School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences

About: School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences is a facility organization based out in Villejuif, France. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Politics. The organization has 1230 authors who have published 2084 publications receiving 57740 citations. The organization is also known as: Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales & EHESS.

Should there really be a ‘Dyslexia debate’?

Abstract: As its name suggests, the book The Dyslexia Debate by Julian Elliott and Elena Grigorenko aims to generate a debate on the concept of developmental dyslexia. Contrary to some misguided detractors of dyslexia (see text box below) these authors do not attempt to deny the existence of children with a specific reading disorder, nor do they deny that it has a strong underlying biological basis, even less do they try to convince the reader that dyslexia is just an excuse for bad teaching or a synonym of social disadvantage. Indeed, they can be commended for being very up-to-date on current research on the topic. The largest part of this book (Chapters 2, 3 and 4) is dedicated to a thorough review of the dyslexia literature, in its cognitive, neural, genetic and educational/therapeutic aspects. The breadth of research covered is remarkable, and its treatment is accurate, if not perfectly well balanced. One may indeed regret that, for the sake of its argument, the book prefers to emphasize inconsistencies and disagreements, rather than providing a more constructive synthesis by focusing on the (admittedly scarce) converging lines of evidence and points of broad agreement. Most importantly, the comprehensive review of the literature is only a means to the book’s real purpose, developed in the first and the last chapters: to demonstrate, step by step, that the notion of dyslexia has no validity, and that we should prefer instead the notion of reading disability. The dispute is not just about whether the notion of specific reading disability should be called dyslexia. The authors argue that there is no good reason to distinguish specific reading disability (dyslexia) from reading disability (or poor reading). Let us begin by clarifying this apparently sibylline point about the definition of dyslexia.### Typical detractors of the dyslexia concept British Member …

Contracting for an innovation under bilateral asymmetric information

Abstract: We analyze licensing contracts between informed innovators and developers exerting profit-increasing effort. Those contracts must simultaneously induce innovators to convey information on the value of their ideas, while inducing developers to exert effort and protecting the innovators' intellectual property rights. We show that the best innovators signal themselves by taking more royalties even if it reduces the developers' share of returns and their incentives. Moreover, royalties are more likely to be used when property rights are easy to enforce and pre-contractual evidence on innovation quality is hard to produce.

Who rules rare disease associations? A framework to understand their action.

Abstract: The inner structure of so-called 'patients' organisations' has been accorded relatively little attention with respect to their increasing role in the medical world. This comparative study in France of eight such organisations, matching six rare disorders, explores the issue of power and decision making through the description of the entities that make up the organisation (and especially which stakeholders are represented), their mutual relationships, the temporal scope of collective action, and the concrete achievements of the organisation. Two main types of organisation are distinguished: 'pluralistic' organisations (that bring together a broad array of different stakeholders who are willing to work together) and 'monistic' organisations (where a single category of stakeholders firmly takes the lead). Their operations are very different and result from the association's composition. A key finding is that both the usual opposition between lay and expert and the reference to the diseases' characteristics prove to be irrelevant to understanding these organisations. Rather, the composition of the leading group is crucial.

Évaluer la durabilité des exploitations agricoles. La méthode IDEA v4, un cadre conceptuel combinant dimensions et propriétés de la durabilité

Abstract: Cet article presente le nouveau cadre conceptuel d’evaluation de la durabilite de l’exploitation agricole developpe dans la methode IDEA v4. Il combine une approche evaluative basee sur les objectifs assignes a une agriculture durable et une evaluation des proprietes des systemes agricoles durables. Il s’ancre dans le champ de la durabilite forte, de la multifonctionnalite et prend en compte les enjeux globaux d’une agriculture durable. Ce cadre conceptuel a permis de construire 53 indicateurs permettant d’analyser la durabilite de l’exploitation agricole selon ces deux approches complementaires. La premiere evalue la durabilite en organisant ces 53 indicateurs selon les 3 dimensions normatives du developpement durable (agroecologique, socio-territoriale, economique), structurees en 13 composantes ; l’evaluation repose sur un systeme de notation base sur 100 unites de durabilite pour chacune des 3 dimensions qui ne se compensent pas entre elles. La seconde evalue la durabilite en organisant les 53 indicateurs selon les 5 proprietes des systemes agricoles durables (autonomie, robustesse, capacite productive et reproductive de biens et services, ancrage territorial et responsabilite globale) qui sont structurees de maniere arborescente en 15 branches ; l’agregation des indicateurs y suit une demarche qualitative et hierarchique mobilisant l’outil DEXi. Le potentiel pedagogique du concept de proprietes des systemes favorise une approche transdisciplinaire de l’exploitation agricole. A la suite de ses trois precedentes versions, IDEA v4 renouvelle son potentiel d’usage pour accompagner la transition agroecologique.