Content uploaded by Izabella Main
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Izabella Main on Apr 15, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Uchodzcy. Teoria i praktyka
Crime is a negative phenomenon present in every country that poses a threat to the existing legal order. It encompasses a variety of behaviours, goals, and motives of those involved in it and the consequences thereof. The basis for crime is the social layer of the state, where people commit crimes by violating the existing legal order. Crime can be considered from various perspectives, such as its extent, intensity, variability, structure, and dynamics, as well as the characteristics and background of those involved. Crime is a challenge for society, and effective prevention requires an understanding of the diversity of crimes and the different motivations of perpetrators. Research on foreigners’ crimes is particularly important in the context of increasing migration from Poland’s eastern border. Knowledge of this topic can aid in the development of appropriate migration management strategies and effective prevention and integration measures. It is important to continue research on crime to better understand its causes and effects and to develop effective methods to reduce and combat it.
Tekst prezentuje metodologię, która została przez autorkę zastosowana do analizy wyników badań przeprowadzonych dla potrzeb rozprawy doktorskiej pt. „Samoświadomość społeczna pracowników organizacji pozarządowych w Polsce”, której celem było odtworzenie wizji świata społecznego osób aktywnie zaangażowanych w pracę polskiego trzeciego sektora. Zaprezentowane zostały dwie metody: jako podstawa analiza pól semantycznych (wraz z modyfikacjami w stosunku do schematu przyjętego przez Regine Robin oraz – jako pomocnicza – analiza glos. W artykule zaprezentowane zostały uzyskane w ten sposób wyniki, które obejmują wnioski na temat pozytywnych i negatywnych opinii badanych o poszczególnych elementach świata społecznego oraz zarysowanych granicach „centrum” i „peryferii” świata społecznego w poszczególnych typach organizacji.
The paper traces the early history of refugee research and shows how, from originally being prime movers in the research, refugees today have largely been reduced to invisibility. In the South, access to refugees held in camps is controlled by local government bureaucracies and by lead agencies, and may be severely restricted or completely denied; in the North, refugees held in detention centres are equally difficult to access and even more disempowered. Examples are given of studies carried out in Sierra Leone, Sudan, Egypt, Kenya, Greece and the Former Soviet Union. The paper also considers barriers to disseminating refugee research, and concludes that now more than ever the duty of the researcher is to speak on behalf of refugees.
Of the estimated 12 million refugees in the world, more than 7 million have been confined to camps, effectively "warehoused," in some cases, for 10 years or more. Holding refugees in camps was anathema to the founders of the refugee protection regime. Today, with most refugees encamped in the less developed parts of the world, the humanitarian apparatus has been transformed into a custodial regime for innocent people. Based on rich ethnographic data, Rights in Exile exposes the gap between human rights norms and the mandates of international organisations, on the one hand, and the reality on the ground, on the other. It will be of wide interest to social scientists, and to human rights and international law scholars. Policy makers, donor governments and humanitarian organizations, especially those adopting a "rights-based" approach, will also find it an invaluable resource. But it is the refugees themselves who could benefit the most if these actors absorb its lessons and apply them. © 2005 Guglielmo Verdirame and Barbara Harrell-Bond. All rights reserved.
This article aims to compare how the main bodies of the European Union and the Council of Europe reacted to the issues raised by the armed conflict in Chechnya: human rights violations; the necessity (or otherwise) of political negotiations between the Chechens and the Russians; and Chechen terrorism. While the requests for political negotiations were quickly dropped by nearly all organs of the Council of Europe (CoE) and European Union (EU), the issue of human rights abuses uncovered a chasm between the legislative and decision-making bodies. The terrorist acts had no impact on either the EU's or the CoE's definition of the conflict in Chechnya, but they did influence EU policy. In sum, this comparison suggests the presence of ‘selective affinities’ between the CoE and EU bodies depending on the issue involved.
This article examines the dynamics of power in refugee determination systems in three countries. It challenges both the view that determination systems encompass rational decision-making processes and the critical view that sees determination procedures as an instrument of the state. It argues that if we use a Foucauldian analysis of power, we are better placed to understand how refugee systems work and to understand the implications for different actors in these systems.
This article explores the complexity of managing refugee issues, particularly refugee repatriations, taking the Horn of Africa as a case. I argue that refugee repatriation endeavours are complex because their success depends on at least four actors, each with different interests. I examine the proposition that as the number of actors involved in a given issue area increases so does the likelihood of less-than-successful outcomes. This is particularly true if resource-poor actors are included in the decision-making process, and, because of the need to extract maximum benefits and/or minimise maximum losses, usually operate under the assumption of zero-sum situations. This assumption narrows their range of responses and hampers their ability to engage in mutually beneficial exchange relationships. As a result, repatriations, which are necessarily consensus-based, become more difficult to accomplish successfully as evidenced in the Horn of Africa.
In 12 essays the author surveys the ways that classic and contemporary sociologists have dealt with the issue of human nature and presents his own theory which takes into account both biological predispositions and tendencies and the social and environmental forces with which they interact to create the human being. The author's analytical works in the fields of racial and ethnic group relations, assimilation and pluralism, social stratification, and marginality are summarized. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Rozprawa habilitacyjna. Uniwersytet Łódzki. Bibliogr. s. 140-151.