Search

The aim of the present report is to identify and analyse initiatives carried out by civil society during the pandemic that proved effective in mitigating gender and other inequalities. Specifically, the analysis offers insights into practices and kinds of action that contribute to reversing the developments that deepen inequality. This is possible by learning from the strategies and promising practices that civil society organisations (CSOs) and vulnerable individuals have put in place to cope with the consequences of the pandemic, and how public authorities can support or hinder these efforts. The empirical data for this analysis consists of, firstly, the mapping of 128 CSO initiatives representing promising practices of support provision to meet the needs of vulnerable people during the pandemic. Secondly, among the mapped initiatives, 31 were selected for further analysis through desk research and semi-structured interviews with representatives of these initiatives. The data were generated by 30 partners and national researchers representing each country considered by the project. The same interview script was used by all the researchers, and contained questions related to the development of the initiative, the actions taken, the attention to gender and diversity dimensions, the policy framework, etc.

The aim of the present report is, first of all, to understand if and how the National Recovery and Resilience Plans (or equivalent recovery policies in the case of the countries that do not belong to the European Union but are part of the RESISTIRÉ project) address gender inequalities in specific domains (gender-based violence; work and labour market; economy; gender pay and pension gaps; gender care gap; decision-making and politics; environmental justice; health; education), and their intersections with selected inequality grounds (social class/socioeconomic background; age; disability; nationality; ethnicity; religion/belief; sexual orientation; gender identity). In line with the theoretical and conceptual approach of RESISTIRÉ, the report builds on an intersectional approach to gender that acknowledges the mutual shaping of multiple complex inequalities. Secondly, the analysis focuses on the processes that led to the design of these policies to understand the level of involvement of relevant stakeholders. Finally, it examines how civil society reacted both to the content of these policies and to the process by which they were designed. The empirical data base for this analysis consists of 31 grids (26 related to NRRPs and 5 related to equivalent policies) filled by 30 national researchers representing each country under the lens of RESISTIRÉ. In the grids, specific questions were presented to collect information on the policies, the design processes, and the reactions from civil society. All the data were analysed through a thematic analysis. In addition, when possible, the main author analysed the closed questions from the grids by creating frequency tables and graphs to provide the most relevant contextual data on the mapped policies. The overall findings of the second cycle of policy mapping are the following: · most plans contain some attempts to propose policy measures aimed at mitigating gender+ inequalities, mostly in the area of work, education, and care, while there are big differences between countries in this; · in most cases the NRRPs’ gender+ issues are mainly relegated to the level of a general reflection or a description of the context, without being linked to concrete solutions – this can be partly explained by the lack of gender dimensions in the criteria for evaluating the plan and the lack of a specific budget for this purpose; · there is a striking lack of measures related to violence (e.g., GBV) and inequalities in the sharing of power (e.g., decision-making and politics) and women are mainly dealt with just as workforce participants; · the plans have embedded stereotypes that see women's problems in accessing the labour market, lower wages, or difficulties in career progression as simply due to a lack of skills and education or their need to learn (male) management skills; · there is still an excessive focus on male-dominated economic sectors and the difficulty of mainstreaming gender in those sectors; · an intersectional approach is completely absent in most plans, and although there are measures relating to age, social class, and disability, these grounds are usually presented as silos, without considering interactions between them; · with rare exceptions, a discussion of inequalities related to religion/belief, gender identity, and sexual orientation is noticeably absent; · there was a low level of involvement of representatives of feminist, immigrant, and LGBTQI+ organisations in the process of designing the plans; · the process of stakeholder involvement and public consultations, when not absent, were rather tokenist in nature or lacked transparency.

This reportanalyses the first cycle ofthemapping of COVID-19 policies and societal responses atthenational and regional level and theresponsesfromcivil society.The aim of thereport is todescribe and analyse the gender dimensions and impacts ofpolicies and societal responses implementedin Europeinthecourse ofand in relation to theCOVID-19 pandemic, with a view to informing thework in WP 3 and 4 and feedingdebates in the first cycle of Open Studios. In line with the theoretical conceptualisation of theResistiréproject, the report builds on an intersectional approach (Hankivskyet al., 2014) anditstheoretical framework focuses on specific domains of gender inequalities(gender-based violence,work andthelabour market,the economy,the gender pay and pension gap,thegender care gap,decision-making and politics,environmental justice,human and fundamental rights), and specific vulnerability grounds (sex and/or gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, race, nationality, class, age, religion/belief,disability).&nbsp

Over two decades, the checklist has risen to prominence in healthcare improvement. This paper contributes to the debate between its proponents and critics, making the case for an STS-informed understanding of the checklist that demonstrates the limitations of both the ‘checklist-as-panacea’ and ‘checklist-as-socially-determined’ positions. Attending to the checklist as a socio-material object endowed with affordances that call upon clinicians to act (Hutchby 2001, Allen 2012), the study revisits the efforts of a recent improvement initiative, the Enhanced Peri-Operative Care for High-risk patients (EPOCH) trial. Rather than a singularised simple tool, this study discusses four different and relationally enacted logics of the checklist as a stop and check tool, a clinical prompt, an audit tool, and a clinical record. Each logic is associated with specific temporality, beneficiaries, relationship to material forms, and interpellates (Law 2002) clinicians to initiate specific actions which can conflict. The paper seeks to make the case for intervention to improve such tools and consciously account for the consequences of their design and materiality and calls for supporting such settings and arrangements in which incoherences collected in tools can be locally negotiated.

Public participation refers most often to participatory political process of reclaiming interests, values and worldviews by social actors who are not professional or elected politicians. This chapter aims at reconsidering this form of expert representation, or civic epistemology, in relation to the tensions and reconfigurations of the Czech environmental movement and issues. The first part analyses the implications of the proposal for National policy for research development and innovation (2009-2015) and the second one discusses three cases of production and use of knowledge in three environmental knowledge production activities (urban ecology, rural and landscape ecology and conservation biology).

This dissertation deals with the relations between economics and ethics. It specifically focuses on a contemporary trend that seeks to reform the socio-economic system from within the private sector, which the thesis conceptualises as 'conscious capitalism'. The thesis is the result of a long-term ethnographic research on socially responsible start-ups in Prague and presents conscious capitalism through three case studies. The first study focuses on the question of work ethic and subjectivity of conscious entrepreneurs and workers and the dynamics of their interrelationship in enterprises. The second study shifts the focus to the sphere of socially beneficial production and the creation of conscious products, and analyses in detail the operation of one social enterprise. The theme of the third case study is the relation of conscious capitalism to shareholder capitalism, which it on the one hand criticizes, but on the other hand builds on and uses for its own development. This dissertation belongs to the critical social science studies that address the ethical turn in capitalism (Bandinelli 2017; Chiapello 2013; Land & Taylor 2014; Morozov 2013), although its own contribution stems primarily from the research focus on the inside of the small start- ups. The work presents conscious entrepreneurship...