text:
Bonus Ep1 Deliberation Culture Context - Jensen Sass
This is a the first episode in a bonus series of Real Democracy Now! a podcast talking about Deliberation, Culture and Context.
In this series I speak with a number of people who participated in the Centre's recent conference which brought together scholars from around the world to examine the different forms, meanings, and significance associated to deliberation in various cultures and contexts. A copy of the conference program is available here.
In this episode I'm speaking with Jensen Sass one of the conference organisers. Jensen is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance.
In future episodes in this bonus series I'll be speaking to people who presented at the conference about their papers, as well as some of those who were on the final roundtable reflecting on the conference overall. These episodes will be released in early 2018. I hope you'll join me then.
3.4 Electoral reform with Dr Alan Renwick
Welcome to episode four of season three of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. This episode is also the 43rd episode of the podcast and the first one since the first birthday of the podcast last week. To help celebrate the podcast's birthday I'd appreciate it if you could share either your favourite episode of the podcast or the podcast generally with someone you think would find it interesting.
Today's episode is about electoral reform with Dr Alan Renwick, Deputy Director of the Constitution Unit at UCL in London. Alan's expertise lies mainly in the areas of electoral systems, referendums, and other modes of engaging the public in decision-making processes, such as citizens' assemblies. His research is comparative: besides the UK, his recent projects have included all European democracies as well as New Zealand, Japan, and Canada. In addition to numerous journal articles, chapters and reports he is the author of two books about electoral reform: A Citizens' Guide to Electoral Reform and The Politics of Electoral Reform: Changing the Rules of Democracy.
Thanks for joining me today. In the next episode I'll be talking with Professor Pippa Norris about electoral integrity.
I am currently putting together interviews about electoral systems around the world and so far I've interviewed people about India, South and Southern Africa, Australia, Asia and the South Pacific and New Zealand.
I would also like to interview someone about electoral systems in Latin America but have not been successful in finding the right person to do this. If you know someone who you could fill this gap please introduce them to me via email at nivek.thompson@uts.edu.au
3.3 Legislature by Lot with Professor John Gastil
Welcome to episode 3 in Season 3 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. Season 3 is about elections, electoral systems, electoral reform and alternatives. In this episode I'm speaking with Professor John Gastil. John is a Professor in the Communication Arts and Sciences and Political Science at the Pennsylvania State University as well as a Senior Scholar in the McCourtney Institute for Democracy. He studies political deliberation and group decision making across a range of contexts.
Recently John and Erik Olin Wright, as part of the Real Utopias project, held a three-day workshop called Legislature by Lot. Thanks to David Schecter I was able to interview John shortly after this workshop to learn more about what was discussed. A copy of the agenda for the workshop which includes the attendees is available with the Show Notes for this episode.
John described this workshop as 'a deliberation about deliberation'.
John spoke about
the origins of the Legislature by Lot workshop [1:32]
the different ways to implement sortition (random selection) [3:54]
some of the arguments in favour of a legislature selected by lot [5:44]
different models of sortition [7:40]
responding to criticisms of legislature by lot [10:11]
how to design an oversight body to support a legislature selected by lot [14:10]
the prospect of institutional change and transition strategies [18:34]
moving the agenda of using sortition forward [23:43]
how much work is happening around the world to test and promote the use of sortition [28:35]
what representation and accountability means for bodies selected by sortition [30:29]
deliberation, consensus, contention and voting [34:35 and 38:50]
what the workshop agreed on [43:18]
what might happen after the workshop: building links between researchers and practitioners [45:34]
responses to critiques of empowered mini-publics [49:35]
when the book arising from the workshop will be published [53:07]
John mentioned the work of the Sortition Foundation, the newDemocracy Foundation to promote the use of sortition.
Thank you for joining me today. In the next episode I will be speaking to Dr Alan Renwick about electoral reform around the world [54:11].
I hope you'll join me then.
Pdf: Legislature by Lot agenda
3.2 Patterns of democracy with Prof Lijphart
Welcome to episode 2 of Season 3 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. Season 3 is looking at elections, electoral systems, electoral reform and alternatives.
In today's episode, I'm talking with Professor Arend Lijphart about his work identifying two main categories of democracies which relate in part to their electoral systems.
Arend is a Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of California. His field of specialisation is comparative politics. He is the author or editor of more than a dozen books, with the two editions of his Patterns of Democracy from 1984 and 2012 being perhaps his most well-known and the subject of our conversation today.
I spoke with Professor Lijphart about
How he came to devote his life to the detailed empirical analysis of democracy in multiple countries around the world [1.10]
The relationship between his empirical work and his theory around patterns of democracy [5.30]
The variables he uses to demonstrate that consensual democracies outperform majoritarian democracies [18:35 ]
Criticisms that his approach does not apply to developing non-Western democracies [28.10]
In the next episode I'll be talking to Professor John Gastil, a Professor in the Department of Communication Arts & Sciences at Penn State College of Liberal Arts, about a workshop he recently co-hosted with Erik Olin Wright, a Professor of Sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, titled Legislature by Lot [32.37]
3.1 Electoral Systems with Professor David Farrell
Thank you for joining me in episode 1 of Season 3 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. Season 3 of the podcast is looking at Elections, electoral systems, electoral reform and alternatives. As you can imagine this is a huge area to cover and I would like to thank Anika Gauja from the University of Sydney who helped me develop a broad structure for this Season.
I'm going to start looking at a few areas at a high level before moving into more detail in areas such as electoral systems around the world, negative campaigning and populism, compulsory vs voluntary voting, the various institutions and actors involved and alternatives to elections, where I'll look at sortition and digital democracy.
In today's episode, I'm talking to Professor David Farrell. David is a Professor of Politics in the School of Politics and International Relations at the University College Dublin. He is a specialist in the study of parties, elections, electoral systems and members of parliament. His current research focuses on the role of deliberation in constitutional reform processes.
I asked David
How would you define the term 'electoral system'? [1:45]
How do you approach comparing so many different approaches to electoral systems around the world? [4:20]
How do you characterise different families of electoral systems? [5.00]
Could you provide an overview of the key elements of different electoral systems? [6:00]
How can everyday people evaluate the different options? [15:05]
Are there electoral reforms that warrant serious consideration that are still only theoretical i.e. they haven't been used anywhere? [20:25]
What do you think about the idea of using sortition to select a house of review? [22:15]
If you were asked to re-design the Irish electoral system what would it look like? [25:25]
Thank you for joining me today. In next week's episode I'll be talking to Emeritus Professor Arend Lijphartabout his lifetime's work. [29:40]
2.18 One change to democracy, part 4
Welcome to episode 18 in Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. This episode is part 4 of the series where my guests share their views in response to the question: If you could change one thing about our system of democracy what would it be? And it is also the last episode in Season 2 about representative democracy. I'll be taking a break to put together Season 3 looking at Elections, voting and alternatives.
First up let's hear from Professor Nadia Urbinati's response to this question. Nadia is is a Professor of Political Theory and Hellenic Studies at Columbia University. She is a political theorist who specialises in modern and contemporary political thought and the democratic and anti-democratic traditions. I spoke with Nadia about the development of representative democracy in episode 2 of Season 2.
Next is Dr Simon Longstaff is the Executive Director of the Ethics Centre here in Sydney Australia. Simon was my guest in episode 17 of Season 2 talking about the relationship between democracy and ethics.
Lewis Adams who was a juror on the Infrastructure Victoria Citizens' Jury in 2015 and a guest on Episode 17 in Season 1.
Nancy Thomas is the Director of the Institute for Democracy and Higher Education in the Jonathan M Tisch College of Civic Life at Tufts College. My interview with Nancy will be published in a later season of the podcast.
Helene Landemore is Associate Professor of Political Science at Yale University. Her research interests encompass democratic theory, theories of justice, Enlightenment thinkers, and the philosophy of social sciences.
Jean-Paul Gagnon from the University of Canberra. Jean-Paul is a philosopher of democracy specialising in democratic theory. I spoke with Jean-Paul in Episode 6 in Season 2 about his work identifying the many adjectives associated with democracy.
Harm van Dijk is one of the founders of the G1000 in the Netherlands. I spoke with Harm in Episode 15 in Season 1 about the design of the G1000 there.
The next person to answer the question is Professor James Fishkin who holds the Janet M. Peck Chair in International Communication at Stanford University where he is Professor of Communication, Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center for Deliberative Democracy. I spoke with Professor Fishkin about deliberative polling in episode 16 in Season 1.
Andy Holdup who was a member of the Citizens' Assembly South in Southhampton in the UK in 2015 and also a guest on episode 17 in Season 1.
And finally, we hear from Benjamin Isakhan who is Associate Professor of Politics and Policy Studies and Founding Director of POLIS, a research network for Politics and International Relations in the Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalization at Deakin University, Australia. I spoke with Ben in episode 4 of Season 2 about non-Western democracy.
Thank you for joining me for Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast, looking at how representative democracy developed and how it operates. I'll be back with Season 3 on Elections, voting and alternatives in September 2017. If you haven't yet subscribed to the podcast, I'd suggest you do that now so that when Season 3 starts you'll automatically have those episodes downloaded onto your podcast app.
2.17 Democracy and ethics with Dr Simon Longstaff
Welcome to episode 17 in Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. Today I'm talking with Dr Simon Longstaff the Executive Director of The Ethics Centre, based in Sydney, Australia.
Simon began his working life on Groote Eylandt (Anindilyakwa) in the Northern Territory where he worked in the Safety Department of the then BHP subsidiary, GEMCO. He is proud of his kinship ties with members of the island's Indigenous community. Following a period studying law in Sydney and a brief career teaching in Tasmania, Simon undertook postgraduate studies in philosophy as a Member of Magdalene College, Cambridge. Simon commenced his work as the first Executive Director of The Ethics Centre in 1991. Simon is a Fellow of CPA Australia and in June 2016, was appointed an Honorary Professor at the Australian National University – based at the National Centre for Indigenous Studies. Formerly serving as the inaugural President of The Australian Association for Professional & Applied Ethics, Simon serves on a number of boards and committees across a broad spectrum of activities. He was formerly a Fellow of the World Economic Forum.
The Ethics Centre (previously known as St James Ethics Centre) is an independent not-for-profit organisation that has been working for over 25 years to help people navigate the complexity and uncertainty of difficult ethical issues. The Ethics Centre delivers innovative programs, services and experiences, designed to bring ethics to the centre of professional and personal life, and align actions with values and principles.
I speak with Simon about how democracy and ethics interact, both ideally and in practice. Simon argues that "any divorce between ethics and politics completely destroys the capacity of democracy and particularly representative democracy to operate as it ought to do."
The next episode of Real Democracy Now! a podcast will be the last in Season 2 and will be part 4 of the 'one change to democracy' set.
After that, I'll be taking a break to put together Season 3, which is all about elections, voting and alternatives.
2.16 Democracy and capitalism with Professors Morlino Merkel Fung and Associate Professor Näsström
Welcome to episode 16 in Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. In this episode, I talk to a few of my previous guests about the relationship between representative democracy and capitalism. Some common themes emerge, specifically around the power of capital challenging the power of democratically elected governments and the problem of growing inequality and the erosion of the welfare state and social democracy.
My first guest is Professor Wolfgang Merkel who spoke about his paper Is Capitalism compatible with Democracy?
Professor Merkel is the Director of the Research Unit: Democracy and Democratization at the WZB Social Science Research Centre Berlin, as well as heading up the Centre for Global Constitutionalism and a number of other projects. He has written widely on democracy, democratisation, social democracy and democracy & capitalism to name but a few in academic and non-academic publications. Professor Merkel is a co-project leader of the Democracy Barometer.
Next, I spoke with Professor Leonardo Morlino who suggests that whilst we can legitimately talk about alternate systems to democracy asking about alternatives to capitalism is a rhetorical question.
Professor Morlino is a professor of political science and director of the Research Center on Democracies and Democratizations at LUISS, Rome. Prof. Morlino is a leading specialist in comparative politics with expertise on Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, and the phenomenon of democratization.
My third guest is Associate Professor Sofia Näsström who spoke about a paper she wrote with Sara Kalm from Lund University, titled A democratic critique of precarity in which they identify precarity as 'which you identify as the material and psychological vulnerability resulting from neo-liberal economic reforms.'
Associate Professor Näsström is from the Department of Government, Uppsala University in Sweden. She works in the field of political theory, with a particular focus on issues related to democracy, constituent power, the people, the right to have rights, representation, freedom and precarity.
And finally, I spoke with Professor Archon Fung about the relationship between representative democracy and free-market capitalism, and also about his work around workplace democracy. I hope to look at workplace democracy in more detail in a later season of the podcast.
Professor Fung is the Ford Foundation Professor of Democracy and Citizenship in the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. His research explores policies, practices, and institutional designs that deepen the quality of democratic governance. He focuses on public participation, deliberation, and transparency. He co-directs the Transparency Policy Project and leads democratic governance programs of the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at the Kennedy School.
In the next episode of Real Democracy Now! a podcast I'll be talking with Dr Simon Longstaff the Executive Director of the Ethics Centre here in Australia about ethics and democracy. He touches on democracy and capitalism too. I hope you'll join me then.
Thank you for joining me in episode 15 in Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast.
I ask all of my guests two questions:
what for them is the essence of a real democracy? and
if they could change one thing about our system of democracy what would it be?
This episode is the third episode where I've put together a range of my guests' answers to the question:
If you could change one thing about our system of democracy, what would it be?
We are very near the end of Season 2 - only three episodes to go and I will soon be starting interviews for Season 3 about elections, voting and alternatives.
I intend to continue to ask all of my guests their view on what is the essence of a real democracy.
I'm thinking of replacing the 'one change' question from Season 3 onwards and would appreciate your ideas on a new question.
Please send your suggestions either via email to nivek@realdemocracynow.com.au or let me know via Twitter or Facebook. I'll be starting the interviews for Season 3 soon and would like to have the new question ready for those interviews.
First up we hear from Professor Gerry Stoker who was part of episode 12 in Season 2 talking about the democratic deficit. Gerry is Professor of Governance within Social Sciences: Politics and International Relations at the University of Southampton. He is also the Centenary Professor of Governance in the Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis at the University of Canberra. In this episode, Gerry outlines both what his research says about what citizens would like changed as well as sharing his views.
The next person is Dr Roslyn Fullerwho was my guest on episode 2 in Season 2 talking about the role of direct democracy in ancient Athens.Roslyn is a Canadian-Irish academic and columnist, specializing in public international law, and the impact of technological innovation on democracy.She'd like to see quite dramatic change, although she does recognise it may take time.
Up next is Max Hardy who was a guest in Season 1 episode 11 talking about facilitating deliberative mini-publics in Australia. Max is the Principal at Max Hardy Consulting where he works with leaders and organisations to achieve results through collaboration. Not surprisingly Max would like to see citizens involved more directly in decision-making.
Carolyn Lukensmeyerwas also a guest in Season 1 episode 13 talking about her work with America Speaks. Carolyn is currently the Executive Director of the National Institute for Civil Discourse, an organisation in the United States that works to reduce political dysfunction and incivility in the political system. She identifies two changes, both institutional, that she would like to see.
Ben McPeek shared his experience as a member of the Residents' Reference Panel for the Davenport Community Rail Overpass project in episode 17 of Season 1. He identifies the need to respect expertise.
Caroline Victor was a member of the Dogs and Cats Citizens' Jury in South Australia and was also part of episode 17 in Season 1. She would like democracy to make more use of technology.
I first spoke with Didier Caluwaertsin episode 14 in Season 1 about the G1000 in Belgium.Didier is an Assistant Professor of Public Policy at the VUB. He would like to set up systems which support a long-term focus in decision-making.
Emily Jenke shared her experiences designing and facilitating deliberative mini-publics in South Australia in episode 10 of Season 1. Emily is a co-CEO of Democracy Co a consultancy focused on helping people come together to consider complex issues and make lasting decisions. She identifies two changes both of which are structural.
And finally, Professor Janette Hartz-Karp would I spoke with in episode 5 of Season 1 about her work in Western Australia designing and managing large deliberative mini-publics. Janette is a Professor in the Sustainability Policy Unit at Curtin University in Western Australia. Janette would like to see much more co-decision making.
Thank you for joining me today. In the next episode of Real Democracy Now! a podcast I'll be talking to a number of people about the relationship between representative democracy and capitalism. I hope you'll join me then.
2.Bonus Democratic deficit, a mismatch between expectations & performance plus challenges with Prof Pippa Norris
Welcome to this bonus episode in Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. Season 2 is about representative democracy and this episode is about the democratic deficit.
In episodes 12 and 13 of Season 2 I spoke to a range of academics about the democratic deficit arising from declining levels of trust and structural aspects of our current system of representative democracy.
Today I talk with Professor Pippa Norris about the democratic deficit arising from the gap between people's expectations of democracy and their perception of its performance.
Pippa is the Paul F. McGuire Lecturer in Comparative Politics at Harvard University where she has taught for two decades. She is also ARC Laureate Fellow and Professor of Government and International Relations at the University of Sydney. She is a political scientist focusing on democracy and development, public opinion and elections, political communications, and gender politics. She directs The Electoral Integrity Project, a multimillion dollar six-year research project with a team based at Sydney and Harvard.
She has published almost forty books, two of which are particularly relevant to my discussion with her today Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Governance, published in 1999 and Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited, published in 2011. She continues to work in this area and she is currently writing a new book Democratic Deficits: Rising Aspirations, Negative News or Failing Performance?.
Thank you for joining me for this bonus episode. I will be talking to Pippa again in Season 3 about The Electoral Integrity Project.
2.14 Citizen satisfaction with democracy with A/Prof Quinton Mayne
In Episode 14 of Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast I'm talking with Quinton Mayne, Associate Professor of Public Policy in the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation in the John F Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. Quinton received his Ph.D. in Politics from Princeton University. His dissertation, entitled The Satisfied Citizen: Participation, Influence, and Public Perceptions of Democratic Performance, won the American Political Science Association's 2011 Ernst B. Haas Best Dissertation Award in European Politics as well as the 2011 Best Dissertation Award in Urban Politics. Mayne's research and teaching interests lie at the intersection of comparative and urban politics. He is particularly interested in how the design and reform of democratic political institutions affect how citizens think and act politically.
I first came across Quinton early in my own PhD studies, finding his dissertation online and being very taken with the idea that satisfaction with democracy could be demonstrably increased by devolving power and authority to local government. In this episode Quinton talks about States of Satisfaction a book he is writing based on his PhD research as well as other research he is undertaking with Associate Professor Armen Hakhverdian looking at the impact of ideological congruence on citizen satisfaction and with Professor Brigitte Geißel to develop an approach for including citizens in the evaluation of democratic quality.
Thank you for joining me today. The next episode of Real Democracy Now! a podcast will be the third episode in the 'One change to democracy' series where you'll hear from a range of my guests answering the question 'if you could change one thing about democracy what would it be?' I hope you'll join me then.
2.13 Democratic deficit , structural aspects with Professors Urbinati, Hindess, Merkel and Morlino plus Dr Fuller & A/Prof Isakhan
Welcome to Episode 13 of Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. In today's episode, we are talking at the democratic deficit again, this time focusing more on structural aspects of democracy.
First up I talk to Professor Nadia Urbinati. Nadia is a Professor of Political Theory and Hellenic Studies at Columbia University. She is a political theorist who specialises in modern and contemporary political thought and the democratic and anti-democratic traditions. Nadia has written extensively on democracy including two books: Representative Democracy: Principles and Genealogy, Democracy Disfigured, and Mill on Democracy: From the Athenian Polis to Representative Government.
I first spoke to Nadia in episode 2 of Season 2 of the podcast where she spoke about the origins and components of representative democracy. Today Nadia talks about the democracy deficit as well as her book Democracy Disfigured, where she identifies three types of democratic disfigurement: the unpolitical, the populist and the plebiscitarian.
My second guest is Emeritus Professor Barry Hindess. Barry is Emeritus Professor in the School of Social Sciences at the Australian National University. Like many senior academics he has published more than he cares to remember, including Discourses of Power: from Hobbes to Foucault, Governing Australia: studies in contemporary rationalities of government (with Mitchell Dean), Corruption and Democracy in Australia, Us and them: elites and anti-elitism in Australia (with Marian Sawer)and papers on neo-liberalism, liberalism and empire and the temporalizing of difference.
I came across Barry's 2002 paper Deficit by Design early in my PhD studies and it was my introduction to the idea that the structure of representative democracy was itself one of the key limitations for the system of democracy. Barry's argument is "that the problem of democratic deficit is in fact the normal condition of the institutions of representative government… [concluding that] democratic deficit is an integral part of its design." Barry is now retired so I am very grateful that he made the time to talk with me for this episode.
My third guest is Professor Wolfgang Merkel, who is the Director of the Research Unit: Democracy and Democratization at the WZB Social Science Research Centre Berlin, as well as heading up the Centre for Global Constitutionalism and a number of other projects. He has written widely on democracy, democratisation, social democracy and democracy & capitalism to name but a few in academic and non-academic publications. Professor Merkel is a co-project leader of the Democracy Barometer. This project developed an instrument to assess the quality of democracy in 30 established democracies and was the focus of my discussion with Professor Merkel in episode 2. 3
My fourth guest is Professor Leonardo Morlino who is a professor of political science and director of the Research Center on Democracies and Democratizations at LUISS, Rome. Prof. Morlino is a leading specialist in comparative politics with expertise on Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, and the phenomenon of democratization. Professor Morlino has been part of a few other episodes - episode 2.3 explaining his analytical approach to evaluating democracy, episode 2.12 about trust and the democratic deficit and he will be on a future episode talking about the relationship between representative democracy and capitalism.
My fifth guest is Dr Roslyn Fuller, a Canadian-Irish academic and columnist, specialising in public international law, and the impact of technological innovation on democracy. Her latest book Beasts and Gods: How Democracy Changed Its Meaning and Lost Its Purpose explores the flaws of representative democracy and how they could be addressed through the application of ancient Athenian principles of demokratia (people power). Her work has appeared, among others, in OpenDemocracy, The Nation, The Toronto Star, Salon and The Irish Times, as well as in many scholarly journals. She is currently a Research Associate at Waterford Institute of Technology and founding member of the Solonian Democracy Institute.
Roslyn was also my guest in episode 2.2 talking about her research on democracy in ancient Athens and how we might apply Athenian direct today. Like Nadia Urbinati, Roslyn is concerned about the impact of money on democracy.
And finally, we hear from Associate Professor Ben Isakhan who is Associate Professor of Politics and Policy Studies and Founding Director of POLIS, a research network for Politics and International Relations in the Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalization at Deakin University, Australia. He is also Adjunct Senior Research Associate, in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Johannesburg, South Africa and an Associate of the Sydney Democracy Network at the University of Sydney, Australia. Ben is the author of Democracy in Iraq: History, Politics, Discourse and the editor of six books including The Secret History of Democracy, and The Edinburgh Companion to the History of Democracy: From Pre-History to Future Possibilities. Ben was my guest on episode 2. 4 talking about non-Western democracy. Today he talks about the challenges to "brand democracy."
Thanks for joining me today. In the next episode of Real Democracy Now! a podcast I will be talking to Quinton Mayne, an Associate Professor of Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University about his research on satisfaction with democracy. I hope you'll join me then.
2.12 Democratic deficit, trust and stealth democracy with Professors Stoker, Warren, and Morlino
Welcome to Episode 12 of Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. In today's episode, we are talking at the democratic deficit, focusing on trust and the concept of stealth democracy.
First up I talk to Professor Gerry Stoker at his research into trust and democracy as well as the concept of stealth democracy.
Gerry is Professor of Governance within Social Sciences: Politics and International Relations at the University of Southampton. He is also the Centenary Professor of Governance in the Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis at the University of Canberra. Professor Stoker's main research interests are in governance, democratic politics, local and regional governance, urban politics, public participation and public service reform. He has authored or edited over 20 books and published over 70 refereed articles or chapters in books.
My second guest is Professor Mark Warren who I spoke to in episode 2.7 about his problem-based approach to democratic theory. In today's episode, he talks about the lack of trust is at the foundation of democracy.
Mark is the Harold and Dorrie Merilees Chair in the Study of Democracy in the Department of Political Science at the University of British Columbia where he established the Centre for the Study of Democratic Institutions. His current research interests fall within the field of democratic theory. He is especially interested in new forms of citizen participation, new forms of democratic representation, the relationship between civil society and democratic governance, and the corruption of democratic relationships.
And finally, I talk with Professor Leonardo Morlino about trust in democracy and the possibility of global democracy. Professor Morlino was part of episode 2.3 explaining his analytical approach to evaluating democracy.
Leonardo is a professor of political science and director of the Research Center on Democracies and Democratizations at LUISS, Rome. Prof. Morlino is a leading specialist in comparative politics with expertise on Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, and the phenomenon of democratization.
Thanks for joining me today. In the next episode of Real Democracy Now! a podcast I will continue to look at the democratic deficit, this time from a structural angle. I hope you'll join me then.
2.11 If you could change one thing about democracy, part 2
In episode 1.9 we heard from a number of the guests I interviewed in Season 1 (about deliberative mini-publics) on their view of the essence of a real democracy. And in episode 2. 5 we heard a range of ideas for 'one change to democracy'. Today is another episode where guests share their idea for that one change (sometimes two) to our system of democracy.
I've found the answers people have given to this question fascinating. As I mentioned last time, sometimes people want changes that directly relate to their area of interest and other things they identify an important change in a completely different part of our democratic system.
First up we hear from Peter MacLeod from MASS LBP in Toronto Canada. I interviewed Peter in episode 1.6 about MASS LBP's work designing and delivering Citizen Reference Panels.
Next is Titus Alexander from Democracy Matters in the UK. Titus was part of episode 1.10 where he talked about the facilitation process for the two UK Citizens' Assemblies.
In episode 1.3 I spoke with the Premier of South Australia, Jay Weatherill about why he supports deliberative mini-publics.
Professor Brigitte Geißel from Goethe University in Frankfurt was part of episode 1.18 discussing how she approaches evaluating deliberative mini-publics.
Next is Professor Leonardo Morlino from LUISS in Rome who was part of episode 2.3 talking about how to evaluate representative democracy.
Also in episode 2.3, talking about how to evaluate representative democracy was Professor Wolfgang Merkel from WZB in Berlin.
Next is Zelalem Sirna from Ethiopia who is a PhD student in Portugal. Zelalem was part of episode 2.4 about non-western democracy.
Professor Mark Warren from the University of British Columbia explained his problem-based approach to democratic theory in episode 2.7.
Professor Archon Fung from Harvard University spoke about pragmatic democracy in episode 2.8.
And finally, Associate Professor Sofia Näsström from Uppsala University in Sweden was my guest on episode 2.9 talking about representation and her upcoming book The Spirit of Democracy.
Thank you for joining me today. In the next two episodes of Real Democracy Now! a podcast I'll taking to a number of people about what isn't working so well in representative democracy, often referred to as the democratic deficit. I hope you'll join me then.
2.10 Monitory democracy with Professor John Keane
Welcome to episode 10 of Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! a podcast. Today my guest is Professor John Keane.
John is Professor of Politics at the University of Sydney and at the Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin. He is also the co-founder and director of the Sydney Democracy Network. He is renowned globally for his creative thinking about democracy and is the author of the Life and Death of Democracy as well writing 'Democracy Field Notes' for the Conversation.
Today I talk with Professor Keane about his book The Life and Death of Democracy and in particular the concept of 'monitory democracy' which he develops in this book based on over 10 years empirical research into the history and practices of democracy.
Thank you for joining me today. In next week's episode you'll be hearing from a range of my guests, answering the question 'if you could change one thing about democracy what would it be?' I hope you'll join me then.
2.9 Representation and the Spirit of Democracy with Sofia Näsström
Welcome to episode 9 in season 2 of Real Democracy Now! A podcast.
In today's episode, I'm talking to Associate Professor Sofia Näsström from the Department of Government, at the Uppsala University in Sweden. Sofia works in the field of political theory, with a particular focus on issues related to democracy, constituent power, the people, the right to have rights, representation, freedom and precarity. She is currently working on a monograph entitled The Spirit of Democracy: Thinking Democracy beyond the Nation-State.
Sofia is a democratic theorist and I talk with her about who is being represented in representative democracies, the difference between democratic and non-democratic representation and her work identifying the spirit of democracy.
Sofia will also be part of a later episode considering the relationship between democracy and capitalism. In next week's episode, I will be move from considering theory by taking an 'empirical turn' with Professor John Keane talking his work on monitory democracy. I hope you'll join me then.
2.8 Pragmatic democracy and saving democracy with Professor Archon Fung
Today I'm speaking with Professor Archon Fung. Professor Fung is the Ford Foundation Professor of Democracy and Citizenship in the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
His research explores policies, practices, and institutional designs that deepen the quality of democratic governance. He focuses upon public participation, deliberation, and transparency. He co-directs the Transparency Policy Project and leads democratic governance programs of the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at the Kennedy School.
I talk to Professor Fung about the concept of 'pragmatic democracy' which he describes as being focused on outcomes and then looking at different approaches to democracy to determine which ones will get us closer to those outcomes. In some ways, this approach is similar to the problem-based approach described by Professor Warren in the last episode. He also expands on his article Our desperate need to save US democracy from ourselves from December 2016.
We'll be hearing from Professor Fung later in this season when I pull together different perspectives on democracy and capitalism, as well as in Season 4 Between Election Democracy where his work on empowered participation is particularly relevant.
In next week's episode, I speak with Associate Professor Sofia Nasstrom about her theoretical work developing the concept of 'the spirit of democracy'. I hope you'll join me then.
2.7 A problem-based approach to democratic theory with Professor Mark Warren
Today I'm speaking with Professor Mark Warren. Mark is the Harold and Dorrie Merilees Chair in the Study of Democracy in the Department of Political Science at the University of British Columbia where he established the Centre for the Study of Democratic Institutions.
His current research interests fall within the field of democratic theory. He is especially interested in new forms of citizen participation, new forms of democratic representation, the relationship between civil society and democratic governance, and the corruption of democratic relationships. I'm talking with Mark about, amongst other things, his latest paper entitled A Problem-Based Approach to Democratic Theory.
In this paper, Mark proposes that we focus on a democratic system which delivers three functions:
empowered inclusion
collective will formation and
the ability to make collective decisions.
He notes that different democratic practices are better at delivering some of these than others and so we should be looking a mix of practices to complement each other and deliver all three functions. He proposes supplementing and layering innovations on top of electoral democracy to create stronger democracies.
Thank you for joining me today. In next week's episode, I will be talking to Professor Archon Fung about pragmatic democracy and how we might save democracy from ourselves. I hope you'll join me then.
2.6 Democracy with adjectives, Jean-Paul Gagnon
Today I'm talking with Assistant Professor Jean-Paul Gagnon from the University of Canberra. Jean-Paul is a philosopher of democracy specialising in democratic theory.
Jean-Paul's research into democracy has three areas of focus. The first, which I am talking with him about today, is an ongoing empirical effort to catalogue democracy's adjectives and to inquire about what knowing these adjectives may come to mean or be used for. The second is to continue contributing to the theory of non-human democracy by trying to draw lessons for human democracies from the practices of non-human others. The third is to contribute to globalising the history of democracy from a democratic theory perspective.
In later seasons of the podcast, I'll be looking more closely at different adjectives and democracy, in particular, those adjectives which aim to describe or prescribe what might be considered better or improved forms of democracy.
In the meantime Season 2 is focused on representative democracy and next week I speak to Professor Mark Warren about his work developing an alternative to different models of democracy. Mark has developed a concept of 'problem-based democracy' where his focus is on the basic functions a democracy needs to fulfil. He sees this approach as a way to 'expand our democratic imagination.' I hope you'll join me then.
2.5 If you could change one thing about democracy what would it be?
In episode 1.9 we heard from a number of the guests I interviewed in Season 1 (about deliberative mini-publics) on their view of the essence of a real democracy. Today we hear from guests from Season 1 and 2 on the one change they would make to our system of democracy.
I've found the answers people have given to this question fascinating. Sometimes people want changes that directly relate to their area of interest and other things they identify an important change in a completely different part of our democratic system.
In this episode, we hear from
Adam Cronkright from Democracy in Practice. I interviewed Adam in episode 1.12 about the work of Democracy in Practice in schools in Bolivia.
Associate Professor Caroline Lee. Caroline was part of episode 1.19 where we considered different critiques of deliberative mini-publics.
Associate Professor Daniel Pemstein was part of episode 2.3 about his work on the Varieties of Democracy Project and the Unified Democracy Scores.
Professor Carson was my first guest in episode 1.1 where she explained the basics about deliberative mini-publics.
Professor Graham Smith who has been part of a couple of episodes now - episode 1.8 where he talked about the UK Citizens' Assemblies and episode1.18 where he outlined his approach to evaluating deliberative mini-publics.
Professor Cristina La Font was also part of episode 1.19 where she explained her critique about some uses of deliberative mini-publics.
Professor Paul Cartledge was our first guest in Season 2 where he took us through a potted history of Ancient Greek democracy. and
Associate Professor Genevieve Fuji Johnson was one of the guests on episode 1.19 critiquing deliberative mini-publics.
In next week's episode, I speak with Jean-Paul Gagnon about his work on 'democracy with adjectives'. So far Jean-Paul has identified over 1400 adjectives used to describe democracy. He also tells us about a virtual 'city of democracy' he is developing based on this work. I hope you'll join me then.
2.4 Non-Western democracy with Benjamin Isakhan & Zelalem Sirna
Welcome to episode 4 of Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! A podcast. Today's episode is about non-Western democracy. I'd like to thank David Schecter for bringing this area of democratic thinking and practice to my attention and for introducing me to my two guests: Associate Professor Benjamin Isakhan and PhD scholar Zelalem Sirna from Ethiopia. Both guests highlight the Eurocentric nature of much of the discourse on democracy and introduce us to some non-western examples of democratic practice.
Benjamin Isakhan is Associate Professor of Politics and Policy Studies and Founding Director of POLIS, a research network for Politics and International Relations in the Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalization at Deakin University, Australia. He is also Adjunct Senior Research Associate, in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Johannesburg, South Africa and an Associate of the Sydney Democracy Network at the University of Sydney, Australia. Ben is the author of Democracy in Iraq: History, Politics, Discourse (Routledge, 2012 HB, 2016 PB) and the editor of 6 books including The Secret History of Democracy (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011 HB, 2012 PB – translated into Japanese 2012, and Arabic 2014), and The Edinburgh Companion to the History of Democracy: From Pre-History to Future Possibilities (Edinburgh University Press & Oxford University Press, 2012 HB, 2015 PB). He is a leading expert and regular commentator on Middle Eastern Politics, Democracy and Democratization across the Middle East, and Heritage Destruction in the Middle East.
Zelalem Sirna is a PhD scholar at the University of Coimbra in Portugal in the programme of Democracy in 21sy Century. He earned his LL.B degree in law from the Haramaya University Ethiopia and his MPhil in Indigenous Studies from University of Tromso, Norway. For his Masters, he undertook a comparative study of Gadaa, the traditional system of governance in Ethiopia and liberal democracy. For his Ph, he is looking at deliberative democracy, deliberative systems and the Gadaa system. As a sociology-legal researcher, is main works are focused on normative pluralism and the challenges it poses in 21st century.
The next episode will consider what my guests think is the one change they would like to see in our system of democracy. I ask all of my guests the same two questions:
what for you is the essence of a real democracy and
if you could change one thing about our current system of democracy what would it be.
I'd love to hear your answers to these two questions and include your perspectives in future episodes. You can send your perspectives to me by email to essence@realdemocracynow.com.au or via Twitter or Facebook.
2.3 Evaluating representative democracy with Professors Morlino & Merkel & Assistant Professor Pemstein
Thank you for joining me in the third episode of Season 2 of Real Democracy Now! A podcast. Season 2 is looking at representative democracy and today I am talking with three academics who take different approaches to evaluating representative democracy. These three approaches are by no means the only ones, in fact there are many indexes and evaluation frameworks in existence. Which is why Dan Pemstein with his colleagues Stephen Meserve and James Melton created the United Democracy Scores to integrate a number of these into one measure.
First up, I speak to Professor Leonardo Morlino who is a professor of political science and director of the Research Center on Democracies and Democratizations at LUISS, Rome. Prof. Morlino is a leading specialist in comparative politics with expertise on Southern Europe (Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Greece), Eastern Europe, and the phenomenon of democratization. He is the author of several books and more than 200 journal essays and book chapters published in English, French, German, Spanish, Hungarian, Chinese, Mongolian, and Japanese. In 2015 -16 he has been conducting research on how the economic crisis affected South European democracies and on the economic and fiscal choices of democracies in the same area within an EU Horizon 2020 grant.
Professor Morlino talks to us about the analytical tool he has developed to allow comparison of democracies.
Next, I talk with Professor Wolfgang Merkel who is the Director of the Research Unit: Democracy and Democratization at the WZB Social Science Research Centre Berlin, as well as heading up the Centre for Global Constitutionalism and a number of other projects. He has written widely on democracy, democratisation, social democracy and democracy & capitalism to name but a few in academic and non-academic publications. Professor Merkel is a co-project leader of the Democracy Barometer. This project developed an instrument to assess the quality of democracy in 30 established democracies and is the focus of my discussion with Professor Merkel today.
Finally, I spoke with Daniel Pemstein. Dan is an assistant professor of political science at North Dakota State University. He is a methodologist who specialises in measurement and builds statistical tools to answer substantive questions in comparative legislative studies and political economy. He is involved in a number of statistical projects, including two I'll be talking to him about today: the Varieties of Democracy Project and the Unified Democracy Scores.
Thanks for joining me today. We'll be hearing from Professors Morlino and Merkel again later in Season 2 when we look at the challenges facing democracy and the relationship between democracy and capitalism. Next week's episode covers a topic mentioned today, that is 'non-Western democracy'. I'll be speaking to Associate Professor Benjamin Isakhan about democracy in the Middle East and Zelalem Sirna about Ethiopian democracy. I hope you'll join me then.
2.2 From direct to representative democracy with Dr Roslyn Fuller and Professor Nadia Urbinati
In today's episode, I'm talking with Dr Roslyn Fuller and Professor Nadia Urbinati.
Dr Roslyn Fuller (dipl. jur./erstes Staatsexamen, Goettingen; PhD, Trinity College Dublin) is a Canadian-Irish academic and columnist, specializing in public international law, and the impact of technological innovation on democracy. Her latest book Beasts and Gods: How Democracy Changed Its Meaning and Lost Its Purpose explores the flaws of representative democracy and how they could be addressed through the application of ancient Athenian principles of demokratia (people power). Her work has appeared, among others, in OpenDemocracy, The Nation, The Toronto Star, Salon and The Irish Times, as well as in many scholarly journals. She is currently a Research Associate at Waterford Institute of Technology and founding member of the Solonian Democracy Institute.
Like Professor Cartledge in episode 1 Roslyn is interested in what we can learn from the democracy of ancient Athens and like him, she sees technology as providing a way to scale up direct democracy.
Nadia Urbinati is a Professor of Political Theory and Hellenic Studies at Columbia University. She is a political theorist who specializes in modern and contemporary political thought and the democratic and anti-democratic traditions. Nadia has written extensively on democracy including two books: Representative Democracy: Principles and Genealogy, Democracy Disfigured , and Mill on Democracy: From the Athenian Polis to Representative Government.
Nadia takes us through a potted history of representative democracy and explains four key elements of representative democracy and why they are crucial for an operating representative democracy:
Sovereignty of people expressed in electoral appointment of their representatives
Free mandate for representatives
Electoral mechanisms to ensure responsiveness by representatives
Universal franchise.
Nadia identifies the dual authorities of citizens - our vote and our judgement - which while distinct and different are equally important.
If you would like to hear more from Roslyn and Nadia visit my YouTube channel where I have included videos of other presentations and interviews by these guests.
In next week's episode, we will hear about a couple of the many different approaches to evaluating representative democracy: the Varieties of Democracy project, the Democracy Barometer, the Unified Democracy Scores and the work done by the Research Centre on Democracies and Democratizations in Rome. I hope you'll join me then.
2.1 Democracy in ancient Greece with Prof Paul Cartledge
Welcome back to Real Democracy Now! a podcast.This is episode one of Season Two. Season Two is about representative democracy
Season Two is about representative democracy: its origins, components, how it can be evaluated, different approaches to democracy, the democratic deficit and the relationship between democracy and capitalism.
In Episode 1 of Season 2, I'm talking to Professor Paul Cartledge. Professor Cartledge was the inaugural A G Levants Professor of Greek Culture
Professor Cartledge was the inaugural A G Levants Professor of Greek Culture in the University of Cambridge and President of Clare College, Cambridge. Between 2006 - 2010 he was Hellenic Parliament Global Distinguished Professor in History and Theory of Democracy at New York University. Over the course of his career, he has written and edited numerous books on the ancient Greek world, most recently Democracy: a Life. He has served as historical consultant for the BBC television series The Greeks, and for four Channel 4 documentaries, including The Spartans.
If you would like to hear more from Professor Cartledge I've added some videos to the Real Democracy Now! YouTube Channel.
Some other material you may find interesting:
How student activism informed Paul Cartledge's new history of democracy
Ancient Greeks would not recognise our democracy
G1000 in Cambridge
In the next episode, I'll be talking with Professor Nadia Urbinati and Roslyn Fuller about the history of democracy and design. I hope you'll join me then.
1.19 Deliberative mini-publics - some critiques
In this episode I speak to three academics who each take a critical perspective on the operation of deliberative mini-publics. Each of them takes issue with a different aspect of the impact or influence that the recommendations coming from deliberative mini-publics have on public policy.
For Associate Professor Genevieve Fuji Johnson the failure of the democratic innovations she studied (which includes deliberative mini-publics and deliberative polling) was that they didn't have any real impact on policy and decision-making.
Professor Cristina La Font takes basically the opposite view. For her deliberative mini-publics should not have any impact on policy decisions, rather they should be used to support the broader engagement of citizens.
Associate Professor Caroline Lee's critique is that many democratic innovations, including deliberative mini-publics, appear to allow for influence or impact but the issues they are asked to consider are often heavily circumscribed, and deliberative mini-publics are explicitly denied the opportunity to address the challenges underlying the difficult issues they are faced with.
And Roslyn Fuller provides another perspective suggesting that citizens may change how they approach decision-making within a deliberative mini-public depending on whether they believe their recommendations will be implemented or not.
This is the final episode of Season 1 looking at deliberative mini-publics. If you haven't already listened to episodes 1 - 18 I'd suggest you go back and listen to them all, starting with Professor Carson explaining what deliberative mini-publics are in episode 1.1.
Season 2 will look at the history of democracy, the dominant model of representative democracy, as well as what is working and what isn't.
Season 2 will commence in mid-March. I hope you'll join me then.


Short communication: Efficacy of copper sulfate hoof baths against digital dermatitis—Where is the evidence?
Digital dermatitis is a major problem in modern dairy production because of decreased animal welfare and financial losses. Individual cow treatments are often seen as too time consuming by farmers, and walk-through hoof baths have therefore been used extensively to control digital dermatitis. For decades, copper sulfate hoof baths have been used to treat and prevent digital dermatitis. Copper sulfate has been referred to as the industry gold standard when it comes to hoof-bath chemicals. In several scientific studies testing the efficacy of other hoof-care products, copper sulfate has been used as a positive control, thereby indicating that copper sulfate has a known positive effect. However, this may not be the case. A dilemma may exist between (1) copper sulfate generally being perceived as being effective against digital dermatitis and (2) a possible lack of well-documented scientific evidence of this effect. The objective of this study was to evaluate the existing scientific literature to determine whether the efficacy of copper sulfate used in hoof baths against digital dermatitis has in fact been demonstrated scientifically. A systematic literature search identified 7 peer-reviewed journal articles describing the efficacy of copper sulfate in hoof baths as treatment or prevention of bovine digital dermatitis. Only 2 of the 7 studies compared copper sulfate to a negative control; most studies were relatively small, and often no clear positive effect of copper sulfate was demonstrated. In conclusion, the frequent claim that copper sulfate is widely reported to be effective is supported by little scientific evidence. Well-designed clinical trials evaluating the effect of copper sulfate against digital dermatitis compared with a negative control are needed. Until such studies have been made, the efficacy of copper sulfate in hoof baths against digital dermatitis remains largely unproven.


It has become increasingly difficult to navigate the world of IT support.
It seems like every company feeds you the same line about how much you need their service. So how do you separate the elite from the mediocre? And even more importantly, which one is the perfect fit for your specific needs?
PC Help Services who is based in Indianapolis, has compiled a list of six questions you should always ask an IT company that you are interviewing. If they can't provide a valuable answer to any one of them, they're not the right fit for you.
Do they have industry experience with your type of business?
This question is vital to ask because it will instantly indicate whether or not they're confident in their services. It's not a requirement that they have previous work within your industry, but they should provide their answer confidently – either way. If the answer is yes, they should also be able to provide specific examples. If they can't provide these examples, they may be lying just to get your business.
Do they have technology specializations with the systems you have invested in?
For this question the answer must be "yes." There's no point in paying someone to manage your IT services if they aren't an expert in the systems you use. You may as well pick up a couple how-to books from the local library, and do it yourself. It's your IT support team's job to be an expert in your network systems.
Do they have experience working with your business applications?
This is just as important as the previous question. Do a little bit of research, and follow up with more specific questions in regards to the applications at hand. It's very easy for an IT company to tell you they have experience with an application, when the reality is very different.
Can they back up their claims of great service with client case studies?
Check their website out. A reputable IT company will have written "social proof" of their work via case studies with previous clients. The case studies should describe the specific issues that their client was facing, followed by a detailed description of how the problems were addressed. It should also contain quotes from the client, which is a testimonial to the IT company's work.
Are they up to speed with the latest technologies?
It's important that your IT team is up to speed on the latest technological innovations. They will become the backbone of your company, supporting your efforts to surpass your competitors. Ask for specific examples of exactly how they stay up-to-date and informed in this ever changing media-scape.
Can they take care of you?
When interviewing your IT company, ask for specific examples of how they can assist in growing your company. Ask for suggestions, and pay attention to see if their answer is general run-of-the-mill, or specific to your company's objectives.
Ultimately it's fundamental that you trust your gut feeling when hiring an IT company for your business. You should feel like you're working with a human being, not a robot. They should have our best interest in mind, not their bank account.
Always ask for proof of their qualifications, and always follow your intuition.


text:
(39971) József, désignation internationale (39971) Jozsef, est un astéroïde de la ceinture principale.

Description
(39971) Jozsef est un astéroïde de la ceinture principale. Il fut découvert le  à Piszkesteto par László L. Kiss et Krisztián Sárneczky. Il présente une orbite caractérisée par un demi-grand axe de 2,54 UA, une excentricité de 0,25 et une inclinaison de 8,4° par rapport à l'écliptique.

Compléments

Articles connexes
 Liste des planètes mineures (39001-40000)
 Ceinture d'astéroïdes

Références

Planète mineure découverte en 1998
Astéroïde de la ceinture principale
Objet céleste découvert par Krisztián Sárneczky
Jozsef

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Posted bydemaray January 9, 2016 September 19, 2016 Posted inArt and Science Collaboration, Design Collaboration, Eco-Art
The Hand Up Project, attempting to meet the new needs of natural life forms. E. Demaray
To aid in various applications this January 2016, I've compiled a portfolio of recent work. Feel free to browse. More in-depth descriptions a projects can be found in individual posts on this page. The pfd with images is here:
Demaray_Portfoleo
Text descriptions are here:
The Hand Up Project, attempting to meet the new needs of natural
life forms, detail of crab on hand
The Hand Up Project: attempting to meet the new needs of natural life forms is dedicated to land hermit crabs, these are the small crabs with thin exoskeletons that must adopt the abandoned shells from marine gastropods in order to remain housed and protected from predators. The problem is that, right now, there are not enough shells left on global shorelines for this animal to use—so biologists routinely find them living in broken glass jars, plastic bottle tops and any other form of refuge that they can get their pincers on.
Based on what we know about the needs of these animals in their current environment, the Hand Up Project is dedicated to producing alternative forms of housing, specifically designed for use by land hermit crabs, out of biodegradable plastic. The project utilizes an adaptable AutoCAD design and a stereo lithography process for fabrication. The key to this new design is that the spiral in the middle of a traditional shell has been minimized, reducing the overall weight of each house and increasing its internal volume to weight ratio, something that the animal likes.
In its beta version, the Hand Up Project was a great success. Twenty-five percent of the initial crab population chose to move into a new, fabricated, home when presented with the novel structures for a period of two months.
life forms, detail of multiple houses
I began this project when I was in the middle of my graduate studies. At the time, I found myself referring to this and other art works that I was making as examples of inappropriate care giving activities.
As might be expected, the project produced what may be the most expensive hermit crab houses ever created and the funding needed to manufacture and distribute the shelters is significant. Although this effort is a minor, genuine attempt to give a struggling life form a hand up, the "art part" of this endeavor centers on the way we propose to fund the new dwellings. The Hand Up Project is currently soliciting corporate sponsorship in order to fund manufacturing and distribution—by licensing the houses for advertising. In exchange for financial support, the project will produce each plastic shelter bearing a corporate logo before placing the structure back in the wild for the animals to use.
Giant Sequoia
Giant Sequoia sapling with sweater. Dimensions variable, 1998.
The image above is a piece called "Giant Sequoia"; it is a Giant Sequoia sapling wearing a sweater. I started knitting sweaters for plants when I was in graduate school. At the time I wanted to communicate through a visual medium my feelings of being ineffectual and powerless in attempting to help the natural world.
Corpor Esurit, or we all deserve a break today, detail of ant habitat
Center For Exploratory and Perceptual Arts, Buffalo, NY, 2008
Titled Corpor Esurit, or we all deserve a break today (Copor Esurit is a derivation of a Latin phrase meaning the body hungers), this piece offers a population of ants fast food
Corpor Esurit, or we all deserve a break today, detail of foraging area
(cont.) from McDonald's for the duration of one month, and considers the impact of the industural food sources on us humans as well as the many other species that, by extension, may also end up being dependent upon modern food production for sustenance.
Commissioned by the Center for Exploritory and Perceptual Arts (CEPA), I paired with an behavioral ecologist form the American Museum of Natural Science and created what may be the worlds largest ant farm featuring a sky line of Buffalo. Spanning 20 feet in its installation at CEPA, the exhibition was built at eye height to facilitate first-hand observation of an animal that is rarely seen at an intimate distance. The exhibit also offered a habitat specifically designed to facilitate the nesting and foraging behavior of ants. Pogonomyrmex occidentalis, the ants chosen for this project, are an ant of choice for commercial ant farms, were they typically reside without a queen, have a life span of between 2 and 3 weeks, and eat a wide variety of foods. The fitness of the population was determined by the population's longevity and foraging behavior.
Corpor Esurit, or we all deserve a break today, detail of colony counting
(cont.) Visitors to Corpor Esurit were encouraged to participate in observing the ant's foraging behavior by drawing diagrams and filling out observational questionnaires in the gallery. These questionnaires helped to identify what foods the ants preferred, and the extent of their foraging behavior. The questioneers also asked viewers to describe their own consumption of junk food. In addressing industrial food production, the interconnected nature of our food chain, and the plight of life all forms facing changing food sources, wall-size menus were posted in the gallery listing the constituents of each human food item offered.
During the course of the exhibition, the colony cleaned house by interning their deceased in specific locations at the perimeter of their foraging areas where they were counted and removed twice a week. The average life expectancy of the ants residing in the exhibit was 23 days, which exceeded their commercial ant farm life expectancy by almost a week.
Listening Stations for Birds, that play human music
Elizabeth Demaray and James Walsh, Abington Art Center, Jenkintown, PA 2007
Titled Listening Stations for Birds, That Play Human Music, this collaboration between the artist James Walsh and myself considers the fact that although birds are bombarded by human noise on a routine basis, and many species respond to human song, nobody has ever studied what type of human music birds might prefer.
Created for the woods of Abington Art Center in Pennsylvania, a wooded park land and sculpture garden that is surrounded by the suburbs of Philadelphia, this piece also addresses the nature of a biotope–an environment shared by multiple species where human and animal populations overlap.
The exhibition involved installing a series of four sound-emitting sculptures along a secluded nature trail. Each sculpture or "listening station" played its own genre of human music: classical, jazz, country and rock. Perched on twelve-foot tall poles, each station offered a twenty-minute loop of pre-programmed melodies on an internal ipod nano with an external speaker system and a circular tray of wild bird food.
While our purpose was to observe what kind of music birds might like, our motive was to get viewers out into the woods, to interacting with other species and to hopefully consider the impact of our presence on other life forms. So, much like Copor Esurit, we handed out clipboards with observational worksheets. These worksheets asked visitors to go into the woods, to listen to the music that humans produce and to observe which types of music might be preferred by our avian co-habitants.
Lichen for Skyscrapers Project
Art in Odd Places, New York, NY 2011
This project seeks to ameliorate the lack of native vegetation found in global cities by culturing lichen on the sides of skyscrapers and other manmade structures. Lichen, a wonderfully adaptable life form, can grow vertically on many porous surfaces. Once propagated, it forms a protective barrier, insulating its supporting surface from harmful elements while serving to lower the cumulative temperatures and rain runoff in metropolitan centers. This, along with the ability to withstand extreme drought, makes lichen an almost ideal form of "houseplant". This artwork debuted as part of New York City's Art in Odd Places, 2011, which was dedicated to the
detail shot of "lichaffiti" at Art in Odd Places, New York, NY 2011
(cont.) concept of ritual. As part of this festival, Lichen for Skyscrapers proposed lichen planting as a new ritual for the urban dweller–one that seeks to renew nature in an inner-city context.
In support of culturing lichen on buildings, I held walking tours and workshops on propagation. In addition to handing out an informational brochures during the lichen tours, I gave out sample baggies of lichen slurry to anyone who was able to oversee a planting on an urban structure. One of the volunteers on the project began calling this process "lichaffiti," like graffiti, because all one needs to do to cultivate it, is to open a high-rise window a few inches and then apply lichen slurry on the building's exterior surface. If the lichen doesn't take, it will simply dry up and blow away to propagate itself in other more favorable conditions.
Elizabeth Demaray, Ahmed Elgammal, Simeon Kotchoni, Qingze Zou, 2015
The IndaPlant Project: An Act of Trans-Species Giving is designed to facilitate the free movement and metabolic function of ordinary houseplants. Now in the third year of a three-year production cycle, this initiative is dedicated to creating a community of light-sensing robotic vehicles , or florsborgs, each of which is able to respond to the needs of a potted plant by moving it around in three-dimensional space in search of sunlight and water.
Elizabeth Demaray, Ahmed Elgammal, Simeon Kotchoni, Qingze Zou
Still from a webcam feed at Association of Environmental Studies Symposium, New York, NY, 2014
The IndaPlant unit currently carries out basic sun- and water-seeking functions and is wired through an Arduino board. It is chargeable via solar power and can perform motion planning to independently avoid obstacles during movement. A short video that describes the building of the initial IndaPlant floraborg and shows the very first floraborg test run can be seen here: https://vimeo.com/90457796
The project is a joint effort between work groups in art, engineering, computer science and biology.
The Endangered Species Recipe Book, A Taxonomy, Menu, Performance and Exhibition, Zagreus Projekt, Berlin
PandoraBird: Identifying the Types of Music That May Be Favored by Our Avian Co-Inhabitants at DigiHuman Lab Rutgers University

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Hanan Kolko and Richard Winsten are speaking at the 2014 East Coast Cannabis Business Expo, Educational Conference & Regulatory Summit from October 12 – October 13. Entrepreneurs, business professionals and lawmakers will join cannabis industry veterans at the largest East Coast cannabis business convention. More than 80 exhibitors and 40 speakers will provide the information aspiring marijuana entrepreneurs need to succeed in this rapidly growing industry.
The International Cannabis Association's first ever "Cannabis Industry Regulatory Summit" will assemble lawmakers, commissioners and other government officials who will shape the future of the cannabis industry. They'll share ideas and discuss the business opportunities that will soon be available. The format of the summit will allow attendees to interact with these officials and discuss the challenges states face in creating regulations and implementing new laws. The Regulatory Summit will be a rare opportunity to network with the key government officials and learn first-hand about their plans for the industry.


text:
Q: Cannot load RJB (Ruby Java Bridge) on Windows using
require 'rjb'

in IRB returns "true", but
require 'rjb'

in my application returns
cannot load such file -- rjb

Including 'rjb' into Gemfile does not solve the problem. What's wrong?
require "rubygems"

does not help.
rjb is installed.
I have Ruby 1.9.3

A: Depending on the version of Ruby you're using, you will require to load RubyGems first:
require "rubygems"
require "rjb"

You can check if rjb was installed as a gem using gem list rjb from a console.
Without more details about the version of Ruby you're using, guess this is the best I could answer it.

A: Edit Gemfile of your project in this way, add a string:
gem 'rjb', '1.4.7' <- put version of installed rjb gem

Then save Gemfile
and do
bundle install

P.S. Sorry for my English =)

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Tsunamis Are Bringing New Species to Our Coasts
A new study shows how early monitoring and response efforts could prevent costly impacts.
Bob Berwyn
(Photo: Pavel Ahmed/Flickr)
Entire communities of new marine and seashore organisms have arrived in Hawaii and along the West Coast in the aftermath of the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami.
Almost 300 species, including fish, snails, sponges, and many microorganisms, survived the 5,000-mile drift as organic clumps around floating islands of the rubble that was swept from the shores of Japan by the tsunami's relentless waves. Such a large and concentrated swarm of new arrivals is highly unusual and presents a potential invasive species threat, according to a new study published in the journal Science.
Greg Ruiz, a marine invasive species researcher with the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center who co-authored the paper, says floating colonizations by invasive species are rare events.
"There are no [previous] records of material coming from the shores of Asia to the shores of North America, and the search record is quite extensive," Ruiz says, adding that earler colonizations happened via other mechanisms like ship traffic.
"One of the things that really blew me away is that so many of these organisms could survive in open ocean for five to six years," Ruiz says, alluding to the journey of a tiny Japanese coastal fish that washed ashore near Long Beach in the stern well of a rusty fishing boat. "We didn't think they would find enough food. Our study shows that's not the case."
These Japanese sea stars arrived in Newport, Oregon, in 2012 aboard a floating fisheries dock.
(Photo: John W. Chapman/Oregon State University)
After studying the accretions of rubble and organisms, Ruiz suggests that the huge amount of plastic debris in the ocean, including material mobilized by the tsunami, made the rafts sturdy enough to withstand the long trip.
Some of the debris was quite large, including a 60-foot floating dock encrusted with shellfish and other organisms, as well as 60 to 70 boats of various sizes. A lot of the species the team documented were in good physical shape and actively reproducing.
Now that they are here, the team says, it's time to start thinking about a response, because the flotilla of new organisms could harbor potential threats to human health and ecosystems, as well as to important economic resources like fisheries and tourism. An unrelated recent study found, for example, that potentially harmful microbial communities are forming in areas where plastic pollution is dense.
Ruiz says the big-picture solution is to reduce global plastic pollution, but some short-term measures aimed at prevention could save a lot of money down the road. Once damaging aquatic invaders are established, it's extremely hard to get rid of them. Zebra and quagga mussels caused losses of up to $5 billion on the economy of the Great Lakes region in the late 1990s by clogging water intakes and degrading fisheries.
The latest study helps identify where the pollution is washing up, which could guide early monitoring and targeted clean-ups, aimed at preventing new species from gaining a foothold.
Aquatic species started hitchhiking when prehistoric people launched their first dugout canoes, and spread globally when seafaring Phoenicians and Vikings took to the seas. On land, Marco Polo's camels no doubt carried their share of pests between Europe and Asia. Biological invasions are, in a way, the story of life on Earth.
Marine sea slugs washed ashore in Oregon in 2015 aboard a derelict Japanese vessel.
But the scope of this latest migration across the Pacific is probably unprecedented. Altogether, the team counted 289 living invertebrate and fish species arriving from Japan. Many species were just recorded on one piece of debris, so the scientists estimated that the real number of species is much higher.
Most frequent among the new species were mollusks, but there were also many types of worms, anemones, and jellyfish relatives and crustaceans, as well as branching colonies of underwater bryozoans. None of the organisms would be expected to survive such a long time at sea—up to six years for some of them—because open ocean conditions are usually not tolerable for coastal species. The findings suggest that the slower speed of the rafts compared to ships may have let the organisms gradually adapt during the trip.
Ruiz said that several of the species they identified—especially parasites associated with mussels and some starfish, as well as algal species—have shown invasive behavior in other ecosystems. The hotspots for tsunami debris accumulation are along the coast in Washington and Oregon, and to a lesser degree in California.
Until now, the scientists hadn't documented any colonization by the new species. It can take several years for invaders to establish a foothold, and that opens a window of opportunity for prevention.
Still, for now, the best-practices handbook for responding to marine invasive species is pretty thin.
"For terrestrial systems, probably for economic reasons, we've developed pretty good tools for detection and treating, controlling or eradicating new pests that come in," Ruiz says.
For aquatic systems, there are some controls, but there's not a robust response or regulatory framework. Nevertheless, there have been successful eradications of marine invasive species: Ruiz said that, by acting fast, biologists were able to eradicate a potentially harmful mussel from a harbor in Western Australia, as well as parasites associated with abalone that landed on the central California coast some years ago, and invasive algae in Southern California.
Prevention starts with continued monitoring for potentially threatening new arrivals. The next step is studying the various species to determine if there are pathogens or parasites that present a threat to human health, native ecosystems or fisheries and recreation, followed by targeted clean-ups.
Most of all, Ruiz says the study shows the urgent need to reduce plastic pollution in the oceans. Much of the debris the scientists found was made of fiberglass or other plastic materials that made the new large-scale invasion possible.
"The growing amount of plastics and microplastics in the oceans may have big impacts for animals and ecosystems. There should be some attention to this as we consider the consequences of plastic pollution," Ruiz concludes.
Invasive SpeciesThe FixTsunamiEnvironmentHawaiiSmithsonian
These Mysterious Mushrooms Are Key to Our Planet's Ecosystems
Interaction of forests and fungi plays a huge role in the Earth's global carbon cycle.
Why the IPCC's New Focus on Mountain Climate Change Is a Big Deal
Better science coordination will help mountain communities prepare for global warming.
A Credible Path Forward on Renewable Energy
Most of the world could run on renewable energy by 2050 at a quarter of the cost of the current energy system, all while saving lives.
Mountains Are Warming Twice as Fast as the Rest of the World
To sustain mountain communities, we need more monitoring and better governance.
Halting Invasive Species May Be Simple As Eating Them
The idea that if you can't beat 'em, eat 'em has found new resonance in the battle against one particularly voracious invasive species, the lionfish.
How Climate Scientists Can Save Lives by Predicting Glacial Collapse
Research in Tibet and Peru has identified glaciers and glacial lakes that could cause catastrophic avalanches and floods.


text:
Jamaal Williams is making opportunity count while on pace for 1,000 yards
If you would have told me that Jamaal Williams would be the Detroit Lions' leading rusher through their first eight games, I would have told you that D'Andre Swift was probably injured. If you would have told me before the season that Williams was on pace for 1,000 yards rushing through eight games, I would have called you crazy. Well, Swift is hurt, and Williams, who is in this sixth season in the NFL and his second season with the Lions, has seized the opportunity.
What did Jamaal Williams say about making his opportunity count with the Detroit Lions?
On Thursday, Williams spoke to Dave Birkett of the Detroit Free Press, and he talked about how his making the absolute most of his opportunity with the Lions in 2022.
"I think it's more of just dedication, just working hard and not psyching yourself out mentally of seeing like it could be, your sixth year could be your best year," Williams told the Free Press on Thursday. "A lot of us want it to happen right away. Trust me, I did. My first year, rookie year, I wanted 1,000. But it's more of just staying focused on the plan, learning your role and once you get those opportunities make them count and then go from there."
Via Dave Birkett – Detroit Free Press
Through his first eight games of the season, Williams has rushed for 545 yards and eight touchdowns, which puts him on pace for 1,158 yards and 17 touchdowns on the season.
Now, assuming Swift does get healthy and works his way back to being the starter who gets most of the touches, Williams' stats will surely take a dip.
But until Swift does get healthy, Williams is going to continue to dedicate himself to making the most of his opportunity, and that is what every player on the Lions needs to do.
Michigan High School Football Playoffs: Predicting the Division 1 Regionals
2023 Detroit Tigers' offseason blueprint, part 2: 'Dream' Free Agents to target and more realistic targets


CompTIA Security+ professionals help to implement, administer, and maintain a secure computing environment for any organization. The certification is designed for those with a few years of experience in IT administration with a focus on security that want to help protect and secure their network. Viewers will hear about different topics and objectives discussed in this course including different areas of security, threats and vulnerabilities, cryptography, and other additional topics and will attain knowledge and skills to identify security issues, to mitigate and deter threats, to apply security controls, and implement and maintain an organization's security policies.


Malia's interest in DJ'ing started during High School when she noticed her cousins taking on mobile gigs and forming a crew called CREAM (Collecting Respect Educating All Minds) Foundation but it wasn't until after 2002 that she started to take DJ'ing seriously. Malia's music, style & talent always leaves a lasting impression with her audience and listeners. With an emphasis on blending and producing a clean set, she is determined to keep people in the groove and the ladies on the dance floor. Malia joined the Stacks Vinyl family in 2004 and since then has had more opportunities than most DJ's to learn about music history, practice the skills from world renown DJ's and network with people who bring out the best in what she loves to do. Along with promoting events and artists, Malia uses her role as a DJ to influence all ages and females with a passion for music to participate in positive related activities. By starting the first and only show called the Bonita Applebum Show which was ran by all females on Earthbound Radio and hosting free female DJ workshops through Stacks Vinyl, Malia has made a growing impact on many artists and DJ's today.
Artists: Miki Vale (Sleeping Giant), Havana (Skoolcraft Music), Ne-Yo (Island Def Jam).
Corporate/Organizations: Stacks Vinyl, Agenda Show, Operation Samahan, The Cypher, Bloomingdales, Adidas.
DJ Residencies: PartySanDiego.com @Sam's by the Sea, Foreplay Entertainment @Aubergine, Bonita Applebum Show & Tru Skool Tuesdays on Earthbound Radio.
San Diego: U-31, Bar Pink, Club Montage, Kava Lounge, Honey Beehive, House Of Blues, Onyx, Heat, Decos Nightclub, Ole' Madrid, On Broadway, Red C Lounge, Martini Ranch San Diego, The Blvd., Club Rox, JRDN @Tower 23, Blind Melons, Faces Nightclub, Red Bull Music Academy's Afterburner @Airport Lounge.
Los Angelas & Orange County: Cerritos All-Stars, Sol Of Hip Hop (CSU Fullerton), Little Temple Bar, Kettle & Keg, The Grandstar Jazz Club, Air Conditioned Supper Club, Opus Bar & Grill, Edukation Athletics @The Blue Cafe, The Funk Lab, The Roc.
All Ages: Zenbu Lounge, Project Blowed (Los Angeles), Keep The Feel @Static Lounge, Stacks Vinyl 2004-2005 Female DJ Workshops (San Diego & Cerritos), DJ/Co-host on Earthbound Radio for Tru Skool Tuesdays and Special Battle-Star Saturdays, Summit Fundraiser hosted by Californians for Justice and Activist San Diego, 2005 San Ysidro H.S. Talent Show Dance, 2005 Turntable Lounge, 2005 San Diegos 1st Annual Unity Jam @Writerz Block, Chula Vista Skate Park, The Get Down & Danceteria @Hot Monkey Love, FACE and DEEP hosted by Rich and Creamy.


text:
Sinthetics
Trade Report
The North Diamond
Making a Name
Antwerp Tightens Up
Measuring Sparkle
Showing Off Sparkle
Holiday Dazzle or Fizzle?
Behind the Steel Door
Somewhere in the Rainbow
Fabulous Fantasies
KA-CHING, KA-CHING
With the increasing global need for transparency, the diamond industry is being held more accountable.
By Marc Goldstein
It's not completely accurate to speak about Belgium's new antimoney-laundering (AML) legislation. Indeed, what is known as the preventive part of the law was introduced in Belgium as far back as January 11, 1993, and 11 years later, on January 12, 2004, the legislation was extended to diamond traders.
What's new today is that the European and Belgian authorities are beginning to enforce those laws within the diamond industry with much more severity than in the past. As part of that enforcement, the fiscal authorities have set up a specialized diamond unit that has already started moving from diamond company to diamond company to help implement controls. During the first round of visits, the diamantaires were essentially informed of the mistakes that were found and weren't, reportedly, fined for any violations. But the message the visits of the authorities sent to the industry was that very soon, the tolerance level would go down to zero.
Legally, money laundering includes the notion of conscious involvement. This means the people "should have reasonably known" that, one way or another, they were involved in money laundering. According to the law, money laundering occurs when participants transfer, use, hide, store or take into custody, for any reason whatsoever, money or assets of illegal origin. AML extends to money that finances terrorism, organized crime and drug trafficking, as well as serious and organized tax fraud and misuse and abuse of corporate assests.
A freelance accountant working exclusively for diamond companies explained anonymously that "The big difference between now and what used to be is that in essence, they're making all of us accessories to the system. They're forcing diamantaires to get adequate training in the AML requirements so that, should anything out of line with those requirements be discovered, they are likely to be considered responsible. And the Sword of Damocles that's now hanging over our heads is most certainly not a joke. Just the monetary fines for violations of the AML law can reach up to $1.7 million, and that doesn't even include the criminal aspect of violations, which also can lead to severe sanctions."
Training Certificates
In order to facilitate the industry's adaptation to the new legal requirements, the Antwerp World Diamond Centre (AWDC) created a Client Acceptance Policy (CAP) document, which was made available to all diamantaires who registered for and attended its AML seminars. At the conclusion of the seminar, attendees received an AML training certificate. On the one hand, the certificate has its importance, given it serves as proof of completion of the training that is one of the law's major requirements. The problem is that seminar participants in a way end up knitting themselves the rope with which the tax authorities could hang them. If they are found guilty of violations of the law, the certificate holders could easily be told that they "were aware and knew." On the other hand, if the diamond manufacturers and traders skip the AML seminars, they end up being in violation of the law, since the training is compulsory. Obviously, there's not much of a choice.
Another accountant summarized how he sees the situation. "The tendency is that the actors become cops and potentially can be convicted if the fiscal authorities can prove that you're not a good cop!" He was referring to the fact that diamantaires who receive the training will be expected to police themselves and the industry for money-laundering violations and may even be subject to prosecution on the basis that they were aware of the regulations in the first place.
Discomfort and Consequences
Under the seal of anonymity, the top executive of one of the Antwerp diamond bourses elaborated. "Of course, we're not comfortable with all this. You must understand that there's the law and the spirit of the law. We, as diamantaires, all agreed that our trade had to be monitored one way or another to help get rid of blood diamonds. This is what was indeed rooted in the United Nations decisions that led to this legislation. However, at this stage, we don't know exactly how the fiscal authorities are going to use all this extra power the government is giving them. They have to understand that an industry such as ours relies upon a very delicate equilibrium. We have severe competition abroad and our business is extremely footloose," he said, referring to the fact that the industry can quickly move its assets to another location should legislation become too abusive or intrusive.
In their argument for less restrictive regulation, Antwerp diamantaires often cite the example of France, where the presidency of François Hollande has placed such fiscal burdens on the population that many of the more innovative people and entrepreneurs are leaving the country to establish themselves abroad. Increasing the level of enforcement in Antwerp, even though it may be laudable, is inevitably likely to create a further distortion of competitiveness with respect to other "more permissive" diamond centers.
It still may be too early to tell what the spread will be between the law and the spirit of the law. There's a reasonable degree of fear because nobody knows exactly to what extent diamantaires will be held accountable for the fraud cases they might encounter. A diamond manufacturer concluded, "It's all a question of due diligence: where does that end exactly? We understand that there's a need for clarity, but we can't all become sheriff's deputies and spend unreasonable amounts of time on that. We have businesses to run as well."
Article from the Rapaport Magazine - December 2013. To subscribe click here.
Tags: Marc Goldstein


text:
Q: React redux shows previous state old data before fetching new data I use React-Redux and functional components with hooks.
Whenever I send a request for fetching data from the server I set isLoading field in global state to true and then after request is done back to false.
In the rendering component I either show the fetched data or a loading screen if isLoading is set to true. Now the problem is whenever I change page and then reopen the sreen with data, before showing loading screen react renders previous state data from the previous fetch for a brief moment.
Hope someone can explain to me how to avoid that behavior and the reasons why it acts that way.
Here's an example code of what I'm talking about. If I change routes and go back I can see the old data:
//App.js
function App() {
    return (
        <BrowserRouter>

            <Route exact path='/' component={ProductList}/>
            <Route exact path='/NotHome' component={NotHome}/>
        </BrowserRouter>
    );
}

//ProductList.js
const ProductList = (props) => {

    const [Skip, setSkip] = useState(0);
    const [Limit] = useState(5);

    useEffect(() => {
        props.requestProductList(Skip, Limit);
    }, []);

    return (
        props.isLoading
            ?
LOADING

            :

                {props.productList && props.productList.map(product => (

{product.productName}

                        <img src={`http://localhost:5000${product.productMainPicture}`} style={{width: 200, height: 200}}/>

                ))}

    )
};

const mapStateToProps = (state) => ({
    productList: state.product.productList,
    isLoading: state.product.isLoading,
});

const actionCreators = {
    requestProductList
};

export default connect(mapStateToProps, actionCreators)(ProductList);

//ProductReducer.js

const PRODUCT_SET_PRODUCT_LIST = 'PRODUCT_SET_PRODUCT_LIST';
const SET_LOADING = 'SET_LOADING';

const initialState = {
    productList: [],
    isLoading: false
}

export const ProductReducer = (state = initialState, action) => {
    switch (action.type) {
        case PRODUCT_SET_PRODUCT_LIST:
            return {
                ...state,
                productList: [...action.productList],
                productsCount: action.productsCount
            }
        case SET_LOADING:
            return {
                ...state,
                isLoading: action.isLoading
            }
        default:
            return state;
    }
};

const setProductList = (productList, productsCount) => ({type: PRODUCT_SET_PRODUCT_LIST, productList, productsCount});
const setLoading = (isLoading) => ({type: SET_LOADING, isLoading});

export const requestProductList = (skip, limit) => async (dispatch) => {
    dispatch(setLoading(true));
    try {
        const res = await productApi.requestProductList(skip, limit);
        dispatch(setProductList(res.data.products));
        dispatch(setLoading(false));
    } catch (e) {
        console.log(e);
        dispatch(setLoading(false));
    }
};

//api.js
export const productApi = {
    async requestProductList(skip, limit) {
        return await Axios.post(`http://localhost:5000/api/product/get_product_list`, {skip, limit});
    }
}

A: How about clearing the data when leaving the page and then when revisiting, everything should work as expected.
Let me explain,
Lets say you set the Redux state with ObjectA = {...}, then when you leave that page,
objectA still exists with values, so it immediately displays those values. While the network request is asynchronous and takes time to complete the promise and update the objectA.
To solve this, you can create a clearAction, which clears objectA when leaving the page.
useEffect(() =>
{
        props.requestProductList(Skip, Limit);

       return () =>
       {
         props.clearData()
       }

}, []);

/* Redux reducers*/

case CLEAR_DATA:
    return {...state, objectA: null}