| 11. |
- Schierup, Carl-Ulrik, 1948-, et al.
(författare)
-
Reimagineering the Common in Precarious Times
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Intercultural Studies. - : Routledge. - 0725-6868 .- 1469-9540. ; 39:2, s. 207-223
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The paper explores movements for social transformation in precarious times of austerity, dispossessed commons and narrow nationalism; movements counterpoised to an exhausted neoliberalism on the one hand, and a neoconservative xenophobic populism on the other. Applying ‘rainbow coalition’ as generic concept it points at contours of a globally extended countermovement for social transformation, traversing ‘race’, class and gender, driven by reimaginings of the commons and indicating how they could be repossessed and democratically ruled; that is ‘reimagineered’). A multisited enquiry explores how actors express their claims as activist citizens under varying conditions and constellations, and if/how discourses and practices from different locations and at different scales inform each other. It interrogates whether there may be an actual equivalence of outlook, objective and strategy of ostensibly homologous contending movements which develop under varying local, national and regional circumstances in contemporary communities riveted by schisms of class, ‘race’/ethnicity and gender, occupied by the ‘migration’ issue and challenged by popular demands for social sustainability. The paper contributes to social theory by linking questions posed by critics of ‘post-politics’ concerning contingences of pluralist democracy and revitalised politics of civil society, to precarity studies focused on globalisation and the changing conditions of citizenship, labour and livelihoods.
|
|
| 12. |
|
|
| 13. |
-
Antirasistisk Ordbok
- 2015
-
Samlingsverk (redaktörskap) (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Språk är ett viktigt medel i kampen för rättvisa. Den här ordboken samlar ett antal begrepp som är grundläggande för den antirasistiska kampen som förs idag i Sverige och i resten av Europa. Det är en samling av begrepp som har definierats och förklarats av ett flertal antirasistiska forskare i Sverige där många av oss är verksamma och anknutna till föreningen Antirasistiska Akademin.
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
-
En brokig gemenskap
- 2017
-
Samlingsverk (redaktörskap) (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- En brokig gemenskap presenterar huvudresultaten från 2016 års västsvenska SOM-undersökning. I fokus för undersökningen står Västra Götalands invånare och deras upplevelser av hur det är att leva och verka i Västsverige. Titeln knyter an till de resultat och analyser som redovisas i boken, men också till de likheter och olikheter som präglar gemenskapen i Västra Götalands olika delar. Några av de frågor som analyseras är medborgarnas bedömningar av regional och kommunal service, erfarenheter av arbetsliv och upplevelser av mångkultur. Kulturvanor, medborgaraktivism och cirkulär ekonomi är andra områden som ligger i bokens blickfång. Flera kapitel innehåller jämförelser med tidigare års västsvenska SOM-undersökningar och med de nationella SOM-undersökningarna. I En brokig gemenskap, den 71:a forskarantologin från SOM-institutet, bidrar forskare från olika discipliner vid Göteborgs universitet och Högskolan i Borås med analyser av det västsvenska samhället. Boken innehåller också en metod- dokumentation av 2016 års västsvenska SOM-undersökning.
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
- Berlin, Cecilia, 1981, et al.
(författare)
-
Change Agent Infrastructure (CHAI) – a Stakeholder Analysis Tool for Ergonomics- and Work Environment- Related Change Projects
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 2194-5365 .- 2194-5357. ; 498:2017, s. 715-726
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper is a short communication introducing a novel method forstakeholder analysis, Change Agent Infrastructure (CHAI). The method isspecifically developed in the context of ergonomics/work environment-relatedchange projects and is meant for early stages of change projects. It mapspotential stakeholders against eight distinct “roles” that have been found inprevious research to facilitate or hinder workplace change. Mapping the“decision dilemmas” that stakeholders may face, as well as identifying over- orunderrepresented roles, may benefit the change project in terms of determininginformation needs and how the project team should be staffed. The method hasbeen iteratively developed and tested in educational and research projects. Themethod is visual, participative and helps to clarify the various participants’understanding of the change at hand and what it means for them – thiscontributes positively to information strategies and decisions that facilitates theplanning and execution of a sustainable change.
|
|
| 18. |
- Dymitrow, Mirek, et al.
(författare)
-
Anatomy of a 21st-century project: A critical analysis
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Anatomy of a 21st-century sustainability project: The untold stories. Dymitrow, M. and Ingelhag, K. (eds.). - Gothenburg : Mistra Urban Futures / Chalmers University of Technology. - 9789198416633 ; , s. 205-236
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this analytical chapter we focus on human factors to shed light on what a 21st-century project might look like from within. Adopting a non-essentialist perspective to project-making, we at the same time acknowledge that the notion of human nature is blurred, dynamic, changeable, heterogeneous, and internally riven. The human condition, hence, always dictates what ontological position a project adopts regarding its subject matter, execution and end results. In this respect, with this book we commit to an open-ended normativity: normative by reluctantly accepting the bias of the project formulas as we have defined their ability to shape the contemporary world, but open-ended with regard to a constant awareness that all knowledge is constructed, fluid and flawed, and that the insights here presented are only some of many possible interpretations. That said, we do not believe that plurality of opinion is intrinsically useful for creating ‘good projects’ – we believe it is an overused statement (cf. de Botton 2019) – but plurality of opinion is possibly the only way to unravel how a project operates and what keeps it afloat, including its silent triumphs and hidden pathologies. Since values and value systems can differ even within very small entities, to truly understand the inner workings of a project requires covering all its nooks and crannies. This methodological approach – autoethnography – is represented in the vast empirical section of this book – top to bottom and side to side, the results of which are discussed in the ensuing nine subsections. When things are whipped up into a sustainability frenzy with a flurry of divergent messages, it is easy to lose track of goal and purpose. For change to happen, we must dare to open a can of worms and find each other in the disenchantment of our broken world. The battle against unsustainability is a war of attrition: words against deeds – and both are enclosed in projects.
|
|
| 19. |
- Dymitrow, Mirek, et al.
(författare)
-
Anatomy of a 21st-century project: A quick autopsy
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Dymitrow, M. and Ingelhag, K. (eds.), Anatomy of a 21st-century sustainability project: The untold stories. - Gothenburg : Mistra Urban Futures / Chalmers University of Technology. - 9789198416633 ; , s. 1-12
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We all are accustomed to projects. Projects are everywhere, and everything is basically a project. We have learnt how to deal with projects, for better or worse. Some of us love them, some of us are fed up with them. But projects are here to stay. Projects are far from a new invention, what has changed is the fine-tuning. It has changed to the point that projects of today are virtually unrecognisable from those from days of yore. All projects of today ‘must’ be green. They must have social relevance. They must be innovative, and must leave footprints (not ecological, hopefully). Projects of today are ideally transdisciplinary; wearing blinkers is a thing of the past. Inclusive projects, bottom-up projects, future-minded projects… who would even challenge that? Projects are no longer targeted, planned, structured endeavours; that description no longer suffices. To be able to do projects today, we are trained in project management, project leadership, spreadsheets, GANT charts, swimlanes, Kanban, Scrum, Waterfall, sprints, deliverables, bandwidths, roadblocks, backlogs, agile methodologies and the like. Have you noticed a pattern yet? On the other hand, projects of today are full of pitfalls. Lack of resources, scope creep, poor project handling, unrealistic deadlines, lack of interest from stakeholders or simply not paying attention to warning signs are just some of the most oft-cited reasons why projects fail. With this book, we want to halt this chthonic gallop, and just pause for a while. We want to open the lid to the black box of project-making and let it stay aslant for the time it takes to read this book, so we can peek into what goes on – on the inside.
|
|
| 20. |
- Dymitrow, Mirek, et al.
(författare)
-
Making two worlds meet
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Dymitrow, M. and Ingelhag, K. (eds.), Anatomy of a 21st-century sustainability project: The untold stories. - Gothenburg : Mistra Urban Futures / Chalmers University of Technology. - 9789198416633 ; , s. 175-179
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter focuses on the personal experiences of collaborations based on academic–practitioner interactions, which are not always as straightforward as presented in commonplace transdisciplinary theory. By using autoethnographic methodology, this chapter provides some of the most important insights from past and ongoing work from a major sustainability project that uses the ‘Research Forum’ (RF) as a new a means of co-production of transdisciplinary knowledge. The reflections center on the most common modes of interaction observed between academics to practitioners, but also on the pros and cons of everyday work in a overtly transdisciplinary context. The findings reveal that transdisciplinarity is neither a business deal nor a display of unconditional democracy. It is a tricky form of collaboration that takes time, energy and trust to understand, and this level of maturity may be difficult to obtain using the commonplace project format.
|
|
