How parties frame social citizenship and the inclusion of immigrants in Germany, Switzerland and the United Kingdom

Recent research on the transformation of West European party systems emphasises that cultural issues such as immigration have gained in importance besides the traditional socio-economic cleavage. While this literature shows that parties address not only cultural but also economic is-sues, it has paid less attention on whether parties combine cultural and economic issues. In this paper we focus on immigrants’ social rights by analysing if and how mainstream parties combine immigration and redistributive issues. Drawing on Faist (1995), we distinguish three different perspectives how political actors, here mainstream parties, might react to the welfare chauvinist claims that aim to restrict immigrants’ social rights. Our analysis relies on party manifestos in Germany, Switzerland and the United Kingdom between 1999 and 2011. The results of the anal-ysis indicate that variation is found among party families, in particular among the left. Even though the purpose of the paper is not to ‘prove’ that the populist challenge explains how the mainstream left-wing parties behave, the results allow nonetheless for interpreting mainstream parties’ strategic combination of welfare and immigration issues as a response to anti-immigration and anti-integration issues raised by populist challengers.

Performance of an abbreviated version of the Lubben Social Network Scale among three European community-dwelling older adult populations

PURPOSE: There is a need for valid and reliable short scales that can be used to assess social networks and social supports and to screen for social isolation in older persons. DESIGN AND METHODS: The present study is a cross-national and cross-cultural evaluation of the performance of an abbreviated version of the Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS-6), which was used to screen for social isolation among community-dwelling older adult populations in three European countries. Based on the concept of lack of redundancy of social ties we defined clinical cut-points of the LSNS-6 for identifying persons deemed at risk for social isolation. RESULTS: Among all three samples, the LSNS-6 and two subscales (Family and Friends) demonstrated high levels of internal consistency, stable factor structures, and high correlations with criterion variables. The proposed clinical cut-points showed good convergent validity, and classified 20% of the respondents in Hamburg, 11% of those in Solothurn (Switzerland), and 15% of those in London as at risk for social isolation. IMPLICATIONS: We conclude that abbreviated scales such as the LSNS-6 should be considered for inclusion in practice protocols of gerontological practitioners. Screening older persons based on the LSNS-6 provides quantitative information on their family and friendship ties, and identifies persons at increased risk for social isolation who might benefit from in-depth assessment and targeted interventions.

Gender-fair Language Changes the Social Perception of Professional Groups: The Case of German and Italian.

Gender-fair language, including women and men, such as word pairs has a substantial impact on the mental representation, as a large body of studies have shown. When using exclusively the masculine form as a generic, women are mentally significantly less represented than men. Word pairs, however, lead to a higher cognitive inclusion of women. Surprisingly little research has been conducted to understand how the perception of professional groups is affected by gender-fair language. Providing evidence from an Italian-Austrian cross-cultural study with over 400 participants, we argue that gender-fair language impacts the perception of professional groups, in terms of perceived gender-typicality, number of women and men assumed for a profession, social status and average income. Results hint at a pervasive pay-off: on the one hand, gender-fair language seems to boost the mental representations in favor of women and professions are perceived as being rather gender-neutral. On the other hand professional groups are assigned lower salary and social status with word pairs. Implications of results are discussed.

How involved are they really? A comparative network analysis of the institutional drivers of local actor inclusion

Different socio-economic and environmental drivers lead local communities in mountain regions to adapt land use practices and engage in protection policies. The political system also has to develop new approaches to adapt to those drivers. Local actors are the target group of those policy approaches, and the question arises of if and how much those actors are consulted or even integrated into the design of local land use and protection policies. This article addresses this question by comparing seven different case studies in Swiss mountain regions. Through a formal social network analysis, the inclusion of local actors in collaborative policy networks is investigated and compared to the involvement of other stakeholders representing the next higher sub-national or national decisional levels. Results show that there is a significant difference (1) in how local actors are embedded compared to other stakeholders; and (2) between top-down versus bottom-up designed policy processes.

Does gender-fair language pay off? The social perception of professions from a cross-linguistic perspective

In many languages, masculine forms (e.g., German Lehrer, “teachers, masc.”) have traditionally been used to refer to both women and men, although feminine forms are available, too. Feminine-masculine word pairs (e.g., German Lehrerinnen und Lehrer, “teachers, fem. and teachers, masc.”) are recommended as gender-fair alternatives. A large body of empirical research documents that the use of gender-fair forms instead of masculine forms has a substantial impact on mental representations. Masculine forms activate more male representations even when used in a generic sense, whereas word pairs (e.g., German Lehrerinnen und Lehrer, “teachers, fem. and teachers, masc.”) lead to a higher cognitive inclusion of women (i.e., visibility of women). Some recent studies, however, have also shown that in a professional context word pairs may be associated with lesser status. The present research is the first to investigate both effects within a single paradigm. A cross-linguistic (Italian and German) study with 391 participants shows that word pairs help to avoid a male bias in the gender-typing of professions and increase women's visibility; at the same time, they decrease the estimated salaries of typically feminine professions (but do not affect perceived social status or competence). This potential payoff has implications for language policies aiming at gender-fairness.