Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Part of Periodical (1)
- Postprint (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Keywords
- (Ex-ante) impact assessment (1)
- Depressive disorder (1)
- Developing countries (1)
- Emotional valence (1)
- General population (1)
- Indicators (1)
- Land use change (1)
- Negative life events (1)
- Positive life events (1)
- Scenario study (1)
Background: Life events (LEs) are associated with future physical and mental health. They are crucial for understanding the pathways to mental disorders as well as the interactions with biological parameters. However, deeper insight is needed into the complex interplay between the type of LE, its subjective evaluation and accompanying factors such as social support. The "Stralsund Life Event List" (SEL) was developed to facilitate this research.
Methods: The SEL is a standardized interview that assesses the time of occurrence and frequency of 81 LEs, their subjective emotional valence, the perceived social support during the LE experience and the impact of past LEs on present life. Data from 2265 subjects from the general population-based cohort study "Study of Health in Pomerania" (SHIP) were analysed. Based on the mean emotional valence ratings of the whole sample, LEs were categorized as "positive" or "negative". For verification, the SEL was related to lifetime major depressive disorder (MDD; Munich Composite International Diagnostic Interview), childhood trauma (Childhood Trauma Questionnaire), resilience (Resilience Scale) and subjective health (SF-12 Health Survey).
Conclusions: The SEL is a valid instrument that enables the analysis of the number and frequency of LEs, their emotional valence, perceived social support and current impact on life on a global score and on an individual item level. Thus, we can recommend its use in research settings that require the assessment and analysis of the relationship between the occurrence and subjective evaluation of LEs as well as the complex balance between distressing and stabilizing life experiences.
Background: Life events (LEs) are associated with future physical and mental health. They are crucial for understanding the pathways to mental disorders as well as the interactions with biological parameters. However, deeper insight is needed into the complex interplay between the type of LE, its subjective evaluation and accompanying factors such as social support. The "Stralsund Life Event List" (SEL) was developed to facilitate this research.
Methods: The SEL is a standardized interview that assesses the time of occurrence and frequency of 81 LEs, their subjective emotional valence, the perceived social support during the LE experience and the impact of past LEs on present life. Data from 2265 subjects from the general population-based cohort study "Study of Health in Pomerania" (SHIP) were analysed. Based on the mean emotional valence ratings of the whole sample, LEs were categorized as "positive" or "negative". For verification, the SEL was related to lifetime major depressive disorder (MDD; Munich Composite International Diagnostic Interview), childhood trauma (Childhood Trauma Questionnaire), resilience (Resilience Scale) and subjective health (SF-12 Health Survey).
Results: The report of lifetime MDD was associated with more negative emotional valence ratings of negative LEs (OR = 2.96, p < 0.0001). Negative LEs (b = 0.071, p < 0.0001, beta = 0.25) and more negative emotional valence ratings of positive LEs (b = 3.74, p < 0.0001, beta = 0.11) were positively associated with childhood trauma. In contrast, more positive emotional valence ratings of positive LEs were associated with higher resilience (b = -7.05, p < 0.0001, beta = 0.13), and a lower present impact of past negative LEs was associated with better subjective health (b = 2.79, p = 0.001, beta = 0.05). The internal consistency of the generated scores varied considerably, but the mean value was acceptable (averaged Cronbach's alpha > 0.75).
Conclusions: The SEL is a valid instrument that enables the analysis of the number and frequency of LEs, their emotional valence, perceived social support and current impact on life on a global score and on an individual item level. Thus, we can recommend its use in research settings that require the assessment and analysis of the relationship between the occurrence and subjective evaluation of LEs as well as the complex balance between distressing and stabilizing life experiences.
The impact of land use changes on sustainable development is of increasing interest in many regions of the world. This study aimed to test the transferability of the Framework for Participatory Impact Assessment (FoPIA), which was originally developed in the European context, to developing countries, in which lack of data often prevents the use of data-driven impact assessment methods. The core aspect of FoPIA is the stakeholder-based assessment of alternative land use scenarios. Scenario impacts on regional sustainability are assessed by using a set of nine regional land use functions (LUFs), which equally cover the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainability. The cases analysed in this study include (1) the alternative spatial planning policies around the Merapi volcano and surrounding areas of Yogyakarta City, Indonesia; (2) the large-scale afforestation of agricultural areas to reduce soil erosion in Guyuan, China; (3) the expansion of soil and water conservation measures in the Oum Zessar watershed, Tunisia; (4) the agricultural intensification and the potential for organic agriculture in Bijapur, India; and (5) the land degradation and land conflicts resulting from land division and privatisation in Narok, Kenya. All five regions are characterised by population growth, partially combined with considerable economic development, environmental degradation problems and social conflicts. Implications of the regional scenario impacts as well as methodological aspects are discussed. Overall, FoPIA proved to be a useful tool for diagnosing regional human-environment interactions and for supporting the communication and social learning process among different stakeholder groups.
Editorial: Wir greifen im vorliegenden Heft eine Reihe von eher praxisorientierten Fragestellungen auf, behandeln aber auch grundlegende Themen. Carolin König widmet sich in ihrem Beitrag über das TRIPS-Übereinkommen menschenrechtlichen Implikationen des geistigen Eigentums, wie sie vor allem für den Handel mit und die Entwicklung von Medikamenten von Bedeutung sind. Johannes Freudenreich und Florian Ranft liefern eine statistische Analyse der 29 Wahrheitskommissionen, die ihre Arbeit beendet haben. Dabei werden Variablen zu Ressourcen, Mandat, Inhalt und Ergebnis von Wahrheitskommissionen untersucht. Die Autoren wollten herausfinden, ob es ein Standardmodell für Wahrheitskommissionen gibt, kommen aber zu dem Ergebnis, dass sich ein solches noch nicht erkennbar herausgebildet hat. Unter dem Titel „Rechtsstaatlichkeit in Europa: Dogmatik im (Kon)text“ beschäftigen sich Philippe Gréciano und Norman Weiß mit dem diesbezüglichen Entwicklungsstand der Europäischen Union und versuchen, aus rechtsvergleichender Perspektive Anregungen für die weitere Entwicklung zu gewinnen. Silke Bruchmüller untersucht in ihrem Beitrag die Aktivitäten des Deutschen Bundestages im Zusammenhang mit der „Terrorismusbekämpfung in der 14. und 15. Legislaturperiode“. Der Beitrag „Menschsein als Teilhabe an innerer und äußerer Würde“ von Linda Pickny behandelt das Thema Menschenwürde aus rechtsphilosophischer Sicht. Anne Dieter ruft dazu auf, die „Menschenrechte leben [zu] lernen“, und erinnert so daran, den wohlweislich bereits in der Präambel der Allgemeinen Erklärung der Menschenrechte geforderten fortschreitenden Prozess der Anerkennung und Verwirklichung von Menschenrechten voranzutreiben. Der Dokumentationsteil enthält den traditionellen Bericht über die Arbeit des Menschenrechtsausschusses der Vereinten Nationen im Jahre 2008. Der erste Teil, verfasst von Anne Foith, behandelt vorrangig das Staatenberichtsverfahren. Corinna Dau und Gunda Meyer führen die Reihe „Mitgliedstaaten des Europarates“ mit einem Artikel über Lettland fort. Alexander Dietz und Frank Martin Brunn beschreiben Inhalte und Strukturen der „Interdisziplinäre[n] Forschung zum Thema Menschenwürde an der Universität Heidelberg“. Dem Problem der „Zirkulären Migration“ ist schließlich der Bericht von Julia Vespermann gewidmet. Buchbesprechungen runden das Heft ab, bei dessen Herstellung uns Jutta Wickenhäuser und Tim Reiß redaktionell unterstützt haben. Gunda Meyer scheidet mit diesem Heft aus der Redaktion aus, um sich ganz auf das Referendariat zu konzentrieren. Ihre Nachfolgerin, Anne Foith, gehört bereits zum Kreis unserer Autorinnen und Autoren. Wir wünschen unseren Lesern eine anregende Lektüre.
While inequality of opportunity (IOp) in earnings is well studied, the literature on IOp in individual net wealth is scarce to non-existent. This is problematic because both theoretical and empirical evidence show that the position in the wealth and income distribution can significantly diverge.We measure ex-ante IOp in net wealth for Germany using data from the Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP). Ex-ante IOp is defined as the contribution of circumstances to the inequality in net wealth before effort is exerted. The SOEP allows for a direct mapping from individual circumstances to individual net wealth and for a detailed decomposition of net wealth inequality into a variety of circumstances; among them childhood background, intergenerational transfers, and regional characteristics. The ratio of inequality of opportunity to total inequality is stable from 2002 to 2019. This is in sharp contrast to labor earnings, where ex-ante IOp is declining over time. Our estimates suggest that about 62% of the inequality in net wealth is due to circumstances. The most important circumstances are intergenerational transfers, parental occupation, and the region of birth. In contrast, gender and individuals’ own education are the most important circumstances for earnings.