A partire da alcune linee di tendenza di lungo periodo, e guardando anche alla domande e alle questioni che emergono dalla situazione di emergenza legata alla pandemia di Covid-19, questo contributo si propone di identificare alcuni elementi della sfida per raggiungere una maggiore parità di genere nella formazione in ambito scientifico e tecnologico, guardando in particolare alla situazione milanese. Dopo una rassegna dei temi emergenti, proveremo a leggere i dati degli atenei milanesi, nel confronto con la situazione nazionale, per poi riflettere sulle politiche in corso.
Territorial cohesion has figured in the lexicon of the European Union for some years. However, there has never been a clear definition of the notion, not even after its inclusion in the Lisbon Treaty. Moreover, within the European Union Cohesion Reports and, more generally, within European Union documents, along with the other two dimensions of cohesion (economic and social) it has been treated separately without any serious attempts to reconcile them and develop a coherent interpretation of cohesion—the result being the creation of a contested and ill-defined understanding of territorial cohesion and its relationship to the other two dimensions of Cohesion Policy. Given that the approach advocated by Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy aims to embed the different dimensions and how they interact in specific spatial configurations (created by the confluence of a range of different 'flows' that can create multiple overlapping assemblages with 'fuzzy' boundaries), this raises important questions about how we understand these relationships. Moreover, the policy discourses in which each dimension of cohesion is situated create their own frameworks that are conducive to developing the conditions, including appropriate policy strategies, to supporting these individual cohesion formations. The rather arbitrary separation of these approaches in 'official discourse' impedes addressing cohesion in a coherent and integrated manner. Thus, after reviewing the relevant key policy literature, the article will seek to consider how territorial cohesion relates to the other two dimensions of cohesion taking into account the role of the place-based approach. However, it is argued that the search for territorial (social and economic) cohesion has been subordinated to neoliberal notions such as competitiveness and economic growth.
Addressing the under-researched interplay between civic activism and government agencies, this paper focuses on the conditions for broad local support for civic crowdfunding projects and the interaction between proponents of such projects, their associated stakeholders, and traditional urban planning frameworks. Building on Carolina Pacchi's the work on the relationships between community and state in examples of local activism in European cities, the paper applies four types of relationship between community and state: state regulation and community implementation; cooperation; community autonomy; and community opposition. These are used to unpack the diff erent phases of civic crowdfunding projects and to show how relationships with the state evolve throughout the lifecycle of a project. Drawing upon qualitative research carried out in London and Milan between 2015 and 2017, we examine the case of the Peckham Coal Line in south London, a proposed urban elevated park along a disused coal line. Chosen for its long-term ambitions, its substantial local support and fi nancial backing through mayoral match-funding, the case is used to examine the dynamic nature interaction between the digitally enabled activism of civic crowdfunding and local government agencies. Our study of the development of the Peckham Coal Line project gives insight into the shifting nature of the relationship between civic actors and the state, showing that while the 'autonomous' development of local projects is an important aspect of civic crowdfunding projects, the state does not disappear. Further, online and offline activities are only one step in the redefi nition of contemporary forms of citizenship and the claim that of civic crowdfunding can deliver extended citizen participation should be more closely scrutinized.
All across Europe, inequality is rising. This is visible in the persistent social and economic divides between countries, between regions, and between cities and rural areas. In response to this inequality, the regional policy of the European Union has striven to strengthen the Union's territorial cohesion. However, the policy response of the EU's individual Member States to regional inequality tends to diverge from the EU's focus on territorial cohesion, and examples of Member State policies and practices that correspond with the EU vision of enhanced cohesion are more rare. In this handbook, we examine some of the Member State policies and initiatives that do seem to work towards a vision similar to the EU vision for a territorially cohesive Union. The handbook presents the findings and recommendations of the international research project Inequality, urbanization and territorial cohesion: Developing the European social model of economic growth and democratic capacity (COHSMO). COHSMO is based on 21 case studies carried out in seven European countries: Denmark, Austria, the United Kingdom, Greece, Poland, Italy and Lithuania.
