WS_2027_Review form_Annie BUNTING, Letizia PAOLI, Nicole BÖGELEIN, Samara VELTE, Thiago R. OLIVEIRA, Yvonne MCDERMOTT REES, Giulia ARENA and Antonino AZZARÀ

Name of reviewer: *

Title: "Hope, Rights and Justice in times of Crisis"

COORDINATORS: ANNIE BUNTING, JENNIFER BALINT, FRANKA VAUGHAN and MARGOT YOUNG. None of the organisers are involved in the Institute’s research lines.

1) Quality of the workshop proposal (see brief description of the workshop, workshop programme, CVs of organisers and their prior publications [including with the IISL]) *

Please assess in this section: ● Does the workshop meaningfully contribute to socio-legal studies / sociology of law? ● Do track-record and scholarly potential of the organisers let expect a good workshop? ● What are the prospects of successful publication of workshop in IISL outlets?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

2) Originality of the proposed workshop (see the respective section in the workshop proposal (see the respective document in the application file) *

Please assess in this section: ● What makes this workshop original and distinctive vs. "more of the same"? ● Does it aim to open new lines of research (and are these still relevant to the IISL)? ● Does it create novel connections between different fields, approaches, communities?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

3) Spread of participation (see list of participants [please focus on confirmed participants marked with *], language of the workshop and the proposal, and related explanations) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent do participants represent different national/regional/cultural contexts? ● Are participants from different career stages actively involved in the workshop? ● Is the choice of the language of the workshop appropriate (English, Spanish, bilingual)?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

4) Relevance to the Basque Country (see the respective section in the workshop proposal) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent does the proposal indicate connections to the Basque Country? ● If it is not specifically dealing with Basque topics: Is it still relevant for local people? ● If it is explicitly taking up Basque topics: Is this done in a scholarly convincing manner?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

Title: "Conceptualizing, Assessing, and Reducing Harm: Drawing Insight from Victims’ Experience, Policy Initiatives, and Varied Disciplines"

COORDINATORS: LETIZIA PAOLI, VICTORIA GREENFIELD, FERNANDO MIRÓ LLINARES and GEMMA VARONA MARTÍNEZ. None of the organisers are involved in the Institute’s research lines.

1) Quality of the workshop proposal (see brief description of the workshop, workshop programme, CVs of organisers and their prior publications [including with the IISL]) *

Please assess in this section: ● Does the workshop meaningfully contribute to socio-legal studies / sociology of law? ● Do track-record and scholarly potential of the organisers let expect a good workshop? ● What are the prospects of successful publication of workshop in IISL outlets?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

2) Originality of the proposed workshop (see the respective section in the workshop proposal (see the respective document in the application file) *

Please assess in this section: ● What makes this workshop original and distinctive vs. "more of the same"? ● Does it aim to open new lines of research (and are these still relevant to the IISL)? ● Does it create novel connections between different fields, approaches, communities?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

3) Spread of participation (see list of participants [please focus on confirmed participants marked with *], language of the workshop and the proposal, and related explanations) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent do participants represent different national/regional/cultural contexts? ● Are participants from different career stages actively involved in the workshop? ● Is the choice of the language of the workshop appropriate (English, Spanish, bilingual)?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

4) Relevance to the Basque Country (see the respective section in the workshop proposal) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent does the proposal indicate connections to the Basque Country? ● If it is not specifically dealing with Basque topics: Is it still relevant for local people? ● If it is explicitly taking up Basque topics: Is this done in a scholarly convincing manner?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

Title: "Wicked Cases, Wicked States? Challenging Authoritarianism in the Courts"

COORDINATORS: NICOLE BÖGELEIN, RENATA MUSTAFINA and KERSTIN BREE CARLSON.None of the organisers are involved in the Institute’s research lines.

1) Quality of the workshop proposal (see brief description of the workshop, workshop programme, CVs of organisers and their prior publications [including with the IISL]) *

Please assess in this section: ● Does the workshop meaningfully contribute to socio-legal studies / sociology of law? ● Do track-record and scholarly potential of the organisers let expect a good workshop? ● What are the prospects of successful publication of workshop in IISL outlets?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

2) Originality of the proposed workshop (see the respective section in the workshop proposal (see the respective document in the application file) *

Please assess in this section: ● What makes this workshop original and distinctive vs. "more of the same"? ● Does it aim to open new lines of research (and are these still relevant to the IISL)? ● Does it create novel connections between different fields, approaches, communities?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

3) Spread of participation (see list of participants [please focus on confirmed participants marked with *], language of the workshop and the proposal, and related explanations) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent do participants represent different national/regional/cultural contexts? ● Are participants from different career stages actively involved in the workshop? ● Is the choice of the language of the workshop appropriate (English, Spanish, bilingual)?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

4) Relevance to the Basque Country (see the respective section in the workshop proposal) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent does the proposal indicate connections to the Basque Country? ● If it is not specifically dealing with Basque topics: Is it still relevant for local people? ● If it is explicitly taking up Basque topics: Is this done in a scholarly convincing manner?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

Title: "Memory, mediations and transitions: language and the imaginary of conflict"

COORDINATORS: SAMARA VELTE, NATALIE BRABER, THOMAS VAN DE PUTTE and SOPHIE VAN DEN ELZEN. None of the organisers are involved in the Institute’s research lines.

1) Quality of the workshop proposal (see brief description of the workshop, workshop programme, CVs of organisers and their prior publications [including with the IISL]) *

Please assess in this section: ● Does the workshop meaningfully contribute to socio-legal studies / sociology of law? ● Do track-record and scholarly potential of the organisers let expect a good workshop? ● What are the prospects of successful publication of workshop in IISL outlets?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

2) Originality of the proposed workshop (see the respective section in the workshop proposal (see the respective document in the application file) *

Please assess in this section: ● What makes this workshop original and distinctive vs. "more of the same"? ● Does it aim to open new lines of research (and are these still relevant to the IISL)? ● Does it create novel connections between different fields, approaches, communities?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

3) Spread of participation (see list of participants [please focus on confirmed participants marked with *], language of the workshop and the proposal, and related explanations) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent do participants represent different national/regional/cultural contexts? ● Are participants from different career stages actively involved in the workshop? ● Is the choice of the language of the workshop appropriate (English, Spanish, bilingual)?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

4) Relevance to the Basque Country (see the respective section in the workshop proposal) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent does the proposal indicate connections to the Basque Country? ● If it is not specifically dealing with Basque topics: Is it still relevant for local people? ● If it is explicitly taking up Basque topics: Is this done in a scholarly convincing manner?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

Title: "Legal Cynicism, Trust, and Legitimacy: Linking Micro and Macro Processes in the Study of Crime and the Rule of Law"

COORDINATORS: THIAGO R. OLIVEIRA, CHARLES C. LANFEAR, DAVID KIRK and ROBERT J. SAMPSON. None of the organisers are involved in the Institute’s research lines.

1) Quality of the workshop proposal (see brief description of the workshop, workshop programme, CVs of organisers and their prior publications [including with the IISL]) *

Please assess in this section: ● Does the workshop meaningfully contribute to socio-legal studies / sociology of law? ● Do track-record and scholarly potential of the organisers let expect a good workshop? ● What are the prospects of successful publication of workshop in IISL outlets?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

2) Originality of the proposed workshop (see the respective section in the workshop proposal (see the respective document in the application file) *

Please assess in this section: ● What makes this workshop original and distinctive vs. "more of the same"? ● Does it aim to open new lines of research (and are these still relevant to the IISL)? ● Does it create novel connections between different fields, approaches, communities?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

3) Spread of participation (see list of participants [please focus on confirmed participants marked with *], language of the workshop and the proposal, and related explanations) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent do participants represent different national/regional/cultural contexts? ● Are participants from different career stages actively involved in the workshop? ● Is the choice of the language of the workshop appropriate (English, Spanish, bilingual)?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

4) Relevance to the Basque Country (see the respective section in the workshop proposal) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent does the proposal indicate connections to the Basque Country? ● If it is not specifically dealing with Basque topics: Is it still relevant for local people? ● If it is explicitly taking up Basque topics: Is this done in a scholarly convincing manner?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

Title: "Trust in Evidence in an Era of AI: Socio-Legal Perspectives"

COORDINATORS: YVONNE MCDERMOTT REES, MARYANNE BRASSIL and ANNE HAUSKNECHT. None of the organisers are involved in the Institute’s research lines.

1) Quality of the workshop proposal (see brief description of the workshop, workshop programme, CVs of organisers and their prior publications [including with the IISL]) *

Please assess in this section: ● Does the workshop meaningfully contribute to socio-legal studies / sociology of law? ● Do track-record and scholarly potential of the organisers let expect a good workshop? ● What are the prospects of successful publication of workshop in IISL outlets?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

2) Originality of the proposed workshop (see the respective section in the workshop proposal (see the respective document in the application file) *

Please assess in this section: ● What makes this workshop original and distinctive vs. "more of the same"? ● Does it aim to open new lines of research (and are these still relevant to the IISL)? ● Does it create novel connections between different fields, approaches, communities?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

3) Spread of participation (see list of participants [please focus on confirmed participants marked with *], language of the workshop and the proposal, and related explanations) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent do participants represent different national/regional/cultural contexts? ● Are participants from different career stages actively involved in the workshop? ● Is the choice of the language of the workshop appropriate (English, Spanish, bilingual)?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

4) Relevance to the Basque Country (see the respective section in the workshop proposal) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent does the proposal indicate connections to the Basque Country? ● If it is not specifically dealing with Basque topics: Is it still relevant for local people? ● If it is explicitly taking up Basque topics: Is this done in a scholarly convincing manner?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

Title: "Institutionalizing Intersectionality in Southern Europe: shared trajectories and pending structural challenges"

COORDINATORS: Giulia ARENA and Mariacaterina LA BARBERA. None of the organisers are involved in the Institute’s research lines.

1) Quality of the workshop proposal (see brief description of the workshop, workshop programme, CVs of organisers and their prior publications [including with the IISL]) *

Please assess in this section: ● Does the workshop meaningfully contribute to socio-legal studies / sociology of law? ● Do track-record and scholarly potential of the organisers let expect a good workshop? ● What are the prospects of successful publication of workshop in IISL outlets?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

2) Originality of the proposed workshop (see the respective section in the workshop proposal (see the respective document in the application file) *

Please assess in this section: ● What makes this workshop original and distinctive vs. "more of the same"? ● Does it aim to open new lines of research (and are these still relevant to the IISL)? ● Does it create novel connections between different fields, approaches, communities?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

3) Spread of participation (see list of participants [please focus on confirmed participants marked with *], language of the workshop and the proposal, and related explanations) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent do participants represent different national/regional/cultural contexts? ● Are participants from different career stages actively involved in the workshop? ● Is the choice of the language of the workshop appropriate (English, Spanish, bilingual)?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

4) Relevance to the Basque Country (see the respective section in the workshop proposal) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent does the proposal indicate connections to the Basque Country? ● If it is not specifically dealing with Basque topics: Is it still relevant for local people? ● If it is explicitly taking up Basque topics: Is this done in a scholarly convincing manner?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

Title: "Security as Care for Relationships and Communities. Redefining the Concept of Security in Contemporary Global Crises"

COORDINATORS: ANTONINO AZZARÀ, STEFANO ANASTASÌA, VINCENZO SCALIA and LUDOVICA CHERUBINI SCARAFONI. None of the organisers are involved in the Institute’s research lines.

1) Quality of the workshop proposal (see brief description of the workshop, workshop programme, CVs of organisers and their prior publications [including with the IISL]) *

Please assess in this section: ● Does the workshop meaningfully contribute to socio-legal studies / sociology of law? ● Do track-record and scholarly potential of the organisers let expect a good workshop? ● What are the prospects of successful publication of workshop in IISL outlets?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

2) Originality of the proposed workshop (see the respective section in the workshop proposal (see the respective document in the application file) *

Please assess in this section: ● What makes this workshop original and distinctive vs. "more of the same"? ● Does it aim to open new lines of research (and are these still relevant to the IISL)? ● Does it create novel connections between different fields, approaches, communities?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

3) Spread of participation (see list of participants [please focus on confirmed participants marked with *], language of the workshop and the proposal, and related explanations) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent do participants represent different national/regional/cultural contexts? ● Are participants from different career stages actively involved in the workshop? ● Is the choice of the language of the workshop appropriate (English, Spanish, bilingual)?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

4) Relevance to the Basque Country (see the respective section in the workshop proposal) *

Please assess in this section: ● To what extent does the proposal indicate connections to the Basque Country? ● If it is not specifically dealing with Basque topics: Is it still relevant for local people? ● If it is explicitly taking up Basque topics: Is this done in a scholarly convincing manner?

	1	2	3	4	5
Your score: (max. 5 points) *	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 1	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 2	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 3	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 4	Your score: (max. 5 points) - 5

Your comments: *

(In key words or bullet points)

Overall scoring: *

Considering my above scores and comments for the applications I was assigned to review, I arrive at the following ranking of the selected applications:

	A (best)	B (medium)	C (lowest)
Hope, Rights and Justice in times of Crisis *	Hope, Rights and Justice in times of Crisis - A (best)	Hope, Rights and Justice in times of Crisis - B (medium)	Hope, Rights and Justice in times of Crisis - C (lowest)
Conceptualizing, Assessing, and Reducing Harm... *	Conceptualizing, Assessing, and Reducing Harm... - A (best)	Conceptualizing, Assessing, and Reducing Harm... - B (medium)	Conceptualizing, Assessing, and Reducing Harm... - C (lowest)
Wicked Cases, Wicked States? Challenging Authoritarianism in the Courts *	Wicked Cases, Wicked States? Challenging Authoritarianism in the Courts - A (best)	Wicked Cases, Wicked States? Challenging Authoritarianism in the Courts - B (medium)	Wicked Cases, Wicked States? Challenging Authoritarianism in the Courts - C (lowest)
Memory, mediations and transitions: language and the imaginary of conflict *	Memory, mediations and transitions: language and the imaginary of conflict - A (best)	Memory, mediations and transitions: language and the imaginary of conflict - B (medium)	Memory, mediations and transitions: language and the imaginary of conflict - C (lowest)
Legal Cynicism, Trust, and Legitimacy: Linking Micro and Macro Processes in the Study of Crime and the Rule of Law *	Legal Cynicism, Trust, and Legitimacy: Linking Micro and Macro Processes in the Study of Crime and the Rule of Law - A (best)	Legal Cynicism, Trust, and Legitimacy: Linking Micro and Macro Processes in the Study of Crime and the Rule of Law - B (medium)	Legal Cynicism, Trust, and Legitimacy: Linking Micro and Macro Processes in the Study of Crime and the Rule of Law - C (lowest)
Trust in Evidence in an Era of AI: Socio-Legal Perspectives *	Trust in Evidence in an Era of AI: Socio-Legal Perspectives - A (best)	Trust in Evidence in an Era of AI: Socio-Legal Perspectives - B (medium)	Trust in Evidence in an Era of AI: Socio-Legal Perspectives - C (lowest)
Institutionalizing Intersectionality in Southern Europe: shared trajectories and pending structural challenges *	Institutionalizing Intersectionality in Southern Europe: shared trajectories and pending structural challenges - A (best)	Institutionalizing Intersectionality in Southern Europe: shared trajectories and pending structural challenges - B (medium)	Institutionalizing Intersectionality in Southern Europe: shared trajectories and pending structural challenges - C (lowest)
Security as Care for Relationships and Communities. Redefining the Concept of Security in Contemporary Global Crises *	Security as Care for Relationships and Communities. Redefining the Concept of Security in Contemporary Global Crises - A (best)	Security as Care for Relationships and Communities. Redefining the Concept of Security in Contemporary Global Crises - B (medium)	Security as Care for Relationships and Communities. Redefining the Concept of Security in Contemporary Global Crises - C (lowest)

I authorize the IISL to process my assessment information: *

I authorize the Institute to use the information on the evaluation of applications for the evaluation of proposals received and only for that purpose.

YES

NO

Sending date:

Month

Day

Year

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Math question * 12 + 6 =

More information?

For more information:

Workshop Coordination Team

Avenida de la Universidad, 8
Apartado 28
20560 Oñati (Gipuzkoa) - Spain
T: +34 943 78... Ver teléfono
E: workshop@iisj.es

Oñati International Institute for the Sociology of Law

Ibarra Zelaia 3 (AHPG) - Apartado 28
20560 Oñati (Gipuzkoa)
Spain

Support the IISL

The Institute has received many generous individual donations for a number of years.

Make a donation