RISULTATI RICERCA

Il saggio esamina il conflitto tra legislatore e giudici nazionali ed europei in materia di concessioni demaniali marittime. Analizzando la sentenza del Consiglio di Stato n. 4479/2024, l’Autrice ribadisce l’illegittimità delle proroghe generalizzate e la prevalenza del diritto europeo. Vengono approfonditi i concetti di scarsità della risorsa e interesse transfrontaliero, nonché il valore ambientale e sociale delle spiagge come beni comuni. Il contributo conclude auspicando una riforma organica che concili concorrenza, tutela ambientale e gestione sostenibile del demanio costiero

La Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea si è pronunciata in merito alla validità di una clausola, contenuta nelle condizioni generali di contratto, che vieta la cessione del diritto alla compensazione pecuniaria riconosciuto ai passeggeri in caso di cancellazione del volo. Nella fattispecie, sei passeggeri avevano ceduto tale diritto a una società di recupero crediti, la quale agiva in giudizio contro il vettore. La compagnia aerea eccepiva l’inammissibilità dell’azione, richiamando la clausola contenuta nelle condizioni generali di trasporto. La Corte ha affermato che il diritto alla compensazione pecuniaria trova fondamento direttamente nel reg. (CE) n. 261/2004, e che il divieto contrattuale di cessione dei diritti spettanti ai passeggeri integra una restrizione inammissibile ai sensi dell’art. 15 dello stesso regolamento.

Con la sentenza in commento, la Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea torna a esprimersi su un tema dibattuto in giurisprudenza e dottrina, relativo al riconoscimento del diritto alla compensazione pecuniaria al passeggero del trasporto aereo in caso di ritardo all’arrivo del volo. Nel caso di specie, la Corte ha negato il diritto di compensazione pecuniaria al passeggero che, dopo aver appreso del ritardo del volo originario, ha provveduto ad acquistare autonomamente un volo alternativo, raggiungendo la destinazione finale con un ritardo inferiore a tre ore rispetto all’orario originariamente previsto, non ritenendo che in tali circostanze il passeggero abbia sofferto alcun disagio grave, tale da giustificare il diritto alla compensazione.

Un recente arresto della Corte di Cassazione, sezione tributaria offre l’occasione per riconsiderare l’excursus normativo e giurisprudenziale che ha interessato gli obblighi fiscali riconducibili al gestore turistico, con riguardo all’imposta di soggiorno. Ciò che emerge chiaramente dall’analisi è l’incompleta struttura che ha contraddistinto il tributo, da un punto di vista normativo – fin dalla sua “delimitazione” all’interno del decreto sul federalismo municipale – causando complessità interpretative ancora non del tutto risolte. Tra queste quella più dibattuta è stata la scelta di molti enti di attribuire una caratterizzazione soggettiva non univoca, al predetto gestore, con il precipuo obiettivo di garantire l’incasso delle somme relative alle obbligazioni contratte, anche nel caso in cui l’effettivo mani-festante la capacità contributiva non avesse adempiuto correttamente all’impegno che ne derivava. Invero, tale aspetto ha avuto concrete ricadute, non solo nella fase accertativa, ma anche in quella riscossiva e sanzionatoria. In tempi più recenti, un altrettanto complesso incrocio normativo, sembra aver messo formalmente la parola fine all’inquadramento fiscale, almeno dal punto di vista interpretativo. L’intervento, tuttavia, non appare scevro di contraddizioni. Con il precipuo fine di formulare alcune osservazioni critiche e riflessioni conclusive, vengono esaminati alcuni risvolti di carattere generale e i più specifici istituti di diritto tributario sostanziale interessati.

L’autrice affronta il tema dell’obbligo di identificazione degli ospiti previsto dall’art. 109 t.u.l.p.s., con particolare attenzione alle modalità di self check-in nelle locazioni brevi. In tale prospettiva, critica le argomentazioni poste a fondamento della sentenza n. 10210/2025 del TAR Lazio – la quale ha annullato la Circolare ministeriale che imponeva l’identificazione de visu – ritenendo che l’eliminazione del requisito della presenza fisica comporti un ingiustificato affievolimento dei doveri di verifica gravanti sui gestori e rischi, al contempo, di svuotare di effettività la ratio di prevenzione e controllo perseguita dall’art. 109

Un recente arresto della Corte di Cassazione, sezione tributaria offre l’occasione per riconsiderare l’excursus normativo e giurisprudenziale che ha interessato gli obblighi fiscali riconducibili al gestore turistico, con riguardo all’imposta di soggiorno. Ciò che emerge chiaramente dall’analisi è l’incompleta struttura che ha contraddistinto il tributo, da un punto di vista normativo – fin dalla sua “delimitazione” all’interno del decreto sul federalismo municipale – causando complessità interpretative ancora non del tutto risolte. Tra queste quella più dibattuta è stata la scelta di molti enti di attribuire una caratterizzazione soggettiva non univoca, al predetto gestore, con il precipuo obiettivo di garantire l’incasso delle somme relative alle obbligazioni contratte, anche nel caso in cui l’effettivo mani-festante la capacità contributiva non avesse adempiuto correttamente all’impegno che ne derivava. Invero, tale aspetto ha avuto concrete ricadute, non solo nella fase accertativa, ma anche in quella riscossiva e sanzionatoria. In tempi più recenti, un altrettanto complesso incrocio normativo, sembra aver messo formalmente la parola fine all’inquadramento fiscale, almeno dal punto di vista interpretativo. L’intervento, tuttavia, non appare scevro di contraddizioni. Con il precipuo fine di formulare alcune osservazioni critiche e riflessioni conclusive, vengono esaminati alcuni risvolti di carattere generale e i più specifici istituti di diritto tributario sostanziale interessati

In this paper, we will explore a possible dialogue between educational pragmatism and post-critical pedagogy (PCP) and we will ‘test’ it in reference to the question of inclusion, which is arguably one of the chief notions in contemporary educational debate. To start with, we will object to the possibly unfortunate adoption of the “normativity” vocabulary within the Manifesto for a Post-Critical Pedagogy and we will suggest the need for a shift from the language of norms to that of values, by building on Hans Joas’ distinction between norms and values. While norms have to do with obligation and the limitation of possibilities of action, values are characterized by an ideal and inspirational function. In keeping with Joas’ distinction, we will argue that the notion of normativity may risk being accomplice with the excessive role of normative critique decried by postcritical approaches.
Against this backdrop, we will zoom in on the question of inclusion. We will indicate two possible outlooks: a critical pragmatist view of inclusion, as exemplified in some insights of José Medina, and a post-critical understanding, which we will outline in reference to Joas but also - via him - to the classics of educational pragmatism. We will finally suggest that the relationships between critique and post-critique should be construed in terms of a quasi-Bohrian complementarity and that pragmatism qua a “corridor theory,” as Papini famously put it, can help us to orchestrate this complex regime of relationships.

This paper investigates the potential of integrating the concept of justice into the post-critical theory of education. Drawing on the resonance of Hannah Arendt’s ideas within post-critical pedagogy, and acknowledging the communal dimension inherent in education, I propose the inclusion of justice as an essential element in post-critical educational discourse. The analysis critically engages with the ontological foundations of Arendt’s reflections on education, assessing their implications for the status of justice from a postcritical perspective. While Arendt’s strict delineation between the ontologies of politics and education presents a challenge to the straightforward application of justice within a post-critical perspective, this paper argues that justice remains vital for addressing the communal and ethical dimensions of education - as both a concern for the common world and an axiomatic affirmation of the subject’s capabilities in terms of equality, with the latter framed through a Rancièrean lens. To this end, I draw on alternative philosophical perspectives, particularly that of Alain Badiou, whose ideas are already integrated into the post-critical perspective on education, to explore pathways for incorporating justice into post-critical framework.

This article explores the complex relationship between education, democracy, and social justice, challenging the dominant view that education should serve as an instrument for achieving political goals, including equity and inclusion. Drawing on post-critical educational theories, particularly the works of Hannah Arendt and Jacques Rancière, the authors argue that education is an autonomous, intergenerational practice centered on introducing newcomers to the common world, fostering love and care for it, and enabling its renewal. The instrumentalization of education for social justice, they contend, undermines its essence by prioritizing critique over affirmation and imposing anti-educational practices like censorship and stultification. Similarly, the article criticizes the conflation of democracy with social justice, emphasizing that democracy is rooted in radical equality and collective deliberation around shared concerns, rather than the rectification of historical injustices. Ultimately, the authors advocate for a “thing-centered” approach to education and democracy, grounded in trust in the world and its shared durability.

This article addresses the call for education to engage with contemporary social and environmental challenges, whilst preserving its pedagogical integrity. By focusing on the genuinely educational core of the school and teaching we want to avoid falling in the trap of instrumentalizing education or functionalizing it in order to resolve societal problems, however, we will argue that its precisely these ‘essential characteristics’ of education and the school which might offer a response to the challenges we’re facing nonetheless. We intend to take up the matter of our current global predicament and frame it as an educational problem, drawing on several educational attitudes such as giving orientation, enabling agency and fostering a belief in - and responsibility for - the common world. In doing this we will argue for the correspondence between a logic of education and a logic of care for the world. We therefore end with a defense of the institution of the school and a more ‘traditional’ account of teaching against discourses which seek to frame it as outdated or inherently unsustainable, and we propose to emphasize the role it plays in fostering a renewed relation to the world. The purpose of this article, referring the title of a work by Isabelle Stengers, is a resistance to the oversimplification and impoverishment of our thinking (on education) and ways of (educational) life. Our account is therefore post-critical in the sense of that we intend to affirm the richness of an autotelic understanding of education, as well as its significance for finding ways to live more responsibly and sustainably.

Critical educators based their proposal on the question of teaching to change the world and society. Our aim is to contribute to a rethinking of the role of education in building a more just society through the new perspective of post-critical pedagogy (PCP). The authors propose to overpass the paradigm of changing the world, guided by the idea that education today should focus on guarding the world. We discuss two different concepts, that conceive PCP in two different ways: Hartmut Rosa’s concept of ‘resonance’ on one side, and Michel Serres’s idea of ‘mingling’ with the world on the other. Resonance delineates a manner in which individuals and the world engage in a relationship, ultimately shaping each other’s form. Rosa’s resonance theory is connected with critical theory: for Rosa, resonance is a space of meaning within the accelerated and alienating world. Instead Serres refuses the critical moment: according to him, the act of knowing does relies on a respectful ‘mingling’ with the world that does not entail any critical stance. Through this term, Serres encapsulates an ecological approach to knowledge, proposing a just relationship with the surrounding world as the foundation of knowledge. We will build on these concepts in order to affirm two different interpretations of PCP and justice, generally conceived as a just relationship with the surrounding world.

Different global institutions like the UN and the UNESCO make claims on a positive potential that the digitalization could have in achieving more social justice, particularly through education. This belief in the positive effects of digitalization in education will be challenged in this paper by addressing three concerns that are particularly connected with the experience of collectivity: 1) Social media is confused with a public space. 2) The isolating experience in using digital tools stands in contrast to the collectiveness of educational settings. 3) Educational responsibility is lost when digital tools are in charge of education.
These concerns will be discussed with reference to Hannah Arendt’s differentiation of disparate life spheres (the private, the political and the social), her analysis of the experience of being alone (solitude, isolation and loneliness) and her critique concerning the devaluation of the teacher’s profession. Finally, the analysis will be connected to a post-critical perspective in education that emphasizes the experience of collectivity in educational settings.

In the contemporary educational landscape, digital technologies have become an obligatory passage point, often appearing neutral, to the extent that they are rarely put under scrutiny and discussion. However, these are necessary steps in order to eventually reimaging them to attune to specific educational discursive frames. This article moves from the assumption that there is a need for educational researchers, educators and other relevant educational subjects to coalesce in a collective mobilisation that brings at the centre of public and policy debate the politics of digital education technology through a work of collective problematisation and reinvention. In order to contribute to this urgency, this article thus presents the theoretical and methodological underpinnings, and the results, of an experiment in what we call a public sociology of educational technology. Drawing on Michael Burawoy's plea for a Public Sociology (2004), our aim was to design and play with a methodology apt to carry out a work of creative and affirmative critique. The experiment was carried out by the L@bed Collective during the second edition of the Reclaim the Tech (RTT) Festival, held in Bologna in May 2024. During the workshop we invited our public to engage in a conversation about the design of the UNICA platform and its performative effects. We did this through a combination of two methods, walkthrough and a/r/tography, aimed respectively to playfully dis- and re-assemble materially the UNICA platform. We present some preliminary considerations on the insights which we gathered from such an experiment in public sociology of educational technology, with a specific reference to both the potential and limits of our methodology and the insights of such a collective work of denaturalisation, problematisation and reinvention.

What drives this article is a genuine and profound desire to understand how the post-critical perspective can offer readings that are more capable of grasping, understanding, and carefully treating the delicate phenomena of ‘radicalization’. This desire arises, as often happens, from a doubt. The doubt is whether the ‘critical’ dimension does not chain us within a dialectical reading without offering pedagogical escape routes, does not allow us to imagine practices for preventing radicalization phenomena that in turn configure themselves as polarizing, radical, and non-dialogical experiences.
In this article, the first move to understand the contribution of the postcritical perspective will be to start precisely from the critical perspective used as a reference framework within a field research experience. The final movement will be to understand more deeply whether we truly need a ‘post’ point of view, but especially whether and how this can offer a different reading of what prevention of violent radicalism phenomena is and how it can be rethought.

La particolarità del potere sostitutivo introdotto dalla riforma dell’art. 120 co. 2 della Costituzione è di aver messo in stretta relazione l’intervento di sostituzione da parte del Governo con i “livelli essenziali” delle prestazioni connesse con i diritti fondamentali, la cui definizione è affidata in via esclusiva allo Stato. La conclusione che sembra potersi trarre è che la sostituzione delle amministrazioni che non rispettino i “livelli essenziali” sia un dovere a cui il Governo non può sottrarsi pena essere chiamato a rispondere. Ma cosa succede nelle periferie il Governo non è in grado di conoscerlo, dato che il suo rappresentante in loco è il prefetto, organo che non è affatto addestrato ad occuparsi dei «diritti civili e sociali» dei cittadini diversi dalla sicurezza e dall’ordine pubblico.