ICON S Conference 17 – 19 June 2016 Humboldt University Berlin

are viewed as “other” by one another, each invested
with its own social, cultural, and political content. These
differences may be reflected in the means used to
reach the purported desired end – a healthy, safe, and
accessible food supply – and this difference may be a
source of conflict. This friction, however, can also be
a space of foment for policy change and democratic
engagement. In this Paper, I explore the perception that
these regulatory spheres are opposed, and examine
the source and implications of this view.
Aeyal Gross: Food Security. A Supply or Demand
Problem?
The social protests in Israel in summer of 2011
started with food prices protests, before the focus
shifted to housing. Nonetheless the issue of the right
to food was almost completely excluded from the social
reforms suggested by the think tank which came
out of the protests. Instead, most of the discussion of
food took place in discourses of government bodies
which focused on the price of food. As a result, various
reforms were proposed and began to be implemented,
so as to increase competition in the food market. The
assumption was that this would cause a decrease in
food prices. The National Council on Food Security suggested
another reform, focusing on the institutionalization
and the financing of food hand outs to poor families.
This paper argues that reforms or food security
often deal with supply, whereas major causes of food
insecurity lie with demand, i.e. the reduced buying power
of poor families. It points to how general economic
policies including cuts in welfare are at the root of the
increase in food insecurity, and that reforms on the
supply side are limited in what, if at all, they can achieve.
37 FEDERALISM ALONG AND
BEYOND BORDERS.
A NEO-FEDERALIST PERSPECTIVE
In the last twenty years federalism seemed to be a
crucial concept to establish democracy and rule of
law. If we understood federalism as oneside of the coin,
secession and disintegration seem to be the other
side. Federalism enables cooperation along borders
and strengthens external borders. When borders are
collapsing, federalism is challenged. New internal borders
might be set up. The panel will address these issues
of federalism & secession within domestic states
(comparative perspective) and beyond (European and
international perspective). The role of sub-national
entities in the 21st century is crucial to solve global
problems on the ground (like migration, integration,
environmental issues etc). The identity of sub-national
entities is changing and constitutional law is often not
providing sufficient solutions to these developments.
The panel will analyse these challenges from different
perspectives, including methodological considerations,
institution-based analysis, the democratic dimension
and core ideas of federalism. Altogether, the panel develops
a bigger picture of a neo-federalist perspective,
which addresses federalism along and beyond borders.
Participants
Name of Chair
Room
Barbara Guastaferro
Lucía Payero López
Dirk Hanschel
Konrad Lachmayer
Konrad Lachmayer
BE2 E42
Barbara Guastaferro: Institutional Responses
to Territorial Differentiation: Comparing Italy
and the UK
Important reforms of constitutional significance
are currently affecting national legislatures in Italy and
the United Kingdom, where the composition of one
of the Houses of Parliament is going to be modified
responding to a call for territorial differentiation. On the
one hand, the reformed Italian Senate will represent
“territorial institutions” – and no longer “the Nation” – as
it happens in some of the second Chambers of fullyfledged
federal States. On the other hand, the “English
Votes for English Laws” procedure introduced into the
House of Commons, will allow legislation affecting England
to be enacted only with the consent of Members of
Parliament for constituencies in England, thus excluding
MPs representing devolved legislatures. Against
this backdrop, the paper will analyze the constitutional
and political significance of territorial representation for
unitary – rather than federal States – and explore the
causes of the emerging “territorialisation” of national
legislatures.
Concurring panels 69