This article discusses the complexities of Shona kinship structure and how it positions women through relationships that are based on consanguinity and affinity. The article, which is an auto-ethnographic discussion emanating from my insider status as a participant observer in Shona kinship structure, addresses women’s fluctuation between being women and “social men” in their patrilineages. Shona patriarchy involves the positioning of women in a kinship structure in which social hierarchy, status and gender are fluid and not necessarily aligned with biology. Women’s status in Shona kinship structure is not homogeneous and fixed, but contingent upon a flexible interpretation of gender. Este artigo discute a complexidades da estrutura de parentesco Shona e como ela posiciona as mulheres por meio da relacionamentos que são baseados na consanguinidade e na afinidade. O artigo, que é uma discussão autoetnográfica que emana do meu status de insider como uma observadora-participante na estrutura de parentesco Shona, aborda a flutuação das mulheres entre mulheres e “homens sociais” em suas patrilinhagens. O patriarcado Shona envolve o posicionamento das mulheres em uma estrutura de parentesco na qual a hierarquia social, o status e o gênero são fluidos e não necessariamente alinhados com a biologia. O status das mulheres na estrutura de parentesco Shona não é homogêneo e fixo, mas contingente a uma interpretação flexível do gênero.
Spyros Blavoukos and Panos Politis-Lamprou give a brief overview of the new financial instrument for joint procurement of defence equipment in the field of European defence.
Read the ELIAMEP Explainer here.
As powerful nations turn inwards and multilateral institutions falter, alternative coalitions need to step into the breach to push for global progress. Such flexible and diverse groupings will be most effective if they are based around issues and deploy new tactics to seize every chance to shape international norms. Len Ishmael, Stephan Klingebiel and Andy Sumner explain the concept of ‘like-minded internationalism’.
As powerful nations turn inwards and multilateral institutions falter, alternative coalitions need to step into the breach to push for global progress. Such flexible and diverse groupings will be most effective if they are based around issues and deploy new tactics to seize every chance to shape international norms. Len Ishmael, Stephan Klingebiel and Andy Sumner explain the concept of ‘like-minded internationalism’.
As powerful nations turn inwards and multilateral institutions falter, alternative coalitions need to step into the breach to push for global progress. Such flexible and diverse groupings will be most effective if they are based around issues and deploy new tactics to seize every chance to shape international norms. Len Ishmael, Stephan Klingebiel and Andy Sumner explain the concept of ‘like-minded internationalism’.
This study examines the effects of a nationwide shock-responsive social cash transfer scheme during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on highly risk susceptible informal economy households in Kenya. Leveraging primary in-person survey data in a doubly robust difference-in-differences framework, we find that households receiving shock-responsive cash transfers were less likely to encounter income loss, poverty, and food scarcity compared to households not receiving them. The scheme also reduced the likelihood of engaging in costly risk coping such as selling productive assets. When comparing different pillars of the scheme with varying degrees of shock-responsiveness, we observe that the impacts were statistically significant only when payment cycles were pooled and the transfers were vertically scaled. The study adds to the global policy discussion on developing effective shock-responsive interventions, underscoring the merits of shock-responsive social cash transfers during crises.
This study examines the effects of a nationwide shock-responsive social cash transfer scheme during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on highly risk susceptible informal economy households in Kenya. Leveraging primary in-person survey data in a doubly robust difference-in-differences framework, we find that households receiving shock-responsive cash transfers were less likely to encounter income loss, poverty, and food scarcity compared to households not receiving them. The scheme also reduced the likelihood of engaging in costly risk coping such as selling productive assets. When comparing different pillars of the scheme with varying degrees of shock-responsiveness, we observe that the impacts were statistically significant only when payment cycles were pooled and the transfers were vertically scaled. The study adds to the global policy discussion on developing effective shock-responsive interventions, underscoring the merits of shock-responsive social cash transfers during crises.
This study examines the effects of a nationwide shock-responsive social cash transfer scheme during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on highly risk susceptible informal economy households in Kenya. Leveraging primary in-person survey data in a doubly robust difference-in-differences framework, we find that households receiving shock-responsive cash transfers were less likely to encounter income loss, poverty, and food scarcity compared to households not receiving them. The scheme also reduced the likelihood of engaging in costly risk coping such as selling productive assets. When comparing different pillars of the scheme with varying degrees of shock-responsiveness, we observe that the impacts were statistically significant only when payment cycles were pooled and the transfers were vertically scaled. The study adds to the global policy discussion on developing effective shock-responsive interventions, underscoring the merits of shock-responsive social cash transfers during crises.
This short commentary offers insights into different aspects of legitimacy building using the example of German polar research contributions to the International Polar Years (IPYs). The piece focuses on three aspects of legitimacy building, with polar science 1) being framed as research concerning the climate crisis, 2) as a subject of science communication, and 3) informing policy.
This short commentary offers insights into different aspects of legitimacy building using the example of German polar research contributions to the International Polar Years (IPYs). The piece focuses on three aspects of legitimacy building, with polar science 1) being framed as research concerning the climate crisis, 2) as a subject of science communication, and 3) informing policy.
This short commentary offers insights into different aspects of legitimacy building using the example of German polar research contributions to the International Polar Years (IPYs). The piece focuses on three aspects of legitimacy building, with polar science 1) being framed as research concerning the climate crisis, 2) as a subject of science communication, and 3) informing policy.
In October 2022, the EU established a military assistance mission in support to Ukrainian armed forces (EUMAM Ukraine). This article addresses two questions: First, how did the EU succeed in establishing EUMAM Ukraine, also in view of the fact that earlier attempts to establish an EU military training mission in Ukraine had failed? Second, what explains the mission’s unique design as compared with previously launched EU training missions? While a reformulation of EU member states’ security preferences driven by the heightened threat of an aggressive Russia is certainly necessary to explain the creation of EUMAM Ukraine, we argue that the launch and design of the mission can only be fully understood through a neofunctionalist approach, taking into account the effect of functional pressure and the activism of EU actors. The article shows how the EU High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy and the European External Action Service seized an initiative from member states and set the foundation for the mission of unprecedented scope and complexity. This finding illustrates the importance of Brussels-based actors in driving EU security and defence policy forward in times of existential security crisis in Europe.
In October 2022, the EU established a military assistance mission in support to Ukrainian armed forces (EUMAM Ukraine). This article addresses two questions: First, how did the EU succeed in establishing EUMAM Ukraine, also in view of the fact that earlier attempts to establish an EU military training mission in Ukraine had failed? Second, what explains the mission’s unique design as compared with previously launched EU training missions? While a reformulation of EU member states’ security preferences driven by the heightened threat of an aggressive Russia is certainly necessary to explain the creation of EUMAM Ukraine, we argue that the launch and design of the mission can only be fully understood through a neofunctionalist approach, taking into account the effect of functional pressure and the activism of EU actors. The article shows how the EU High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy and the European External Action Service seized an initiative from member states and set the foundation for the mission of unprecedented scope and complexity. This finding illustrates the importance of Brussels-based actors in driving EU security and defence policy forward in times of existential security crisis in Europe.
In October 2022, the EU established a military assistance mission in support to Ukrainian armed forces (EUMAM Ukraine). This article addresses two questions: First, how did the EU succeed in establishing EUMAM Ukraine, also in view of the fact that earlier attempts to establish an EU military training mission in Ukraine had failed? Second, what explains the mission’s unique design as compared with previously launched EU training missions? While a reformulation of EU member states’ security preferences driven by the heightened threat of an aggressive Russia is certainly necessary to explain the creation of EUMAM Ukraine, we argue that the launch and design of the mission can only be fully understood through a neofunctionalist approach, taking into account the effect of functional pressure and the activism of EU actors. The article shows how the EU High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy and the European External Action Service seized an initiative from member states and set the foundation for the mission of unprecedented scope and complexity. This finding illustrates the importance of Brussels-based actors in driving EU security and defence policy forward in times of existential security crisis in Europe.
Bonn, 26. Mai 2025. Weltweit wächst aktuell der politische und gesellschaftliche Widerstand gegen Diversity- und Antidiskriminierungsmaßnahmen in Bezug auf Geschlecht, ethnische Zugehörigkeit, Klasse, Religion und andere intersektionale Identitäten. Angeführt wird dieser Feldzug von der Trump-Administration, die Programme zur Förderung von Vielfalt unter dem Vorwand, sie seien „illegal und unmoralisch“, verbietet. Diese Entwicklung ist besorgniserregend. In demokratischen Gesellschaften gilt Chancengleichheit als zentraler Wert; Vielfalt, Inklusion und Gerechtigkeit werden hochgehalten. Ohne die Perspektiven diverser Gruppen besteht die Gefahr, die Bedürfnisse der Bevölkerung in ihrer Gesamtheit zu vernachlässigen. Daher ist Engagement für Vielfalt und Antidiskriminierung unerlässlich, um eine lebendige Demokratie in nachhaltigen, inklusiven Gesellschaften zu sichern.
Antidiskriminierungsmaßnahmen werden vor allem von der extremen Rechten als woke, elitäre und linke Ideologie diskreditiert, verbunden mit der Behauptung, sie verschärfen gesellschaftliche Ungerechtigkeit, da Identität mehr zähle als Kompetenz. Diese Skandalisierung von Diversity und Antidiskriminierung verstärkt gesellschaftliche Polarisierung und Ausgrenzung.
Zunehmendem Druck ausgesetzt, setzen Universitäten, öffentliche Einrichtungen und private Unternehmen in den USA und anderswo inklusive Maßnahmen wie Diversity-Quoten oder Antidiskriminierungsschulungen aus. Auch in Deutschland gibt es polarisierende Debatten über Frauenquoten oder geschlechtersensible Sprache.
Zur Verteidigung der Diversitätsansätze schlagen wir drei Schritte vor: Erstens ist es wichtig, falschen Narrativen entgegenzuwirken, da sie öffentliche Meinung und politische Entscheidungen prägen. Zweitens müssen Vielfalt und Antidiskriminierung institutionell verankert werden, um die Resilienz zu erhöhen. Drittens sollten Vielfalt und Antidiskriminierung Teil von Schulungen für Führungskräfte sein, um entsprechende strukturelle Veränderungen zu fördern.
Mitgestaltung des öffentlichen DiskursesIrreführenden Narrativen zum Thema Vielfalt entgegenzuwirken ist eine kollektive Aufgabe. Expert*innen sollten sich in Medien, Reden und Debatten öffentlich einbringen und die Vorteile von Diversity erklären. Auch Institutionen aus unterschiedlichsten Bereichen können durch Veröffentlichung von Erfahrungen beitragen. Diese Sichtbarkeit kann dabei helfen, Vielfalt nicht als spaltende Ideologie, sondern als gemeinsames Engagement für Gerechtigkeit, persönliche Freiheit, Inklusion und gesellschaftliche Resilienz zu verstehen.
Bei aller Entschlossenheit, Vielfalt zu verteidigen, ist es wichtig, kritische Stimmen nicht abzutun. Gemeinsame Sichtweisen, Werte und Normen entstehen durch konstruktive Spannungen. Ein gesunder öffentlicher Diskurs hängt von Vielen ab. Im Medienbereich ist ein konstruktiver Journalismus wegweisend, der Lösungen und Gemeinsamkeiten betont. Die Bundesregierung sollte Vielfalt und Antidiskriminierung gegen Angriffe von allen Seiten verteidigen. Dazu gehört auch die Aufnahme eines konstruktiven und faktenbasierten Dialogs über Diversity-Bemühungen.
Verankerung von Diversity in institutionellen StrukturenDer jüngste Backlash zeigt, dass die Bemühungen um Vielfalt und Antidiskriminierung anfällig für politischen und gesellschaftlichen Druck sind. Der Aufbau resilienter institutioneller Strukturen beginnt sektorübergreifend mit dem Bewusstsein, dass Vielfalt ein zentraler Aspekt der Identität einer Institution ist. Das erfordert eine starke Führung, die diesen Prozess vorantreibt, Richtlinien und Finanzierung aufeinander abstimmt und eine Kultur der Reflexion, Teilhabe und gemeinsamen Verantwortung fördert. Beispiele wie die Harvard University und Transport for London zeigen, dass Organisationen, die sich Vielfalt als zentralem Wert verschrieben haben, diese auch schützen.
Führungskraftentwicklung und individuelles HandelnFührungsqualitäten sind für langfristigen Wandel unerlässlich. Führungskräfte sind Vorbilder und Entscheidungsträger*innen. Sie setzen den Ton und beeinflussen die institutionelle Kultur. Sie haben die Macht, strukturelle Veränderungen zu fördern (oder zu blockieren).
Daher gehören Vielfalt und Antidiskriminierung als Inhalte in die Führungskraftentwicklung. Auf diese Weise können sie das Bewusstsein schärfen, Fehleinschätzungen ausräumen, Empathie schaffen und Diversity-Kompetenz fördern. Das IDOS bietet drei Ausbildungsformate für die nächste Generation von Führungskräften an. Indem die Akademien Menschen verschiedener Nationalitäten und Hintergründe zusammenbringen, ermöglichen sie Erfahrungen mit Vielfalt und stärken Kompetenzen im Bereich Dialog und inklusive Führung. Teilnehmende lernen, wie sie Vielfalt fördern können, angefangen bei einer Haltung, die (Meinungs-)Differenzen begrüßt bis hin zu Moderationsfähigkeiten für inklusive Prozesse.
Zielgerichtete MaßnahmenDie aktuelle Situation mag erdrückend wirken, doch gerade jetzt ist verstärktes Engagement gefragt. Öffentlicher Diskurs, institutionelle Strukturen und individuelles Handeln sind wesentliche Kräfte zur Verteidigung demokratischer Prinzipien und zur Förderung der Vielfalt. Am 27. Mai ist Deutscher Diversity-Tag. Öffentliche Unterstützung zu zeigen, ist wichtig. Statt jedoch nur Flagge zu zeigen, sollten wir insbesondere jene Strukturen und Praktiken stärken, die Vielfalt fördern und Diskriminierung durch langfristiges Engagement verhindern.