Suchergebnisse

Abstract The legal recognition of civil unions between same-sex partners, in May 2016, could be defined as a revolution for the system of legal norms regarding the "heterosexual family-centric-system" in Italy. Using official data on the 17,341 people resulting in a same-sex civil union collected by the Italian National Institute of Statistics in the years 2016–2018, this paper analysed the relationship between religious secularization and the diffusion of same-sex civil unions at the regional level in Italy. In particular, an indicator of the incidence of civilly united individuals over total population has been regressed on the rate of heterosexual marriages celebrated according to the civil rite. According to abundant literature, the latter variable could be interpreted as a proxy of secularization. The results indicate that less secularized regions are also those where less civil unions have been celebrated. The results are confirmed also when an instrumental variable approach is implemented. Studying this topic in Italy is particularly interesting since the country has been defined as the least secularized among economically developed nations.

This article investigates the nature of the conversation around austerity on Twitter during the 2015 general election in the UK. Specifically, it explores the kinds of messages referring to austerity, as well as the kinds of accounts involved (whether they referred to a private or public role on Twitter and in society) and their affiliation to politically or non-politically oriented organizations/bodies. The search on Twitter concerning the austerity topic (for the 39-day time period from 3 March to 8 May 2015) resulted in 16,015 tweets, which generally referred to austerity, and 11,146 tweets, which contained at least one relevant hashtag. While austerity was rarely mentioned by mainstream media accounts in the Twittersphere, this topic was widely discussed during the election campaign by private users. This could be seen as a limitation of agenda setting, since there is no correlation between the agenda set by the media on Twitter and the public discussion about it. However, we found a relationship between the offline mainstream media agenda and the discussion led by private users on Twitter, thus confirming, to some extent, the validity of intra-agenda setting. In fact, offline media events (talk shows, news articles and question times) seemed to trigger peaks in tweet-based discussions or mentions about austerity, showing that the agenda set by the offline media influenced the discussion in the Twittersphere. Finally, we found that, while austerity has clear implications for citizens' daily life, it seems to be more of an "elitist" topic, mainly addressed by those who are already politically oriented and well informed on the topic.

O desenvolvimento da sociedade da informação reforçou a existência de obstáculos que dificultam o acesso e o uso apropriado das tecnologias por certos grupos, levando a novas formas de exclusão no mercado de trabalho, nas instituições governamentais, no lazer, e nas atividades educativas. Contudo, reduzir o hiato entre aqueles que estão conectados e aqueles que não estão tendo acesso físico mais barato e mais rápido à internet não resulta automaticamente numa eliminação da distância colocada pelas desigualdades digitais. É um erro assumir um posicionamento tecnologicamente determinista, que vê o acesso à tecnologia como solução para os problemas sociais, incluindo problemas de desigualdade social, democracia, liberdade, interação social e um senso de comunidade. Na verdade, muitas dimensões e padrões existentes podem gerar e reforçar desigualdades, aumentando ainda mais as distâncias entre cidadãos/usuários. O termo "hiato digital", muitas vezes usado como expressão binária, pode não ser adequado porque sugere um hiato unidimensional, baseado principalmente no fator econômico – possuir tecnologia –, ao passo em que há hiatos em perspectivas múltiplas, que vão além do simples acesso ou da obtenção dos recursos. Essas dimensões criam desigualdades digitais que, se não forem retratadas, produzem e reforçam as desigualdades sociais. Os conceitos de estratificação social e digital estão intimamente interligados. The development of the information society has highlighted the existence of obstacles preventing certain social groups from accessing and properly using technologies, leading to new forms of exclusion from the job market, governmental institutions, leisure and academic activities. However, reducing the gap between those who connect and those who do not by offering cheaper and faster physical access does not automatically translate into closing the gap in terms of digital inequalities. The technological determinist position, which sees access to technology as being able to solve social problems, including problems of social inequality, democracy, freedom, social relationships and sense of community, is misleading. In fact, several dimensions and patterns can generate and reinforce inequalities, further increasing the distances between citizens/users. The term "digital divide", often used as a binary expression, is confusing, because it suggests a one-dimensional gap, mainly based on the economic factor – possession of technologies –, while there are gaps in multiple dimensions that go beyond the simple access to or possession of resources. These dimensions create digital inequalities that, if not mirrored, can produce and reinforce social inequalities. The concepts of social and digital stratification are intimately intertwined.

Chapter 1. Introduction. Between Digital, Socioeconomic, and Environmental Poverty -- Part I Theorizing Digital Poverty -- Chapter 2. From Poverty to Digital Poverty -- Chapter 3. Determinants of Digital Poverty -- Chapter 4. The Environmental Dimension of Poverty -- Part II Environmental Poverty and Its Interconnections with Digital Poverty -- Chapter 5. The Environmental Determinant of Digital Poverty from Macro to Micro Perspectives -- Chapter 6. A Bourdesian Approach to the Digital-Environmental Relationship -- Chapter 7. Combining Digital, Post-pandemic Recovery, and Environmental Benefits: Examples at the Macro, Meso, and Micro at Tackling Digital and Environmental Poverty -- Part III Case Study and Policy Recommendations -- Chapter 8. Digital Policy Analysis and Connections Between Digital Poverty and Environmental Poverty in the UK -- Chapter 9. Digital-Environmental Habitus in England: Families as Vulnerable Subjects at Risk of Digital Poverty -- Chapter 10. Developing Digital-Environmental Sustainability -- Chapter 11. Conclusion.

Starting from the assumption that digital capital is a capital in its own right, and can be quantified and measured as such, the authors of this book examine how digital capital can be defined, measured and impact policy. Using the Bourdieusian lens, this book makes a critical contribution to the field by examining in depth the notion of digital capital and by introducing a new theoretical toolkit in order to fully conceptualise it. Against this theoretical background, the authors propose a set of indicators that can be used to measure digital capital at an individual level. Ultimately, readers will learn how this can be used by policy makers to tackle social inequalities which are based on the digital exclusion of citizens.

This paper explores the intertwined nature of digital and environmental dimensions within Bourdieu's concept of habitus to address contemporary global challenges. Controversial evidence exists regarding the environmental impact of digitalization, reflecting contrasting theoretical approaches at societal and individual levels. The paper examines how digital practices' environmental impact depends on usage types, with implications for lifestyles and values. It revises the concept of habitus to encapsulate the complex interaction between digital and environmental fields, facilitating users' awareness and behavioral responses.

This paper focuses on four e-initiatives that were precipitated by the coronavirus outbreak in Italy. These experiences played a relevant role in developing multilevel solidarity (from the local to the global level) both online and offline. They are represented by the hashtags "#iorestoacasa" (I stay at home) and "#andràtuttobene" (everything will be alright), "performances on the balcony," "influencers' campaigns," and "altruism and e-parochialism." These experiences represent revealing examples essential to understand the benefits that a mediated form of solidarity can produce. This is particularly important given the challenges that solidarity faces due to the technological acceleration imposed by the pandemic, which is likely to influence social relationships even in the post-pandemic era. Four lessons can be learned from these expressions of e-solidarity related to the capacity of information and communication technologies to (1) promote unconditioned altruism; (2) fight "parochialism" when the same disadvantaged condition is shared; (3) their capacity to develop a multilevel sense of community by connecting the local experience to the global dimension; and (4) to mediate between institutional sources and people, and connect family members, friends, vulnerable people with neighbors, and the global community. This last point suggests that the pandemic has offered fertile ground for both mechanical and organic forms of solidarity to emerge. On the one hand, it created a collective conscience based on shared vulnerabilities and interdependence. On the other hand, it is based on individualization and diversity. Indeed, these examples of Durkheimian collective effervescence show the paradox of a form of collective individualized and mediated solidarity, which is typical of contemporary society.

This article investigates the interaction between digital capital and some offline components (economic, cultural, political, social and personal) that represent the background against which we access and use the Internet. Based on a stratified sample of the UK population (868), six indexes (one for each component) were generated through factor analysis and univariate analysis. We summarised them into a unique model by performing a multiple linear regression to evaluate the role-played by offline components in the development/reinforcement of digital capital. The interaction between these new indexes and the digital capital index shows that, with the exception of the political component, all offline backgrounds positively contribute to digital capital. Moreover, the multiple regression analysis shows that the economic and social components have the strongest influence on digital capital.

This article investigates the interaction between digital capital and some offline components (economic, cultural, political, social and personal) that represent the background against which we access and use the Internet. Based on a stratified sample of the UK population (868), six indexes (one for each component) were generated through factor analysis and univariate analysis. We summarised them into a unique model by performing a multiple linear regression to evaluate the role-played by offline components in the development/reinforcement of digital capital. The interaction between these new indexes and the digital capital index shows that, with the exception of the political component, all offline backgrounds positively contribute to digital capital. Moreover, the multiple regression analysis shows that the economic and social components have the strongest influence on digital capital.

This article develops a Digital Capital Index by adopting the definition provided by Ragnedda, who defines Digital Capital as the accumulation of digital competencies and digital technologies, and the model for measuring it developed by Ragnedda and Ruiu. It aims to develop a measure that can be replicated for comparison in different contexts. This article contributes both theoretically and empirically to the literature by (a) consolidating the concept of Digital Capital as a specific capital and (b) empirically measuring it. A Digital Capital Index is developed through an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and validated with a representative sample survey of 868 UK citizens. The validation procedure shows that the Digital Capital Index is associated with socioeconomic and sociodemographic patterns, such as age, income, educational level and place of residence, while it appears not to be related to gender.