigrant children in Europe and North America is increasingly worrisome as immigration policies harden. This paper analyzes the gap between States'' obligations under international human rights law and the disparate local implementations in diverse countries. Studies that are both multidisciplinary and incorporate micro and macro level indicators are needed to reveal discrepancies between entitlements and access. It is argued that the lack of available data on the magnitude of the problem and on its individual and public health consequences stems from the conflicting situation faced by health institutions required to simultaneously protect the best interest of each child and allocate limited resources. Collaboration in research is urgently needed to assist policy-makers and institutions make informed decisions. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

A growing number of bioethicists, policy-makers, legal scholars, patient groups, and other critically involved parties in North America and Europe recently have started calling for a new ethical principle to gather participants into clinical and genetics research. While long-prevailing regimes of consent have held that people participate in the research process out of `altruism' (and hence do not merit more than nominal payment for their participation), the increasingly visible profits accruing to bioscience researchers, companies, and universities suggest that this research contract is producing a stark asymmetry. A move is afoot, therefore, to develop a principle of benefit-sharing through which to guarantee some form of returns to research subjects. This paper tracks some of the implications of the rise of this new ethic, tracing its travels from the world of bioprospecting to clinical and genetics research, and exploring how and why benefit-sharing matters to Latourian notions of science as politics. What might it mean, both for bioscience and for our ideas about politics and publics more generally, to think of research not just as a mode of ‘speaking for’, in Latourian terms, but as a mode of giving back? I argue that in shifting the problem from one of dialogue to one of distribution, benefit-sharing proposals are also implicated in the constitution of the biosciences' publics in new ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]