Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (1917)
- Conference Proceeding (1098)
- Part of a Book (965)
- Book (446)
- Other (130)
- Part of Periodical (38)
- Report (36)
- Bachelor Thesis (22)
- Doctoral Thesis (22)
- Working Paper (18)
Language
- German (2679)
- English (2010)
- Spanish (11)
- Multiple languages (8)
- Russian (8)
- Portuguese (5)
- Italian (1)
- Polish (1)
- Turkish (1)
- Ukrainian (1)
Keywords
- Digitalisierung (13)
- Sozialarbeit (13)
- Controlling (12)
- Logistik (9)
- Deutschland (8)
- Hochschule für angewandte Wissenschaften Würzburg-Schweinfurt (8)
- Jahresbericht (8)
- Management (7)
- refugees (7)
- Electromobility (6)
Institute
- Fakultät Wirtschaftswissenschaften (747)
- Fakultät Angewandte Sozialwissenschaften (657)
- Fakultät Informatik und Wirtschaftsinformatik (293)
- Fakultät Elektrotechnik (262)
- Fakultät für angewandte Natur- und Geisteswissenschaften (232)
- Fakultät Gestaltung (212)
- Fakultät Wirtschaftsingenieurwesen (174)
- Fakultät Kunststofftechnik und Vermessung (132)
- Technologie TransferZentrum-Elektromobilität (TTZ-EMO) (72)
- Fakultät Maschinenbau (67)
Chlor-alkali electrolysis plays a significant role in Germany's electricity demand, with a share of >2%. It offers a promising avenue for leveraging demand response strategies. In times of escalating electricity prices, load shifting can help to maintain economic competitiveness of domestic industries. This study aims to assess the potential for electricity cost savings and related CO2 emission reductions through optimal load shifting practices for chlor-alkali electrolysis, considering both current and projected future electricity prices. The research employs the mixed-integer energy system modeling framework IRPopt to model and optimize a chlorine value chain under various scenarios. A sensitivity analysis is conducted to identify the primary factors driving electricity cost savings. The findings reveal that, based on the 2019 electricity price distribution (before pandemic and energy crisis), load shifting can yield electricity cost savings of 5.8% and CO2 emission reductions of 2.7%. As the share of variable renewable energy sources increases along with other driving factors, the electricity price spread is projected to rise from 28% in 2019 to an average of 87% in 2040 scenarios. Consequently, electricity cost savings rise up to 22% and CO2 emission reductions up to 10%. The primary drivers behind electricity cost savings include electricity price spreads and the utilization and operating range of the electrolyzer. In addition to the business-level advantages, the resulting decrease in residual load and lower CO2 emissions contribute to the integration of variable renewable energy sources and the achievement of decarbonization targets at the economic level.
Transitioning to a net-zero economy requires a nuanced understanding of homeowners’ decision-making pathways when considering the adoption of Low Carbon Technologies (LCTs). These LCTs present both personal and collective benefits, with positive perceptions critically influencing attitudes and intentions. Our study analyses the relationship between two primary benefits: the household-level financial gain and the broader environmental advantage. Focusing on the German homeowners’ intention to adopt Rooftop Photovoltaic Systems, Energy Efficient Appliances, and Green Electricity Tariffs, we employ Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling to demonstrate that the adoption intention of the LCTs is underpinned by the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Our research also highlights the pivotal role of perceived benefits in shaping attitudes and intentions. Attitudes towards the LCTs are more strongly related to product-specific benefits than affective constructs. In terms of evaluative benefits, environmental benefits exhibit a higher positive association with attitude formation compared to financial benefits. However, this relationship switches as homeowners move through the decision process with the financial benefits of selected LCTs having a consistently higher association with adoption intention. At the same time, financial benefits also positively affect attitudes. Observing this trend across both low- and high-cost LCTs, we recommend that policymakers and businesses enhance homeowners’ awareness of the personal advantages and implement strategies to make these financial benefits more tangible and accessible.
BAG 24.6.2015
(Thema: Annahmeverzug / Schadensersatz wegen Verletzung der Beschäftigungspflicht)
(2024)
Bioprinting provides a powerful tool for regenerative medicine, as it allows tissue construction with a patient’s specific geometry. However, tissue culture and maturation, commonly supported by dynamic bioreactors, are needed. We designed a workflow that creates an implant-specific bioreactor system, which is easily producible and customizable and supports cell cultivation and tissue maturation. First, a bioreactor was designed and different tissue geometries were simulated regarding shear stress and nutrient distribution to match cell culture requirements. These tissues were then directly bioprinted into the 3D-printed bioreactor. To prove the ability of cell maintenance, C2C12 cells in two bioinks were printed into the system and successfully cultured for two weeks. Next, human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) were successfully differentiated toward an adipocyte lineage. As the last step of the presented strategy, we developed a prototype of an automated mobile docking station for the bioreactor. Overall, we present an open-source bioreactor system that is adaptable to a wound-specific geometry and allows cell culture and differentiation. This interdisciplinary roadmap is intended to close the gap between the lab and clinic and to integrate novel 3D-printing technologies for regenerative medicine.
Depressive Störungen und Angststörungen sind bei Kindern und Jugendlichen weit verbreitet. Der vorliegende Beitrag widmet sich der Bedeutung, die die Emoti-onsregulationsfähigkeit der Betroffenen in diesem Zusammenhang spielt. Es zeigt sich, dass als dysfunktional geltenden Emotionsregulationsstrategien die Entste-hung und Aufrechterhaltung von depressiven Störungen und Angststörungen bei Kindern und Jugendlichen bedingen. Spezifische Therapieansätze wie die dialek-tisch-behaviorale Therapie weisen jedoch wirksame Möglichkeiten auf, die Emoti-onsregulationsfähigkeit von Kindern und Jugendlichen positiv zu fördern. Weitere Forschung, vor allem im Bereich der Angststörungen, ist hier anzustreben.
The dramatic pictures of violence on the Polish - Belorussian border are just the latest manifestation of the dehumanization, securitization and externalization of the EU migration management policies. A trend that can be traced to early 2000s has achieved a new level in recent years after a brief opening of EU borders in 2015. The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified these dynamics in different ways and deepened inequalities of the transnational mobility (Lee 2020; Sumba 2021; Afeworki Abay, Kassaye & Kleibl 2022; Matela & Maaza 2022). In addition to physical violence by state and non-state actors along the EU external border, EU migration management employs strategies that condone prolonged exposure of mobile people to death and to a host of human rights violations (Mbembe 2003, 2019; Mayblin & Turner 2020; Mayblin 2016, 2019; Abuya, Krause & Mayblin 2021; Sadeghi 2019). At the same time, civil society members, media representatives and those who attempt to assist mobile people are also increasingly criminalized, exposed to right-extremist violence and targeted by excessive legal, financial and bureaucratic burdens that make their work difficult, if not impossible. Externalization as a central characteristic of EU border management refers to the propounding mechanisms of moving the border forward (Andrews 2021; Getachew 2019; Gutiérrez Rodríguez 2018a, 2018b; Mayblin, 2017; Mayblin, Wake & Kazemi 2019). Outside of the EU, externalization policies construct EU border controls in so-called countries of origin and transit. In this process, EU migration management is fused with foreign policy, international development and international trade mechanisms. These incursions disrupt socioeconomic dynamics and local mobility patterns as far as Iran-Turkey borderlands, West African ECOWAS region or the border between Ethiopia and the Sudan. The internal and external EU migration management developments are inseparable and materialized legacies of colonialism, enduring gender inequalities, politics of citizenship and racialized economies (Andrews 2021; Getachew 2019). This book therefore aims to critically analyze how Social Work and EU migration management regimes co-constitute each other. The here presented book will offer theoretical discussions and practical experiences around the following questions: In which way is Social Work complicit in the EU migration management regime? Where do Social Workers find opportunities to build solidarities, become subversive of the hegemonic structures and work for empowerment? How do Social Workers deal with the increasingly restrictive political, legal and economic environment, in which they engage with mobile people? How can Social Work become more apt to working with people who are at times highly mobile and at times immobilized in remote camps, forests or desert outposts? Moreover, this book espouses the broadest definition of Social Work as a human rights profession and an academic discipline but also as an indigenous way of social assistance and social change (Staub-Bernasconi 2012, 2016; Healy & Link 2011; Kleibl, Lutz & Noyoo 2020). By paying attention to the temporal and spatial aspects of Social Work with mobile people, we explicitly refuse the apolitical, decontextualized view of Social Work as neutral „helping“, instead we plea for critical reflection on the entanglements of Social Work in complex, intersecting power dynamics. Hence, this book seeks to critically analyze how Social Work becomes entangled in categorization of people to make them „legible“ and „visible“ to EU migration management and how Social Work itself is categorized in order to be disciplined as a „helping“ profession and an instrument of the state/EU migration management. We ask how Social Work could be transformed to work in a multiscalar, transnational scale, truly living up to the ambition to employ „glocal“ approach.
The multiple and simultaneous realities of Social Work practice have always been more complex than its theories suggested. The knowledges, desires and perspectives of its addressees are much more nuanced than standardized empirical qualitative and quantitative research methodologies (that inform theorization) could possibly grasp. In consequence, many assumingly universal and evidence-based methods and instruments in Social Work do not lead towards anticipated outcomes that aim to support the social, political, ecological and economic needs of the addressees. Social Work theories in turn often lack the consideration of, under others, race, class and gender subordination and domination effects, which form integral parts of power dynamics between the oppressed and the oppressors at play in the 21st century. This leads to downplaying the need to theorize and support solidarity from below, as well as to strengthen relational accountability between those that want to advance social justice. In addition, structural elements “from above” such as political and welfare systems and development economies do not receive significant attention either. In consequence, many theories do not lead to concepts, approaches and praxis that sufficiently grasp the historical and contemporary situatedness in which Social Work operates.
While there is an evident need for establishing thorough processes of decolonizing Social Work in education, research and practice, there is only a limited number of literature available on the complex decolonization project. It includes the co-edited volume Decolonizing Social Work by Mel Gray, John Coates, Michael Yellow Bird and Tiani Hetherington (2013), Trabajo Social y Descolonialidad, by María Eugenia Hermida and Paula Meschini (2017) or the Routledge Handbook of Postcolonial Social Work, by Tanja Kleibl, Ronald Lutz, Ndangwa Noyoo, Benjamin Bunk, Annika Dittmann and Boitumelo Seepamore (2020). These foundational works contribute immensely to the much-needed discussion on the diversification of Social Work theories and methods, yet their foci cannot possibly attempt to address a full scope to the decolonization of all Social Work dimensions in greater detail. Furthermore, most publications (e.g., Tascón and Ife, 2020; Fortier and Hon-Sing Wong, 2018) focus on theoretical reflections, leaving the important gap regarding the necessary knowledge transfer into practice, research and education still broadly opened.
Since the publication of Linda Tuhiwai Smith's book (1999), Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples, researchers in various disciplines in social and health sciences have increasingly become aware of the importance of adopting decolonial research methodologies. However, the transnational project of decolonization might be challenging and complex to implement in research projects and teaching formats in Social Work. The chapter contributions in this co-edited volume give insight from a broader geopolitical perspective into how established Eurocentric concepts, perceptions, practices, and paradigms in Social Work have been continuously re-assessed and re-nuanced within the last two decades (Tamburro, 2013; Noyoo, 2020; Kleibl et al., 2020; Castro Varela and Mohamed, 2021; Gray et al., 2023; Harms-Smith and Rasool, 2020). Within the broader project of Western academia, one effect of decolonization is challenging the allegedly objective “scientific knowledge, in view of its rigor and instrumental potential, [as] radically different from other ways of knowing, be they lay, popular, practical, commonsensical, intuitive, or religious” (de Sousa Santos, 2018b: 5). Moreover, decolonial concepts such as “epistemic de-linking” (Mignolo, 2007: 450) and “epistemic disobedience” (Mignolo, 2009: 8) are indispensable in unpacking the colonial roots of epistemic violence and foregrounding ‘Epistemologies of the South’ (de Sousa Santos, 2014) in Social Work research in order to establish “a time of epistemological imagination aimed at refounding the political imagination (…) to strengthen the social struggles against domination” (de Sousa Santos, 2018a: 126-127). The continuous problematization of Eurocentric knowledge production (e.g., methodological nationalism, culturalization, westernization) is therefore important for establishing critical dialogues in Social Work. Most importantly, decolonizing university education (Rodríguez, 2018; Mbembe, 2016; Mignolo, 2013; de Sousa Santos, 2017) in general is the first step in order to disrupt the colonial continuity of knowledge production that “operates as an invisible power matrix that is shaping and sustaining asymmetrical power relations between the Global North and the Global South” (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2014: 181). In moving beyond theoretical discussions and reflections, this co-edited volume addresses the essential questions regarding the implementation of decolonial approaches in research methodologies and teaching formats in Social Work. This co-edited volume is therefore an important contribution for critically minded Social Work educators and students who seek to understand the complex structures of the colonial past, the contemporary postcolonial moment as well as to decolonize their teaching, researching, and visions of decolonialized Social Work.
The fact that the coloniality of power and knowledge (Quijano; 2000; Mignolo, 2007, 2011; Grosfoguel, 2013) has only been addressed poorly in Social Work contributes to what Paulo Freire (1970: 12) referred to as “a culture of silence”. A culture of silence exists where those who are oppressed are not heard in society, and where a lack of knowledge about their contexts creates a high risk for the perpetuation of racism, discrimination, and the violent process of ‘blaming the victim’. Research methodologies and teaching formats in Social Work have always been embedded in the colonial archives of Eurocentric knowledge (Quijano; 2000; Mbembe, 2016; Grosfoguel, 2013). As Freire (1970: 5) argues that “The social worker, as much as the educator, is not a neutral agent, either in practice or in action”. In the last decade, Social Work education and research methodologies have been continuously criticized for being complicit in downplaying and silencing the brutality of the colonial project (Harms-Smith and Rasool, 2020; Kleibl et al., 2020; Tamburro, 2013). This includes but not only limited to the ignorance of the social, political, ecological and economic implications of colonial legacies as well as post and neocolonial continuities in the 21st century. In addition, the development of Western political and welfare systems ‘from above’ do not result in significant social change and transformative justice. In consequence, many theories do not lead to concepts, approaches and praxis that sufficiently grasp the historical and contemporary situatedness of coloniality of knowledge and power in which Social Work keeps operating (Afeworki Abay, 2023; Daňková et al., 2024; Kleibl et al., 2024). In response to the continuities of colonial epistemologies and methodologies in Social Work, the chapter contributions in this co-edited volume show the relevance of Pluriversality as one of the various decolonial strategies to unsettle the coloniality of Eurocentric knowledge production (Quijano; 2000; Mignolo, 2007, 2017; Grosfoguel, 2013). One of strategies of decolonizing research methodologies and teaching formats is to universalize and normalize ways of knowing and knowledge production that Eurocentric systems of knowledge portray as ‘not valuable’ or ‘not objective enough’ (Tuck and Yang, 2012; Tlostanova and Mignolo. 2012; Afeworki Abay, 2023). Likewise, an important analytic strategy for decolonizing research methodologies is to draw upon marginalized and Indigenous knowledge systems (Smith, 1999; Tamburro, 2013; Zavala, 2016) that have been to taken-for-granted in the social, political, economic, and environmental discourses in Social Work.
Decolonizing Social Work
(2024)
Over the last three decades, “decolonization” has become an increasingly emergent framework in tracing and addressing the complex mechanisms of coloniality of knowledge and power (Mignolo, 2011; Quijano, 2000). Surprisingly enough, decolonial perspectives have hardly been considered in Social Work education, research and practice (e.g. Harms-Smith & Rasool, 2020; Kleibl et al., 2020; Gray et al., 2016; Tamburro, 2013; Lutz, Sachau, & Stauß, 2017). Even though, there is a growing body of literature that addresses the need for decolonization of Social Work with indigenous people (e.g. Tanemura et al., 2016; Ives & Thaweiakenrat Loft, 2016) or individuals and communities in and from the Global South (e.g. Noyoo, 2020; Kreitzer, 2016; Freire, 1970), many Social Workers in the Global North (both in academia and practice) argue that the need for decolonization does not apply to their work. This is particularly true in countries of the Global North that claim to have had little engagement with colonialism (e.g. Ranta-Tyrkkö, 2011). Historically, much of Social Work theory and practice was developed in the Global North and exported across the globe as a byproduct of colonization and – in the postcolonial era – in form of development aid (Schirilla, 2018). Within the hegemonic discourses, knowledges produced at the peripheries and in the context of social struggles has been delegitimized and rendered invisible. Therefore, Social Work remains dominated by Euro-American perspectives, which oftentimes reproduce epistemic violence (Spivak, 1988). This acknowledgment, then, calls for a critical analysis of Social Work education, research and practice as well. Recent emerging discussions on implementing decolonial approaches in Social Work (Harms-Smith & Rasool, 2020; Tamburro, 2013; Lutz, Kleibl & Neureither, 2021) have drawn the attention to the possibilities of “epistemic disobedience” (Mignolo, 2009: 8). They brought forward Afrocentric approaches to pedagogy (van Wyk 2014; Watson-Vandiver & Wiggan, 2021), pedagogies that centralize the oppressed (Freire, 1970; Kohan, 2021), non-extractivist research approaches and methods that focus on embodied knowledge and corporeal emancipation (de Sousa-Santos, 2018), as well as creating South-South links (Rivera, 2012).
Decolonial Methodologies in Social Work: Foregrounding Pluriversalism in Teaching and Research
(2024)
While decolonial perspectives have continuously been discussed in contemporary academic discourse in Social Work in the last two decades, yet, the complex legacies of colonialism are often left unreflected within methodological and pedagogical conceptualizations in Social Work (Harms-Smith and Rasool, 2020; Tamburro, 2013; Kleibl et al., 2020; Harms-Smith and Afeworki Abay, 2024). With this understanding in mind, it is imperative to critically engage with the growing interest of mainstream discourse on decolonizing research and education in Social Work and as well as to understand the broader project of decolonization as a way of “epistemic de-linking“ (Mignolo, 2007: 450) from colonial thoughts and practices. Decolonial perspectives in Social Work’s knowledge production require a deep look into the core concept of Pluriversality in foregrounding theories, epistemologies and methodologies of the South. According to Boaventura de Sousa Santos (2018), decolonizing theories, epistemologies and methodologies is an asymmetrical and long-term process that requires deep analysis and reflection both in formerly colonized and colonizing regions. As there are only insufficient methodological reflections on these complex topics of “decolonization” in Social Work (see among others: Kleibl et al., 2024), the aim of this book is to go one-step further and put a spotlight on the increasing number of critical teaching formats as well as research projects in Social Work that aim to challenge the current status-quo of coloniality of power, knowledge and being (Quijano, 2007). This co-edited volume provides discussions and experiences with decolonial approaches in research and education of Social Work. It centres methodologies developed in the Global South (de Sousa Santos, 2014; Connell, 2014) in an attempt to decolonize Eurocentrism, as the knowledge produced by subaltern communities and scholars of the global South have been rendered invisible.
Pandemic - Measures and Consequences: Increased Global Inequality and Violations of Human Rights
(2024)
This chapter explores the enduring impact of the global pandemic and its far-reaching consequences. The pandemic disrupted the world, exposing inequalities inherent in globalization and the privileged lifestyles of the Global North. Global inequality, rooted in colonialism and capitalism, persisted, with the pandemic exacerbating disparities. The crisis not only affected health but also strained families and exacerbated gender inequalities. In the Global South, vulnerable populations faced economic hardship and inadequate healthcare. The pandemic intensified the global education crisis, disproportionately impacting girls. Moreover, human rights violations became apparent as states and institutions failed to meet their obligations. Structural inequalities and unequal access to healthcare underscored the need for a more comprehensive human rights approach in social work. Social work must address structural inequalities, prioritize community-based solutions, and advocate for international solidarity and new legal mechanisms to protect human rights in crises. It must also confront its colonial past and decolonize curricula. As we navigate ongoing crises, social work must take on a transformative role, working alongside marginalized communities to advocate for a more just and equitable society.