Suchergebnisse

Tempe is an indigenous food from Indonesia. Historical evidence show that soybean tempe originated in Central Java and appeared in the Javanese food culture around five centuries ago. Until recently, little attention has been paid to promote tempe even it contributes significantly to the nutrient intake of Indonesians and could prevent hypercholesteremia and hyperglycaemia. This activity aimed at promoting Tempe as Indonesian Indigenous food and culture; and gaining the support from professional organizations, government, community, producers and consumers in order to include tempe in the national list of intangible cultural heritage. This activity was held since 2015 till 2018. The way to promote it was through seminars, online and offline support, and competition. During the last three years, fifteen seminars on the health of tempe were done in fifteen cities covered 4500 women leaders, scientist and government officers. Information about culture and health benefit of tempe was also promoted through social media, and competition, as well as online petition. As much as 22 related professional association, central government institutions, universities, tempe producers and consumers supported written that tempe should be proposed to be national list of intangible cultural heritage; and further to be intangible cultural heritage of UNESCO. The final result of this activity was the Ministry of Education & Culture formally launched that tempe was included in the list of national list of intangible cultural heritage based on certificate number 60089/MPK.E/KB/2017. Besides, tempe also include among the five unique indigenous culture to be promoted to be and intangible cultural heritage of UNESCO.

30 Drosophiliden-Arten sind gegenwärtig von den Maskarene-Inseln bekannt. Auf Reunion ist die dominante Art Drosophila simulans (mehr als 30% aller gesammelten Arten), während diese auf Mauritius zu fehlen scheint und dort durch die endemische vikariante Drosophila mauritiana ersetzt wird. In Reunion sind die Höhe und zu einem geringeren Grade die Niederschlagsmenge die beiden hauptsächlichen Faktoren, durch die die Verbreitung der Arten bestimmt wird. Auf den Maskarene-Inseln gibt es etwa 30% endemische und eben so viele kosmopolitische Arten. Der Rest der Fauna setzt sich aus orientalischen und aethiopischen Arten zusammen. Die Zahl der endemischen Arten beweist, dass die Einwanderung der Fliegen ein sehr altes Ereignis ist, das vor der Besiedlung durch den Menschen stattfand. Eine analoge Schlußfolgerung trifft wahrscheinlich auch auf einige kosmopolitische Arten zu. Die Rolle des Menschen bei der Verbreitung der Drosophiliden ist offenbar von weit geringerer Bedeutung als gewöhnlich angenommen wird. ; 30 Drosophilid species are now recorded from Maskarene Islands. In Reunion the dominant species is Drosophila simulans (more than 30% of the collected flies), while it seems to be absent from Mauritius, being replaced there by the endemic vicariant Drosophila mauritiana. In Reunion altitude and to a lesser degree pluviometry are the two decisive factors determining the repartition of the different species. Maskarene Islands contain about 30% of endemic and the same proportion of cosmopolitan species. The remainder of the fauna consists of Etiopian and Oriental elements. The number of endemic species proves that in many cases the introduction of flies was a very old event, much before human colonization. The same conclusion may probably apply to some cosmopolitan species. The role of man in the dispersion of drosophilid flies is probably far less important than usually admitted.

In the history of the modern state, Africa has been continually depicted in sharp contrast to Europe and its ostensibly special developmental path. However, Benjamin Steiner shows how the formation of nation states in Europe depended on European involvement in the larger Atlantic world, and writes a history of knowledge and encounter between France and parts of Africa during the time of Jean-Baptiste Colbert

Una de las medidas gubernamentales promulgada para hacer
frente a la epidemia causada por el virus COVID-19 fue la imposición de la utilización
generalizada de las mascarillas faciales de protección. La Sección Cuarta
de la Sala III de lo Contencioso-Administrativo del Tribunal Supremo mediante las
sentencias de 20 de noviembre y 17 de diciembre de 2020 desestimó sendos recursos
contencioso-administrativos interpuestos a través del procedimiento especial
de protección de derechos fundamentales, negando que la Orden del Ministerio
de Sanidad 422/2020, de 19 de mayo, reguladora de su utilización vulnerase
los derechos fundamentales de las personas recurrentes. Por el contrario, el Alto
Tribunal consideró que, en el estado de conocimiento de propagación del virus, el
uso obligatorio de la mascarilla constituía una medida legítima, necesaria y proporcional
para alcanzar el fin de interés general de protección de la salud de todos,
el cual prevalece sobre los intereses particulares.
Este trabajo tiene por objeto realizar una valoración crítica de estas sentencias,
en tanto que desde una perspectiva material de contenido y formal, despachan el
litigio sin demasiada profundidad ni brillantez. Para ello, con carácter previo exploramos
de forma somera el marco judicial que vela por la garantía de los derechos
fundamentales en la emergencia sanitaria, así como el contexto normativo
de la medida del uso generalizado de mascarillas. La coyuntura nos sirve de pretexto
para ampliar el campo de nuestras reflexiones hacia una serie de aspectos
de interés jurídico conexos, además de para aportar unas valoraciones finales sobre
la cuestión, en particular, sobre la razonabilidad de dicha medida obligatoria.
COVID-19aren birusak eragindako izurriari aurre egiteko
aldarrikatutako gobernuaren neurrietako bat aurpegiko babes-maskaren erabilera
orokorra ezartzea izan zen. Auzitegi Goreneko Administrazioarekiko Auzien
III. Salaren Laugarren atalak, 2020ko azaroaren 20ko eta abenduaren 17ko epaien
bidez, oinarrizko eskubideak babesteko prozedura bereziaren bitartez jarritako
administrazioarekiko bi auzi-errekurtso ezetsi zituen, eta ukatu egin zuen Osasun
Ministerioaren maiatzaren 19ko 422/2020 Aginduak, haien erabilera arautzekoak,
errekurtsogileen oinarrizko eskubideak urratzen zituenik. Aitzitik, Goi Auzitegiak
iritzi zion birusaren hedapenaren gaineko ezagutza aintzat hartuta, maskara
nahitaez erabiltzea neurri legitimoa, beharrezkoa eta neurrizkoa zela guztion
osasuna babesteko interes orokorraren xedea lortzeko, zeina interes partikularren
gainetik gailentzen den.
Lan honek epaien balorazio kritikoa egitea du xedetzat, edukiaren ikuspegi
formal eta material batetik begiratuta, auzia distira handirik gabe ebatzi baitute.
Horretarako, aurretiaz, azaletik aztertu dugu larrialdi sanitarioan oinarrizko eskubideak
bermatzea zaintzen duen esparru judiziala, bai eta maskaren erabilera orokorraren
neurriaren arau-testuingurua ere. Egoerak aitzakia gisa balio digu gure gogoeten
esparrua aztergai dugun gai nagusiari lotutako interes juridikoko zenbait
alderditara zabaltzeko, eta, halaber, azken balorazio batzuk egiteko, bereziki nahitaezko
neurri honen arrazoizkotasunari buruzkoak.
One of the govermental measures promulgated to cope with the
epidemic provoked by COVID-19 virus was the application of the generalized use
of the face protection masks. The Fourth Section in the Contentious-Administrative
Chamber by the Supreme Court by means of judgments from November 20th
and December 17th dismissed some contentious-administrative appeals lodged
according to the special process for the protection of fundamental rights, denying that the Order by the Health Ministry 422/2020 of May 19th that rules their use,
had violated the appellants fundamental rights. On the contrary, the High Court
considered that in the state of knowledge of the dissemination of the virus, the
mandatory use of face protection masks was a legitimate measure in order to
achieve the general goal of health protection overriding other particular interests.
This work aims at critically assessing the judgments, as from a formal an material
perspective they sort out the dispute with little brillance. For that, we briefly
explore the judicial framework that ensures guarantees of fundamental rigths during
health emergency, and also the legal context of the mandatory generalized
use of face protection masks. The juncture shall be a pretext for broadening the
field for reflecting on some of the aspects of legal interest related to the main issue
studied, as well as for providing a final assessment, in particular, on the reasonableness
of such a compulsory measure.

"All the islands of the western Indian Ocean are immigrant societies: Austronesian seafarers, African slaves, Arab traders, South Asian indentured labourers and European plantation owners have all settled, more or less voluntarily, on Madagascar and Zanzibar, in the Mascarenes and the Comoros. Successive arrivals often struggle to establish their places in these societies, negotiating their way in the face of antipathy, resistance, even violence, as different claims to belonging conflict. The contributions to this volume take a selection of case studies from across the region, and from different perspectives, contributing to a theorisation of the concept of belonging itself. Contributors are Patrick Desplat, Franziska Fay, Marie-Aude Fouéré, Akbar Keshodkar, Hans Olsson, Gitanjali Pyndiah, Ramola Ramtohul, Iain Walker"--