No abstract

La Agenda 2030 tiene por meta construir sociedades pacíficas y justas pero, ¿cómo conseguirlo? Cada vez hay más cuestiones sociopolíticas dirigidas al mundo académico, lo que da una oportunidad para que la investigación para la paz contribuya y genere impacto. Especialmente, el concepto de paz positiva es un tema de creciente interés debido a la necesidad de encontrar nuevas formas de convivencia en sociedades cada vez más diversas. Sin embargo, no existe un paradigma articulado de paz positiva que pueda servir como punto de referencia para la investigación y comunicación interdisciplinaria, así como para la comunicación entre el mundo académico, político y la sociedad. Para contribuir a un desarrollo integrador de la paz positiva, se examinan las posiciones paradigmáticas existentes. Como en su mayoría éstas se ocupan de aspectos ontológicos y axiológicos, se sugiere el paradigma transformador y el paradigma narrativo como complementos adecuados respecto a la metodología y la epistemología. Además, se dan indicaciones sobre lo que debe considerar un investigador como marcos de investigación interdisciplinarios y normativos para cumplir así con la responsabilidad social.

What happens when a university leaves its campus and enter spaces that seem reserved for completely different functions and areas of life - such as shopping? What opportunities and potentials arise from such a shift for the dialog between science and society? Is it an innovative way for science communication to reach groups other than the education-oriented middle class? What skills do academics need to succeed in such a setting? These and similar questions formed the starting point of the Berlin project “Mall Anders - Open Learning Lab for Science and Society”. For seven months in 2021/22, TU Berlin used a retail space in a shopping mall to test new ways of communicating science and co-producing knowledge in a dialogue between the university, business, civil society, politics, and culture. The relocation of university life to a public shopping center enabled broad public involvement in teaching and learning, high activating potential in overcoming the rifts between university and society and new impulses for science communication, participatory research, and student-organized teaching.

No abstract

The UN 2030 Agenda calls for the development and promotion of societies that pursue not only ecological and economic, but also socio-political sustainability goals. Yet, the political as well as academic discourse on that is marginal. Conducting an empirical case study in Germany, this article examines existing political ideations about societal integration and thus cohesion and discusses ideational obstacles to the development of a socially sustainable society. First, the concept of ideations is made accessible for empirical analysis by distinguishing cognitive and affective elements with symbolic, sentimental, programmatical and ideological foundations. The focus is not on the implementation of specific policies, but on the negotiation processes of the ideational foundations of integration governance. The following critical discourse analysis elaborates central aspects of ‘constitutional patriotism' and ‘Leitkultur.' It traces their emergence and characteristics and thereby reveals how different historical contexts and political interests of the actors influence the emergence and dissemination of ideations. Furthermore, it demonstrates how formerly opposing positions converge, emphasizing the impact of ideational processes on changing governance trends. Subsequently, inherent elements of cultural racism and hegemony, religion and ‘values,' and emotion politics are critically discussed as obstacles to developing decolonial ideations about integration. Accordingly, the widespread appreciation of patriotism and national pride as a foundation for successful integration is questioned. The conclusion diagnoses that republican elements are gaining influence with the tendency to individualize, paternalize, and depoliticize integration. Shared cognitive and emotional ideations are intended to ensure support for democracy, but the extent to which these policies themselves exhibit undemocratic tendencies must be critically observed. The two ideations examined are therefore not or only partially suitable for promoting social sustainability.