UNSA Vienna aims at promoting dialogue about and engagement with most commonly overlooked yet important topics within the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) framework.
Since the beginning the UNSA Vienna team has worked hard in order to establish itself as an important connector and thematic initiator within the SDGs framework through
- designing a functional and efficient process for the identification of relevant, yet mainly neglected topics within the SDG framework and
- developing and implementing high-quality, solution-oriented and practical approaches towards the subsequently identified topics.
In concreto, UNSA Vienna is currently working on and raising awareness about two topics, namely
Additionally, two projects on YOUTH EMPOWEREMENT and CORRUPTION are planned for the near future.
Within its work on these specific topics the UNSA Vienna team contributes to the implementation of all 17 SDGs, as UNSA Vienna strongly believes that all SDGs are interrelated and cannot be understood separately – no matter which topic you are focusing on.
To serve its purpose, the UNSA Vienna team uses
- publications formats,
- event formats and
- educational formats.
UNSA Vienna veranstaltet einen Kunstwettbewerb, um auf die Tatsache aufmerksam zu machen, dass immer mehr Menschen aufgrund von Umweltkatastrophen gezwungen sind, ihre Heimat zu verlassen. / UNSA Vienna is hosting an Art Competition to raise awareness of the fact that nearly every day, people are forced to leave their homes due to environmental disasters.
: Book Launching Webinar: Crime Prevention and Justice in 2030 - In Honour of 75 Years United Nations
On 10th December an online/ZOOM virtual book launching hosted by the International Institute for Peace in cooperation with UNSA Vienna features 5 real-time topical statements with online discussants and other Q&A participants (75 minutes), preceded by 6 introductory pre-recorded & edited statements of other book contributors (45 minutes).
Why collecting data on femicide matters? In collaboration with UNODC and SAGE (Students Advocating for Gender Equality), UNSA Vienna is hosting, on December 8, an online event to talk about the paramount importance that data collection on femicide has. On this occasion, the Volume XIII of the UNSA Vienna FEMICIDE Collection “Collecting Data on Femicide” will be introduced.
On this given occasion, namely the COVID-19 crisis, FEMICIDE Volume XIV, Femicide in the History and Presence of Pandemics, aims to analyze and question the impact of pandemics on the issue of femicide from diverse perspectives.
Celebrating women’s leadership within the present global context.
This paper questions the relationship between datasets on fem(in)icide and highlights the complexities of rendering it comparable across time and spaces. Theoretically, it contributes to the sociology of knowledge as it offers a reflexive critique of the practices that create objectified forms of knowledge. Knowledge is conceived not just as an ‘abstract social “construct” [but], specifically a social product, generated by and embodied in particular forms of work’ (Connell et al. 2017: 24). The role of numbers in the shape of data, statistics or indicators are understood as ‘part and parcel’ of the object of study they seek to describe (Bigo et al. 2019; Bruno et al 2016; Desrosières 2002, Foucault 1968, 1978, Hacking 1980; Uprichard 2012; Ruppert 2019). This means that categories, concepts and patterns transmute along with the numbers used to represent them. The argument is divided into three sections, the first of which explores the theoretical conceptualisations and quantifications of fem(in) icide. It questions to what extent the problems of quantifying fem(in)icide are an epiphenomenon of its variance in definitions. The second section grapples with empirical ‘global’, ‘regional’ and ‘national’ efforts to compare fem(in)icide across time and spaces. By zooming in on Mexico as a case study, the paper highlights the complexities of generating comparable data on fem(in)icide due to distinct differences in context. The danger in reducing fem(in)icide to ‘intimate-femicide’ is highlighted as this leaves certain bodies outside of the ‘global’ logics of quantification. As an alternative, the paper’s final section stresses the need to embrace multiplicity through reflexivity in knowledge production. Given the rapid acceleration of digital technologies and data collection methods, it suggests how future studies could strongly benefit from looking into alternative ways of collecting data on fem(in)icide if our aim is to understand further the contextual particularities of this heinous phenomena.