Paradigms of Participation in Origen
The article provides a classification of different kinds of participation in the conceptual framework by Origen, namely, those of natural participation and those of individual participation. In these concepts, Origen did not always borrow from Platonic philosophy – as it was commonly thought. In fact, Origen used as well Aristotelian and other approaches to the universalia and related questions.
Foresight has become an ‘institutional’ activity as more emphasis has been given to the active participation of stakeholders to shape the future of society. As a key element of Foresight, participation improves the quality of Foresight exercises through the engagement of both scientific and non-scientific knowledge, and stakeholder values and preferences. The overall aim of this chapter is to strengthen the Foresight literature with novel concepts and ideas, which are rooted in the participation literature. This will assist Foresight researchers and practitioners understand various rationales of participation and to determine the type and extent of participation that is desirable for different types of Foresight exercises.
The main focus of this paper is the right of the child to express the views, in particular understanding its essence and scope and perspectives of the realization of this right in Russia in the context of the legislation in force, cultural prerequisites and Russian model of democracy. With this in view I study the interconnection between the right to express the views (partially accepted in Russia) and the right to participate (denied to the child due to traditional attitude towards the minor). The conclusion is made that the right to participation should be considered as a broader one which can not be equated to the right to express views. The latter nevertheless is the core, the basis for the other related rights. Further I give an overview of the legal framework and practice of the implementation of the child’s right to express the views and participate in the decision making. Finally, I explore the traditional perceptions with regard to children and their rights and the specifics of Russian democracy, and how they influence right of the child to express the views. The revival of “traditional values” reflected in the legislation and supported by state policies, I argue, together with an open denial of the primacy of the international standards in the field makes it clear - Russia is not in favour of the child’s right to express views.
The main focus of this paper is the relation between the realisation of the right of the child to express his/her views and democracy in Russia. With this in view, I will study the interconnection between the right to express the views and the right to participate. Further, I will give an overview of the specifics of democracy in Russia, how they influence political participation, and what could be done to prevent the further infantilisation of citizens in Russia. Finally, I will explore traditional perceptions with regard to children’s participation in Russia and the legal framework and practice of the implementation of the child’s right to social and political participation.
This publication is a continuation of the series of yearly Academic papers, published since 2006, by the "Baltic Practice" interdisciplinary research Center, in a form of structured and edited collection pf research papers of participants of the International summer school "Practice at the Baltic Sea" or simply "Baltic Practice".
We create collaborative environment for collaborative creation, improvement and promoting bills within public and legislative projects. Enacting a new law means that a community devises out new rules which help it to become more efficient. Below are the principles on which legislative collaboration is based: Public construction of a document aiming at complex cloud issues has high educational value. The practice helps not only produce a quality document and build a community of people interested in its implementation, but promote the innovative document, maintain a new level of its understanding and perception by the society. 518 Collaborative document creation and voting has a priority over document deliberation. Our technology allows collaboration participants to create their own text versions, that could be voted for by other participants. The value of deliberation is less than the value of collaboration. Contemporary collaboration does not always need discussions. Discussion can take so much time and efforts that participants do not have resources to collaborate. The process of selecting text segments is based on the participants' voting. All the votes should be counted but the weight of each vote depends on the participant's impact and the estimation of this impact by the community. The more is the participant's impact and its estimation, the more is the participant's vote weight.
This publication is an continuation of the series of yearly Academic Papers, published since 2006, by the “Baltic Practice” interdisciplinary research Center, in a form of structured and edited collection of research papers of participants of the International HSE Summer School “Practice at the Baltic Sea” or simply “Baltic Practice”, submitted by the students of National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, as well undergraduate and graduate students from several European universities, complimented by the commentaries and research articles by research groups academic leaders and experts.
This paper presents an analysis of the UK Technology Foresight Exercise from the Dialogue, Vision and Dissemination perspectives. Participation and dialogue-based visioning and policy making process was one of the key components of the Foresight exercise, which aimed at involving stakeholders to set priorities in the UK science base and industry. In this way, the stakeholders were given the opportunity to shape the S&T policies and strategies. The exercise helped in a great deal to the establishment of better links between the Government funded S&T and industry in a collective visioning process.
The present article continues the investigation of the Soqotri verbal system undertaken by the Russian-Soqotri fieldwork team. The article focuses on the so-called “weak” and “geminated” roots in the basic stem. The investigation is based on the analysis of full paradigms (perfect, imperfect and jussive) of more than 170 “weak” and “geminated” Soqotri verbs.