• Research dataclose
• Research softwareclose
• Other research productsclose
• SE close
• English close
• Publikationer från Stockholms universitet close
• Mémoires en Sciences de l'Information et de la Communication close
• Hal-Diderot close

ASSESS

In all five cases on the Banco Popular resolution (T-481/17, T-510/17, T-523/17, T-570/17, and T-628/17), the applicants argued that their right to some aspect of good administration in Article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR) had been infringed: the duty of care, the right to be heard, the right of access to files, or the right to reasoned decisions. The cases were a golden opportunity for the General Court to clarify (at least) two aspects of the principle of good administration: the sphere of application ratione personae for the two participation rights – the right to be heard and the right of access to files – and the allocation of the responsibility to uphold the principle when multiple administrative bodies collaborate in preparing a matter. Regrettably, the Court did not seize this opportunity.

The Linguistic Landscape of Covid-19 Workshop

Urban wastewater treatment plants are important collection points for many chemical contaminants, often called micropollutants, which are widespread in the aquatic environment. Currently, this issue is not being sufficiently addressed by regional policy and EU-wide legislation. The EU’s Zero Pollution Ambition, the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability and the likely revision of the Urban Waste-water Treatment Directive now provide opportunities to address this issue. Measures to prevent the emissions of micropollutants via wastewater treatment plants are needed both up- and downstream, to ensure policy coherence between EU water and chemicals legislation.

Peer review report for Grant writing and grant peer review as questionable research practices [version 1; peer review: 1 approved].F1000Research 2021, 10:1126 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.77582.r99418)12 Nov 2021 for Version 1.

Writing is key in anthropology, as one of its main modes of communication. Teaching, research, publications, and outreach all build on, or consist of, writing. This entry traces how anthropological writing styles have evolved over time according to changing politics in the discipline. It starts out in the late nineteenth century, showing how early writings in the discipline aimed to be objective. While writing anthropology in a literary mode goes a long way back, it was not until the 1970s that writing began to be collectively acknowledged as a craft to be cultivated in the discipline. This led to a boom of experimental ethnographic writing from the 1980s, as part of the ‘writing culture’ debate. The idea behind experimental narratives was that they might convey social life more accurately than conventional academic writing. Today, literary production and culture continue to be a source of inspiration for anthropologists, as well as a topic of study. Anthropological writing ranges from creative nonfiction to memoirs, journalism, and travel writing. Writing in such non-academic genres can be a way to make anthropological approaches and findings more widely known, and can inspire academic writing to become more accessible. Recent developments in anthropological writings include collaborative text production with interlocutors and artists. However, the tendency for experimentation is also held in check, as publishing in academic publication formats and featuring in citation indices is crucial for anthropologists’ careers. Still, as our writing moves increasingly online, there is a growth of flexible formats for publishing, including online books, essays on current affairs, and conversations in journals. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Anthropology (CEA) is an open-access teaching and learning resource.

Publicerad i Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2021-11-05

International audience

Obscure Light opens in silence with a black frame. A preface in white letters conveys the historical context of Portuguese fascism (1926-1974), the horrific results of Salazar’s dictatorship (1932-1970), including the long term incarceration of generations of ‘Communists’, and the transnational trauma of the colonial war (1961-1974). Similar to the previous two film, Still Life (Natureza Morta. Visages d’une Dictature, 2005) and 48 (2010), Obscure Light (2017) involves the viewer in a material, critical and poetic enactment of rare archival images and fragments of oral history to invoke a complex time period that is painfully present and therefore rarely addressed in public life. This time, de Sousa Dias closes in on the history of a single Portuguese family and the memories of three siblings. The childhood of Isabel, Rui, and Álvaro Pato was marked by the longing for their absent parents and the ever present threat of the PIDE/DGS. In cliose dialogue with Susana De Sousa Dias' film Obscure Light, this short reflection highlights the possibilities of experiemental documentary to provide an allegory of memory and forgetting; an audiovisual historiography that works against the notion of an enclosed narrative to propose film as a vector for memorywork. Ideally, these are artistic projects that encourage public recognition of contested histories and shared experiences that call for alternative strategies of telling and of bridging between the present and the past.