Scientific research from within and beyond academia continues to provide the justification and the knowledge for policy developments directed toward migration and integration governance. A proliferation of scholarship aims to study, pilot, and investigate the ‘best practices’ for facilitating integration, which is then taken up in advice to policy makers. Many authors have written about this science-policy nexus (Boswell 2009; Penninx, Garcés-Mascareñas, and Scholten 2005; Scholten et al. 2015; Verbeek, Entzinger, and Scholten 2015) These works have also engaged in critical reflection, problematizing this nexus and demonstrating how funding structures draw researchers not only into addressing short-term policy goals, but also into reproducing some of the essentialist worldviews that come with methodological nationalism (Wimmer and Glick Schiller 2002) and the ‘national order of things’ (Malkki 1995). Yet, the colonial legacies and dis/continuities of these logics in integrationism have not received much attention so far.The paper takes a critical lens on the implications of the science-policy complicity in reproducing colonial logics of ‘cultural distance’, based on perspectives and empirical research from different national (Netherlands and Switzerland) and supra-national (EU) contexts. We analyse texts which shape the civic integration programme in the Netherlands, the genealogy of the integration requirement to respect the values of the constitution in Switzerland, and the EU framework on migrant integration. This combined analysis brings forth the role scientists and knowledge producers play in (re)producing the colonial logics within integrationism, and their contributions to the regime of truth within which integration discourse operates. Throughout this article, we draw on examples from these different contexts to display that integration and its migranticized (Dahinden 2016) subjects are constructed through practices deemed as scientific or objective expertise, building on important work by Schinkel (2018) on integration research as “neocolonial knowledge production” and Favell’s (2022) critical reflections on integration indicator frameworks. As we demonstrate, the “idea of integration as an issue of cultural distance is rendered imaginable in and through colonial legacies and scientific practices from which policy draws legitimacy. We show how cultural distance is produced in the scientification of migrants’ assimilability in a ‘Western work ethic’, in measurement of migrants’ adherence to liberal values, and through constructions of integration drawing on social imaginaries of national and European identity. Importantly, we argue that by presenting this cultural distance as a product of objective, scientific processes of empirical observation, the notion of cultural distance is normalised and depoliticized, which ultimately legitimizes integrationism as a mode of governance.The present study builds on important contributions (by Schinkel 2017; Favell 2022; Korteweg 2017; Bonjour and Duyvendak 2017, and others) in attempting to destabilize the normalization of integrationism as the widely accepted mode of governance of ‘immigrant’ or ‘ethnic’ populations and their inherent and problematic ‘distance’. The content and structure of this summer school in post-colonial Amsterdam would allow us to continue our critical reflexive discussions to better understand the colonial logics at play and how they operate in multiple contexts and at multiple levels of governance, in and beyond integration
LINK
The idea of European unity, in any case the official entity as it is communicated by the European Commission, is intrinsically linked to the end of the Second World War: the Stunde Null or 'Hour Zero' on the 8th of May 1945. Industry was in shambles, many cities had been destroyed, and the European societies had to find a way to make peace with the guilt and shame associated with the Holocaust. The pioneers of European integration in the 1950s all agreed on one thing: Never again. No more war. It is a powerful and persuasive image. Clean and clear. Very simple, too - almost as simple as the 'American Dream'. From that point on, the concept of European integration was framed almost naturally in terms of an unwavering contrast between the past and the present. The European {pre-WWII) past was chauvinism, petty disputes, and war, while the European {post-WWII) present was multicultural, cosmopolitan, peaceful, and prosperous. Simple solutions can be deceiving, however, and this was no exception. The choir of critical politicians, policy-makers and opinion leaders is swelling. These voices, the critics and sceptics, are found on the left and the right, in the East and the West, and are unfettered by post-war taboos: Is Europe actually all that multicultural, peaceful and prosperous? And should it be? Why, or why not? LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/guido-van-hengel-8312729/
This paper is about the political imbalance in the EU when it comes to attracting European agencies. Over the years, mainly due to the Brexit negotiations and for cost-efficiency reasons, many EU agencies moved from the UK to elsewhere, finding a new sea for headquarters functions or other departments. Whenever such a move is announced, EU countries and their candidate host cities jump into the breach to make a beneficial offer. The way these processes take place is a vector of the politicization of European integration. Nevertheless, these new locations of the EU agencies have won the bidding contest, is a process that usually takes place under the radar. The decision-making of these kinds of processes rests with the member states of the agency. Instead of choosing the most strategic place and ensuring an equal distribution among EU countries, which is the deal, often the highest bidder or the state contributing the most wins the agency. Interestingly, these processes have hardly been studied in the light of the increased politicization. This paper is an attempt to fill this research gap, by focusing on three cases and the processes of decision-making. The cases are the Collège européen de police (European Police College, CEPOL) which moved from the UK to Budapest in 2014, the European Medicine Agency (EMA) moving from London to Amsterdam in 2019, and the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) which moved its EU-funded program to Bonn and Helsinki mid-2021. The research strategy is as follows: the cases and the lobbying processes are described, then the main political actors are described, and the outcomes are described. The main research question is: How do these processes of political decision-making work out in practice? By answering this question, this study contributes to the discussion on globalized decision-making across the EU and the politicized imbalance which is the result of this.
To reach the European Green Deal by 2050, the target for the road transport sector is set at 30% less CO2 emissions by 2030. Given the fact that heavy-duty commercial vehicles throughout Europe are driven nowadays almost exclusively on fossil fuels it is obvious that transition towards reduced emission targets needs to happen seamlessly by hybridization of the existing fleet, with a continuously increasing share of Zero Emission vehicle units. At present, trailing units such as semitrailers do not possess any form of powertrain, being a missed opportunity. By introduction of electrically driven axles into these units the fuel consumption as well as amount of emissions may be reduced substantially while part of the propulsion forces is being supplied on emission-free basis. Furthermore, the electrification of trailing units enables partial recuperation of kinetic energy while braking. Nevertheless, a number of challenges still exist preventing swift integration of these vehicles to daily operation. One of the dominating ones is the intelligent control of the e-axle so it delivers right amount of propulsion/braking power at the right time without receiving detailed information from the towing vehicle (such as e.g. driver control, engine speed, engine torque, or brake pressure, …etc.). This is required mainly to ensure interoperability of e-Trailers in the fleets, which is a must in the logistics nowadays. Therefore the main mission of CHANGE is to generate a chain of knowledge in developing and implementing data driven AI-based applications enabling SMEs of the Dutch trailer industry to contribute to seamless energetic transition towards zero emission road freight transport. In specific, CHANGE will employ e-Trailers (trailers with electrically driven axle(s) enabling energy recuperation) connected to conventional hauling units as well as trailers for high volume and extreme payload as focal platforms (demonstrators) for deployment of these applications.
DISTENDER will provide integrated strategies by building a methodological framework that guide the integration of climate change(CC) adaptation and mitigation strategies through participatory approaches in ways that respond to the impacts and risks of climatechange (CC), supported by quantitative and qualitative analysis that facilitates the understanding of interactions, synergies and tradeoffs.Holistic approaches to mitigation and adaptation must be tailored to the context-specific situation and this requires a flexibleand participatory planning process to ensure legitimate and salient action, carried out by all important stakeholders. DISTENDER willdevelop a set of multi-driver qualitative and quantitative socio-economic-climate scenarios through a facilitated participatory processthat integrates bottom-up knowledge and locally-relevant drivers with top-down information from the global European SharedSocioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and downscaled Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) from IPCC. A cross-sectorial andmulti-scale impact assessment modelling toolkit will be developed to analyse the complex interactions over multiple sectors,including an economic evaluation framework. The economic impact of the different efforts will be analyse, including damage claimsettlement and how do sectoral activity patterns change under various scenarios considering indirect and cascading effects. It is aninnovative project combining three key concepts: cross-scale, integration/harmonization and robustness checking. DISTENDER willfollow a pragmatic approach applying methodologies and toolkits across a range of European case studies (six core case studies andfive followers) that reflect a cross-section of the challenges posed by CC adaptation and mitigation. The knowledge generated byDISTENDER will be offered by a Decision Support System (DSS) which will include guidelines, manuals, easy-to-use tools andexperiences from the application of the cases studies.
During the coronavirus pandemic, the use of eHealth tools became increasingly demanded by patients and encouraged by the Dutch government. Yet, HBO health professionals demand clarity on what they can do, must do, and cannot do with the patients’ data when using digital healthcare provision and support. They often perceive the EU GDPR and its national application as obstacles to the use of eHealth due to strict health data processing requirements. They highlight the difficulty of keeping up with the changing rules and understanding how to apply them. Dutch initiatives to clarify the eHealth rules include the 2021 proposal of the wet Elektronische Gegevensuitwisseling in de Zorg and the establishment of eHealth information and communication platforms for healthcare practitioners. The research explores whether these initiatives serve the needs of HBO health professionals. The following questions will be explored: - Do the currently applicable rules and the proposed wet Elektronische Gegevensuitwisseling in de Zorg clarify what HBO health practitioners can do, must do, and cannot do with patients’ data? - Does the proposed wet Elektronische Gegevensuitwisseling in de Zorg provide better clarity on the stakeholders who may access patients’ data? Does it ensure appropriate safeguards against the unauthorized use of such data? - Does the proposed wet Elektronische Gegevensuitwisseling in de Zorg clarify the EU GDPR requirements for HBO health professionals? - Do the eHealth information and communication platforms set up for healthcare professionals provide the information that HBO professionals need on data protection and privacy requirements stemming from the EU GDPR and from national law? How could such platforms be better adjusted to the HBO professionals’ information and communication needs? Methodology: Practice-oriented legal research, semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions will be conducted. Results will be translated to solutions for HBO health professionals.
