At the end of the 1940s and the early 1950s, the question whether or not to rearm West Germany was a fiercely and hotly debated topic in Europe. The Americans suggested doing this by integrating the Federal Republic in NATO. However, many Europeans feared the resurgence of German militarism. Nowhere was this more true than in France. Therefore, the French Foreign Minister René Pleven launched the so-called Pleven Plan, designed to allow West German units to be established, but only in small units. That way, Europe could profit from West Germany’s manpower, without the country becoming a military threat. Discussions on the European Defence Community were tough, but in the end was signed by the six Founding Fathers. The Dutch did so reluctantly, especially because the Americans were left out, favouring security arrangements in NATO and rearming and incorporating West Germany in the Western alliance. To the Netherlands, it was essential to incorporate the British and especially the Americans in the Western defense; the Dutch always favoured an Atlantic alliance, opposing too much supranationality in the European integration project. The Federal Republic of Germany on the other hand, saw it as an opportunity to regain sovereignty. In the end, the French National Assembly did not ratify the EDC-Treaty, opening the way to rearming West Germany and making it a full member of NATO. https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=735130 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/martijn-lak-71793013/
MULTIFILE
Like a marker pen on a map, the Covid-19 pandemic drastically highlighted the persisting existence of borders that used to play an ever decreasing role in people´s perception and behavior over the last decades. Yes, inner European borders are open in normal times. Yes, people, goods, services and ideas are crossing the border between Germany and the Netherlands freely. Yet we see that the border can turn into a barrier again quickly and effectively and it does so in many dimensions, some of them being not easily visible. Barriers hinder growth, development and exchange and in spite of our progress in creating a borderless Europe, borders still create barriers in many domains. Differing labor law, social security and tax systems, heterogeneous education models, small and big cultural differences, language barriers and more can impose severe limitations on people and businesses as they cross the border to travel, shop, work, hire, produce, buy, sell, study and research. Borders are of all times and will therefore always exist. But as they did so for a long time, huge opportunities can be found in overcoming the barriers they create. The border must not necessarily be a dividing line between two systems. It has the potential to become a center of growth and progress that build on joint efforts, cross-border cooperation, mutual learning and healthy competition. Developing this inherent potential of border regions asks for politics, businesses and research & education on both sides of the border to work together. The research group Cross-Border Business Development at Fontys University of Applied Science in Venlo conducts applied research on the impact of the national border on people and businesses in the Dutch-German border area. Students, employees, border commuters, entrepreneurs and employers all face opportunities as well as challenges due to the border. In collaboration with these stakeholders, the research chair aims to create knowledge and provide solutions towards a Dutch-German labor market, an innovative Dutch-German borderland and a futureproof Cross-Border economic ecosystem. This collection is not about the borderland in times of COVID-19. Giving meaning to the borderland is an ongoing process that started long before the pandemic and will continue far beyond. The links that have been established across the border and those that will in the future are multifaceted and so are the topics in this collection. Vincent Pijnenburg outlines a broader and introductory perspective on the dynamics in the Dutch-German borderland.. Carla Arts observes shopping behavior of cross-border consumers in the Euregion Rhine-Meuse-North. Jan Lucas explores the interdependencies of the Dutch and German economies. Jean Louis Steevensz presents a cross-border co-creation servitization project between a Dutch supplier and a German customer. Vincent Pijnenburg and Patrick Szillat analyze the exitence of clusters in the Dutch-German borderland. Christina Masch and Janina Ulrich provide research on students job search preferences with a focus on the cross-border labor market. Sonja Floto-Stammen and Natalia Naranjo-Guevara contribute a study of the market for insect-based food in Germany and the Netherlands. Niklas Meisel investigates the differences in the German and Dutch response to the Covid-19 crisis. Finally, Tolga Yildiz and Patrick Szillat show differences in product-orientation and customer-orientation between Dutch and German small and medium sized companies. This collection shows how rich and different the links across the border are and how manifold the perspectives and fields for a cross-border approach to regional development can be. This publication is as well an invitation. Grasping the opportunities that the border location entails requires cooperation across professional fields and scientific disciplines, between politics, business and researchers. It needs the contact with and the contribution of the people in the region. So do what we strive for with our cross-border research agenda: connect!
Background: Concepts such as participation and environment may differ across cultures. Consequently, to use a measure like the Participation and Environment Measure for Children and Youth (PEM-CY) in other than the original English-speaking contexts, cultural adaptation needs to be assured. The aim of this study was to cross-culturally translate and adapt the PEM-CY into German as it is used in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Methods: Fifteen parents of children and adolescents with disabilities from three German speaking countries participated in three rounds of think-aloud interviews. We followed the procedure of cultural equivalence guidelines including two additional steps. Data was analyzed by content analysis using semantic, idiomatic, experiential and conceptual equivalence. Results: Results show adaptations mainly focused on experiential and conceptual equivalence, with conceptual equivalence being the most challenging to reach. Examples of experiential equivalence included adapting the examples of activities in the PEM-CY to reflect those typical in German speaking countries. Conceptual equivalence mainly addressed aspects of “involvement” and “environment” of children and adolescents and was reached through adaptations such as enhanced instructions and structures, and additional definitions. Conclusions: This study presents a cross-cultural translation and adaptation process to develop a German version of the PEM-CY that is suitable for Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Using a modified cultural adaptation process, a culturally adapted version of PEM-CY (German) is now available for research, practice and further validation.
Het Nederlands Openluchtmuseum (NOM) wil actief bijdragen aan een duurzame samenleving met zijn kennis van materialen, producten, diensten en culturele tradities die eeuwenlang functioneerden binnen circulaire gemeenschappen. Ondanks technologische vernieuwing en globalisering heeft het NOM de overtuiging dat deze historische kennis kan bijdragen aan duurzame producten voor de toekomst. Het NOM wil een structurele samenwerking met de creatieve sector om meetbare impact te realiseren binnen en buiten het museum voor de transitie naar een circulaire samenleving. Daarvoor wil het graag zijn collectie en kennis toegankelijk maken voor ontwerpers. Belangrijke praktijkvragen daarbij zijn: Welke rol kan het museum spelen i.s.m. ontwerpers? Hoe kan relevante kennis van het NOM toegankelijk en toepasbaar worden gemaakt voor ontwerpers? Hoe creëer je samen met ontwerpers de gewenste impact in de samenleving? Op basis hiervan is de onderzoeksvraag geformuleerd: Hoe kunnen maatschappelijke organisaties zoals het NOM relevante kennis en artefacten toegankelijk en toepasbaar maken voor ontwerpers t.b.v. meetbare impact voor een circulaire samenleving? Deze onderzoeksvraag is vertaald naar enkele sub-vragen over definities van duurzaamheid en circulariteit, de verwachte rollen van museum en ontwerpers, de gewenste structuur van samenwerking en over de rol van prototypen om de gewenste impact te realiseren. Naast het NOM als MKB, participeren in dit project twee creatieve ondernemers (1 MKB, 1 ZZP-er) die zijn geselecteerd op basis van hun specifieke ontwerpkwaliteiten, hun ervaringen in samenwerken met partners en hun kennis van circulair ontwerp. Samen met docent-onderzoekers en ontwerpstudenten van ArtEZ onderzoeken zij deze vragen. De belangrijkste projectresultaten zijn: prototypen, getest op gewenste maatschappelijke impact; een rapport dat beschrijft hoe het NOM kan samenwerken met de creatieve sector om bij te dragen aan ‘Nederland circulair’; en presentatie- en netwerkbijeenkomsten om kennis te delen en te bouwen aan het netwerk van stakeholders om beoogde impact te realiseren.
The livability of the cities and attractiveness of our environment can be improved by smarter choices for mobility products and travel modes. A change from current car-dependent lifestyles towards the use of healthier and less polluted transport modes, such as cycling, is needed. With awareness campaigns, cycling facilities and cycle infrastructure, the use of the bicycle will be stimulated. But which campaigns are effective? Can we stimulate cycling by adding cycling facilities along the cycle path? How can we design the best cycle infrastructure for a region? And what impact does good cycle infrastructure have on the increase of cycling?To find answers for these questions and come up with a future approach to stimulate bicycle use, BUas is participating in the InterReg V NWE-project CHIPS; Cycle Highways Innovation for smarter People transport and Spatial planning. Together with the city of Tilburg and other partners from The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and United Kingdom we explore and demonstrate infrastructural improvements and tackle crucial elements related to engaging users and successful promotion of cycle highways. BUas is responsible for the monitoring and evaluation of the project. To measure the impact and effectiveness of cycle highway innovations we use Cyclespex and Cycleprint.With Cyclespex a virtual living lab is created which we will use to test several readability and wayfinding measures for cycle infrastructure. Cyclespex gives us the opportunity to test different scenario’s in virtual reality that will help us to make decisions about the final solution that will be realized on the cycle highway. Cycleprint will be used to develop a monitoring dashboard where municipalities of cities can easily monitor and evaluate the local bicycle use.
In 2021, Citython editions were held for the European cities of Eindhoven (Netherlands), Bilbao and Barcelona (Spain), Hamburg (Germany), and Lublin (Poland). Within this project, BUAS contributed to the organization of CITYTHON Eindhoven in cooperation with CARNET (an initiative by CIT UPC) and City of Eindhoven – an event which gives young talent the opportunity to work with mentors and experts for the development of innovative urban solutions. Participants of CITYTHON Eindhoven worked on three challenges:- Traffic safety in school zones - Travel to the campus- Make the city healthy The event took place between 18 May and 2 June 2021 with various experts, for example from ASML, City of Eindhoven and University of Amsterdam, giving inspirational talks and mentoring students throughout the ideation and solutions development process. The teams presented their solutions during the Dutch Technology Week and the winners were announced by Monique List-de Roos (Alderman Mobility and Transport, City of Eindhoven) on 2 June 2021. The role of BUAS within this project was to assist City of Eindhoven with the development of the challenges to be tackled by the participating teams, and find relevant speakers and mentors who would be supporting the students for the development of their solutions and jury members who would determine the winning teams. The project ended with a round table “Green and Safe Mobility for all: 5 Smart City(thon) Case studies” on November 17 organized as part of Smart City Expo World Congress 2021 in Barcelona. This project is funded by EIT Urban Mobility, an initiative of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT), a body of the European Union. EIT Urban Mobility acts to accelerate positive change on mobility to make urban spaces more livable. Learn more: eiturbanmobility.eu.Collaborating partnersCARNET (Lead organisation); Barcelona Institute of Technology for Habitat; Barcelona City Council; Bilbao City Hall; City of Hamburg; City of Eindhoven,; City of Lublin; Digital Hub Logistics Hamburg; Technical University of Catalonia, Tecnalia; UPC Technology Center.
