Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (9)
- Book (2)
- Article (1)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Other (1)
- Report (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (15)
Keywords
- covid crisis (1)
- economic growth (1)
- economic policy (1)
- scarcity (1)
- well-being (1)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (14)
- Fakultät IuI (1)
- Institut für Duale Studiengänge (1)
- LearningCenter (1)
- Präsidium Hochschule Osnabrück (1)
Der vorliegende Leitfaden wurde von der AG „Diversität in Studium und Lehre“ im Rahmen des hochschulweiten Strategieprozesses im Bereich „Studium und Lehre“ erstellt. Vor dem Hintergrund des im Grundsatzpapier „Das Gute besser machen: Strategie 2023 für Studium und Lehre“ (2018) behandelten Querschnittsthemas „Diversität“ sollte zum einen ein gemeinsames Verständnis von Diversität erarbeitet und zum anderen Handlungsoptionen für die Lehre gebündelt werden. Der Leitfaden enthält demnach sowohl theoretische Überlegungen zum Diversitätsverständnis als auch zahlreiche konkrete Tipps und didaktische Anregungen für eine diversitätsorientierte Lehre. Die Materialien/Methoden, auf die im Leitfaden verwiesen wird, sind in einer separaten Materialsammlung/Toolbox zu finden. Die AG wurde vom Vizepräsidenten für Studium und Lehre, Prof. Dr. Alexander Schmehmann, mit der Erstellung der Handlungsempfehlungen im April 2019 beauftragt. Sie setzt sich aus Mitgliedern aller Statusgruppen und Fakultäten zusammen.
The Corona pandemic confronted societies with several unexpected constraints that had the effect of making certain goods much scarcer than before. Withdrawal from Russian oil and gas supplies has a similar effect. Carbon abatement can also be seen as a deliberate choice to make certain goods scarc-er than they actually are. These parallels suggests that it may be worthwhile to take a close look at societies’ responses to all three challenges. This paper makes an attempt to synthetize empirical and theoretical insights regarding these scarcity shocks from a well-being perspective, i.e. replacing the prevalent welfare economic focus on production and consumption with a focus on sustainable well-being.
Taking the case of Germany, it will be argued that the observed responses to all three challenges reflect a focus on maintaining incomes and production and that therefore these responses risk being detrimental to sustainable wellbeing and even to economic stability. This is particularly relevant if carbon abatement requires not only transient material sacrifices but lasting and significant reduc-tions of consumption.
It will be argued that the impact of these new scarcities will be much less problematic in a society that acknowledges the priority of sustainable wellbeing over production and consumption measures. Such a society would still need to incur material sacrifices, but these need not translate into a loss of wellbeing if economic conditions and social norms adapt. This will also be more sustainable not only in terms of ecological impact, but also in terms of debt, inflation and inequality.
Hedonism
(2009)
Keynes’ Grandchildren and Easterlin’s Paradox. What Is Keeping Us from Reducing Our Working Hours?
(2019)
In 1930 Keynes famously predicted that 100 years later-i.e. in 2030-the “economic problem” would be solved and we would be living in an “age of leisure and of abundance” working only 3 h a day. In the same text, Keynes stated that there are absolute and relative needs (“in the sense that we feel them only if their satisfaction lifts us above, makes us feel superior to, our fellows”), but he thought that relative needs are of minor importance. Richard Easterlin’s work, on the other hand, suggests that relative needs are pervasive and that wellbeing depends much more on one’s relative income than Keynes once thought.
It will be argued in this text that Richard Easterlin’s findings, in spite of proving Keynes off the mark in his understatement of relative needs, strengthens the case for working time reductions: the larger the proportion of goods subject to the relative-income effect, the greater are the benefits of working fewer hours. Perhaps the main explanation for why we are still sticking to the 40-h work-week is that the Easterlin paradox has not been widely understood yet.
Thirty years ago, the Fourth King of Bhutan famously proclaimed that ―Gross National Happiness is more important than Gross National Product, thereby setting Bhutan on a holistic development path. Following this historic declaration, Bhutan developed a Gross National Happiness (GNH) Index and screening tool to evaluate all new policies, proclaiming that:
―Gross National Happiness measures the quality of a country in more holistic way [than GNP] and believes that the beneficial development of human society takes place when material and spiritual development occur side by side to complement and reinforce each other.
In July 2011, 68 nations joined Bhutan in co-sponsoring its UN General Assembly resolution on ―Happiness: Towards a Holistic Approach to Development.