|
|
Francqui Prize Conference
Francqui Prize Conference
Cultural diversity versus economic solidarity. Is there a tension? How must it be resolved? Brussels, 28/2/03-1/3/03 In June 2001, Philippe Van Parijs was awarded the Francqui Prize. Part of this annual prize consists in the funding, by the Francqui Foundation, of a major international conference in the area of interest of the laureate.
The conference took place on 28 February and 1 March 2003 at the University Foundation (Brussels), with the active participation of 120 invited scholars from over 20 countries and Crown Prince Philippe of Belgium. The conference was opened by Professor Mark Eyskens, former Prime Minister of Belgium and Chairman of the Francqui Foundation, and the last speaker was Professor Frank Vandebroucke, Belgium's federal Minister for social affairs. Twelve papers were circulated in advance and briefely presented at the conference. Each discussion was introduced by two comments, one long and one short in each case focusing on two papers simultaneously. All papers and comments are or will soon be downloadable from this site. Their final versions will be gathered in a collective volume to be published by the Francqui Foundation (in conjunction with De Boeck Université) in a series consisting of all the proceedings of the conferences organized by its successive laureates. The whole book and each of its chapters can be downloaded from Cultural diversity versus economic solidarity.
Theme of the conference Presumption. Other things being equal, the more cultural (and in particular linguistic) homogeneity within the population of a politically defined territory, the better the prospects in terms of economic solidarity. Or, conversely, the more is done to preserve cultural (and in particular linguistic) diversity - typically by creating territorial subunits and giving them the power to protect their distinct languages -, the poorer the prospects, other things being equal, for a viable institutionalised solidarity embracing the whole population. The underlying mechanisms are diverse (multidimensional efficiency costs of linguistic diversity, extensive autonomy of linguistically distinct federal units, reduced trans-regional mobility, development of separate public forums, lesser emotional identification with "allophones", etc.) and may operate to very different extents in different contexts, but the resulting presumption seems strong enough (seen from Belgium at any rate) to be used as a point of departure.
Questions. On this backgound, the conference should focus on three sorts of questions:
Interdisciplinary. The aim is to foster a fruitful interaction between (1) people who know and understand (some of) the relevant facts in such multilingual polities as the Congo, South Africa, India, Canada or the European Union, and are interested in the question of what should be done; and (2) people who have thought about the underlying general normative issues, and are interested in the concrete contexts in which they arise.
SESSION 1 David LAITIN (Department of political science, Stanford University), Comments by Jean LAPONCE (Department of political science, University of British Columbia)
SESSION 2 Stuart N. SOROKA, Richard JOHNSTON and Keith BANTING (Queen's University), "Ethnicity, Trust and the Welfare State" Comments by Anne PHILLIPS (Gender Institute, London School of Economics & Political Science)
SESSION 3 Dominique SCHNAPPER (EHESS), "Linguistic Pluralism as a Serious Challenge to Democratic Life" Comment by Justine LACROIX (Faculty of Political Science, Université libre de Bruxelles), Comments on Schnapper and Banting/Kymlica
SESSION 4 Jeremy SEEKINGS (University of Cape Town), "Institutional Design, Cultural Diversity and Economic Solidarity. A Comparison of South Africa, Brazil and Nigeria" Comments by Fabio WALTENBERG (Université catholique de Louvain), Have Seekings and Tamir persuasively refuted the existence of the conference trade-off?
SESSION 5 Eliana LA FERRARA (Department of economics, Università Bocconi, Milano), "Solidarity in Heterogeneous Communities" Comments by Andrew WILLIAMS (Department of philosophy, University of Reading and Harvard University) Discussion launched by Ingrid ROBEYNS (Department of political science, Universitait van Amsterdam)
SESSION 6 Ugo PAGANO (Università degli Studi di Siena), "Linguistic Standardization and Redistribution as Alternative Insurance Mechanisms " Comments by
SESSION 7 Will KYMLICKA (Queen's University, Concluding Reflections - What Have We Learned? Concluding reflections by Philippe VAN PARIJS
Additional background material
|
25/01/2010
|
|