bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Protective and connective professionalism: What we have learned and what we still would like to learn
Authors: Noordegraaf Mirko , Brock David M 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This essay begins with a contribution from Mirko Noordegraaf, author of the 2020 ‘From Protective to Connective Professionalism’ article that initiated this series of exchanges in the Journal of Professions and Organization (JPO). Then, wrapping up this series, David Brock, JPO Editor-in-Chief, looks back at protective and connective constructs in our literature, and suggests several research directions. Our aim is not to close the debate, but to open it up and connect it to promising research avenues, newly arising research strands and promising publications.
A Qa-SNARE complex contributes to soybean cyst nematode resistance via regulation of mitochondria-mediated cell death
Authors: Wang Rui , Deng Miaomiao , Yang Chao , Yu Qianqian , Zhang Lei , Zhu Qun , Guo Xiaoli 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
The resistance to Heterodera glycines 1 (Rhg1) locus is widely used by soybean breeders to reduce yield loss caused by soybean cyst nematode (SCN). α-SNAP (α-soluble NSF attachment protein) within Rhg1 locus contributes to SCN resistance by modulation of cell status at the SCN feeding site; however, the underlying mechanism is largely unclear. Here, we identified an α-SNAP-interacting protein, GmSYP31A, a Qa-SNARE (soluble NSF attachment protein receptor) protein from soybean. Expression of GmSYP31A significantly induced cell death in Nicotiana benthamiana leaves, and co-expression of α-SNAP and GmSYP31A could accelerate cell death. Overexpression of GmSYP31A increased SCN resistance, while silencing or overexpression of a dominant-negative form of GmSYP31A increased SCN sensitivity. GmSYP31A expression also disrupted endoplasmic reticulum-Golgi trafficking, and the exocytosis pathway. Moreover, α-SNAP was also found to interact with GmVDAC1D (voltage-dependent anion channel). The cytotoxicity induced by the expression of GmSYP31A could be relieved either with the addition of an inhibitor of VDAC protein, or by silencing the VDAC gene. Taken together, our data not only demonstrate that α-SNAP works together with GmSYP31A to increase SCN resistance through triggering cell death, but also highlight the unexplored link between the mitochondrial apoptosis pathway and vesicle trafficking.
The quiescent centre of the root apical meristem: conceptual developments from Clowes to modern times
Authors: Dubrovsky Joseph G , Ivanov Victor B 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
In this review we discuss the concepts of the quiescent centre (QC) of the root apical meristem (RAM) and their change over time, from their formulation by F.A.L. Clowes to the present. This review is dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the birth of Clowes, and we present his short biography and a full bibliography of Clowes’ work. Over time, the concept of the QC proved to be useful for the understanding of RAM organization and behaviour. We focus specifically on conceptual developments, from the organization of the QC to understanding its functions in RAM maintenance and activity, ranging from a model species, Arabidopsis thaliana, to crops. Concepts of initial cells, stem cells, and heterogeneity of the QC cells in the context of functional and structural stem cells are considered. We review the role of the QC in the context of cell flux in the RAM and the nature of quiescence of the QC cells. We discuss the origin of the QC and fluctuation of its size in ontogenesis and why the QC cells are more resistant to stress. Contemporary concepts of the organizer and stem cell niche are also considered. We also propose how the stem cell niche in the RAM can be defined in roots of a non-model species.
The Third Element
Authors: d'Aspremont Jean 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter focuses on the norm-creating character of the standard whose customary status is tested as another possible constitutive element of customary international law. It examines the third constitutive element of customary international law, which is the common recognition by international law of the enormous definitional powers to the International Court of Justice when it comes to the custom-identification criteria. It also explores the discursive performance that consists of the constant turning of a blind eye to a specific claim made by the Court in the 1969 North Sea Continental Shelve. The chapter highlights the 1969 North Sea Continental Shelf wherein the Court confirmed the dualistic approach and the consciousness of having a duty may be in order to offer an articulate definition of opinio juris for the first time. It argues that the requirement that the standard whose customary status is tested must be norm-creating as it was prescribed by the Court in the North Sea Continental Shelfcase.
System-support
Authors: d'Aspremont Jean 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter analyzes another common discursive performance witnessed in relation to customary international law that consists of the bestowing of a system-support function upon customary international law. It describes the various facets of discursive performance and particular ways in which customary international law is construed as playing a system-buttressing function. It also mentions how customary international law provides a guarantee for a minimum content for international. The chapter discusses the possibility for customary international law to be the formal nest of all the fundamental doctrines of international law and reviews the closure of international law through self-explanation. It cites customary international law as a system-support function that is informed by the presupposition that customary international law guarantees that there will always be some international legal rules of sort.
The Empire of Rules
Authors: d'Aspremont Jean 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter considers the constant deference to the idea of rule as the most ordinary discursive performance witnessed in the discourse on customary international law. It examines how the idea of rule dominates most arguments about customary international law, be them pertaining to the identification of customary international law or to the law that has been identified as having a customary status. It also cites the custom-formative process and the product of that process that are understood in terms of rules in international legal thought and practice. The chapter describes customary international law as a rule-governed rule-making process wherein there are rules on the identification of customary international law as well as rules of customary international law. It formulates some observations on the pull of the ruleness witnessed in the discourse on customary international law.
Concluding Remarks
Authors: d'Aspremont Jean 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter reviews the discourse on customary international law that is splendid thanks to the myriad of discursive performances that are achieved each time a claim is made about customary international law. It analyzes the anatomic account of the discourse on customary international law that contributed to an image of customary international law as a sophisticated doctrine whereby its users perform all kinds of discursive feats. It also demonstrates that textuality does not have the monopoly on discursive splendour in international law. The chapter argues that textuality is everywhere in customary international law notwithstanding as it is commonly understood as a source of unwritten law. It emphasizes that the discursive splendour of customary international law is neither a-textual nor pre-textual but rooted in the very textual materializations of customary international law.
Race, Refugees, and International Law
Authors: Tendayi Achiume E. 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
The experiences of refugees are heavily mediated by race and ethnicity, and international law plays a significant role in this mediation—in some cases offering important protections, and in others entrenching discrimination and exclusion. This Chapter makes four contributions. First, it articulates a structural and intersectional account of race, racial discrimination and xenophobic discrimination as essential starting points for international legal analysis of race and refugees. This analysis includes the overlap and distinctions between racial and xenophobic discrimination, as well as the role of religion, class and gender in shaping racial discrimination against refugees. Secondly, it reviews the doctrine on race and refugees in international refugee law and international human rights law, and maps the attendant academic literature analyzing this law. Thirdly, the Chapter canvasses legal scholarship that has examined the structure, history and development of the international refugee regime in relation to race. Finally, it concludes with reflections on a research agenda on race and refugees.
The Ethics of International Refugee Protection
Authors: Benhabib Seyla , Nathwani Nishin 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
The ethics of international refugee protection reflect the dual normative principles of state sovereignty and recognition of refugees’ international human rights which characterize the contemporary refugee regime since the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. This contribution identifies three major positions, each of which acknowledges these dual foundations while seeking to balance, synthesize, or transcend them. These positions are: liberal nationalism, which prioritizes state sovereignty and the rights of bounded political communities to protect their own culture and territory; liberal internationalism, which recognizes that state sovereignty is embedded in a system of international duties and prerogatives; and, cosmopolitanism, which seeks to transcend ‘ontology of containment’ characterizing both positions by acknowledging the radical interdependence of peoples and the fluidity of their movement across boundaries. The cosmopolitan position is further divided into agency-centric views, power-centric views, and the post-colonial perspective. The article concludes by defending jurisgenerativity and democratic iterations as political processes through which law’s normative promise and its imbrication in systems of power and domination can be brought to light and resignified to reflect the dignity and subjectivity of refugees and not merely their protection.
The Intersection of International Refugee Law and International Statelessness Law
Authors: Van Waas Laura 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter focuses on the intersection of international refugee law and international statelessness law. While refugee law, policy, doctrine, and research evolved, it was not until after the turn of the twenty-first century that international statelessness law started to draw much attention and to begin to emerge as a field of its own. As global interest in statelessness grows, the interaction between statelessness and forced displacement has also come back under the spotlight. Thus, the chapter provides an insight into the relationship between statelessness and forced displacement. It starts by unpacking how statelessness can manifest itself as a cause or consequence of displacement, as well as how statelessness can be a complicating factor for refugee protection and durable solutions. The chapter then offers a brief overview of key norms relating to the protection of stateless persons and the prevention and resolution of statelessness, setting out the contours of international statelessness law. It also looks at the implications of the statelessness–displacement nexus by exploring the conceptual and practical questions that arise when a refugee is also stateless, and when a stateless person is also a refugee.
The Architecture of the UN Refugee Convention and Protocol
Authors: Hathaway James C. 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
The architecture of the Refugee Convention and Protocol is unique in the world of international human rights law. Rather than being framed in absolutist terms, these treaties embody a principled compromise between attention to the needs of refugees, on the one hand, and recognition of the legitimate interests of host countries, on the other. Refugees are advantaged not only by the attribution of rights on the basis of a non-reservable and flexible definition of refugee status, but also by a commitment to declaratory rather than constitutive status assessment, non-exclusivity of rights accrual, and the existence of no more than constrained exceptions and derogation authority. The legitimate concerns of host countries are catered for by the structure of incremental rights acquisition through attachment and the conceptualization of most rights on a contingent basis.
Sadly, the workability of the compromise embedded in the architecture of the Refugee Convention and Protocol is today threatened by critical failures at the level of implementation: specifically, that these treaties continue to rely on ad hoc, State-by-State efforts rather than coordinated action, and that States have failed to allocate protection responsibilities and burdens on the basis of relative capacities and resources. The challenge is thus not to renegotiate the foundational refugee treaties, but rather to change the way in which protection is operationalized.
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
Authors: Milner James , Ramasubramanyam Jay 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter addresses the role played by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in the making and implementation of international refugee law. It begins by considering UNHCR’s mandate responsibilities and operational functions to better understand the structures that condition the scope of UNHCR’s engagement with the functioning of international law. While UNHCR’s 1950 Statute and the Refugee Convention both mandate UNHCR to serve particular functions, such as its supervisory responsibility relating to the Refugee Convention, its Statute also places particular constraints on UNHCR, especially in terms of the scope of its activities and its reliance on voluntary contributions from States to perform its mandated functions. The chapter then looks at how the roles UNHCR has played in the making and implementation of refugee law at the global, regional, and national levels, through its operations, and how these functions have evolved over time. By illustrating the various instances where UNHCR has demonstrated power, along with those instances where UNHCR has exhibited pathologies and has been constrained by the interests of States, the chapter points to the importance of understanding international refugee law within the political environment in which it functions.
International Humanitarian Law and Refugee Protection
Authors: Ziegler Reuven (Ruvi) 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
The chapter considers the interrelations between international humanitarian law and international refugee law. It seeks to illustrate that, in displacement contexts, interactions between international humanitarian law and (global and regional) refugee protection regimes, which continue to apply during conflict, are rather challenging given that, whereas international humanitarian law shares international refugee law’s concern for vulnerable individuals, its frame of reference (unlike that of international refugee law) is minimization of harm. Given that the regimes have evolved at different times and with their own specific sources, institutions, and ethos, the chapter appraises how ‘regime interaction’ would (or should) work. It then assesses the scope of application of international humanitarian law norms, looking at the significance of international humanitarian law classification, including who classifies conflicts. The chapter concludes by exploring international humanitarian law displacement-related norms and the extent to which international refugee law interpretations affect them.
Customary Refugee Law
Authors: Lambert Hélène 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter explores customary refugee law. Refugee law is primarily treaty law. However, many of the major refugee-receiving countries are not parties to either the Refugee Convention or the Refugee Protocol, for example Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Iran, Jordan, and Lebanon. Hence, customary international refugee law can be critically important in the identification of key principles of refugee protection and as an indication of what is permitted or not. While customary international law may not play as significant a role in refugee law as it does in other areas of international law, there are at least three practices of refugee protection aimed at safeguarding access and admission to refugee protection for which varying degrees of agreement exist in favour of a rule (or emerging rule) of customary law: non-refoulement, temporary refuge, and the right to be granted (to receive) asylum. These practices are deeply intertwined in their humanitarian purpose.
National Constitutions and Refugee Protection
Authors: Lester Eve 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter explores how national constitutional frameworks add a critical dimension to refugee protection. Given the variability in the protective value of national constitutions for refugees, it considers how States draw strength from their constitutions in response to refugee movements and why they do so in particular ways. The chapter seeks to elucidate some of the complexities in the relationship between constitutional law and international refugee and human rights law, considering the relevance of constitutional text and context, State perspectives on the place of international law, and the extent to which constitutional law has shaped, and continues to shape, international law. The chapter offers a taxonomy as a methodological framework for differentiating these complexities, which suggests that the relationship between constitutional law and international refugee law might be understood in one of three ways: as symbiotic, ambivalent, or antagonistic. It then applies this framework to three case studies. It suggests that this approach may help us to think more strategically about how to harness the protective possibilities of constitutional law as well as wrestle more productively with constitutional law’s limitations.
Regional Refugee Regimes
Authors: Anker Deborah 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter analyses refugee protection in the North American region, which includes Canada, the United States, and Mexico. The dynamics of the region, in particular the hegemonic role of the US, have often led to restrictive policies, reflecting the US’s objective of keeping asylum seekers away from its borders. Such policies can be traced back to the US’s support of violent regimes in the Northern Triangle of Central America during the 1980s and 1990s. US foreign policy contributed to the conflict and instability that generated a significant portion of the very refugees that it has since sought to keep away. But the dynamics in the region are complex, with Canada and Mexico not always aligning their policies to US interests. This chapter discusses the various international and regional refugee and human rights regimes to which Canada, the US, and Mexico are parties, and outlines the origin and evolution of specific refugee policies and practices in each of these three States. The chapter concludes by reflecting on the role of legal advocates, activists, and non-governmental organizations in holding governments accountable and ensuring that international and constitutional refugee protections are realized.
Regional Refugee Regimes
Authors: Muntarbhorn Vitit 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter focuses on the 10 States that form the Association of Southeast Asian Nations: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Laos), Malaysia, Myanmar, Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. There has been a tendency by Southeast Asian States to avoid using the term ‘refugees’ at the national level, even though they have to deal with the term in international fora. Most States in the region do not have specific laws on refugee protection; their legal structure tends to classify people who seek refuge as ‘illegal immigrants’ under national immigration law. Occasionally, policies allowing asylum seekers to reside temporarily in the country pending durable solutions help to exempt them from the strictures of such law. Ultimately, two salient features emerge in the chapter’s discussion. First, most Southeast Asian countries are still not parties to the international refugee instruments. Secondly, however, there is an extensive practice within the region of affording temporary refuge to most people seeking asylum, even if local integration or settlement remains the exception rather than the rule.
Protection at Sea and the Denial of Asylum
Authors: Moreno-Lax Violeta 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter grapples with the vexed issue of protection at sea, unpacking destination States’ practices of interdiction and their justification on purported humanitarian grounds. After introducing the rules governing interdiction powers and the obligation to render assistance to persons in distress, it problematizes the instrumentalization of maritime rescue, based on the supposed benevolent effect of ‘stopping the boats’ as a means to ‘save lives’. Two competing yet complementary dynamics are detected and critiqued. First, while destination States inflate their policing competence through reliance on rescue rhetoric and intervene beyond prerogatives explicitly recognized in the law of the sea, they tend to maintain minimalistic constructions of the associated concepts of ‘distress’ or ‘place of safety’ to reduce the scope of their legal responsibilities. Thus, secondly, they deflate their rescue duties and detach them from related international protection obligations, either by deflecting them to third countries or by negating them altogether. Drawing on examples from the US Caribbean interdiction programme, the Australian ‘Pacific Strategy’, and the mare clausum approach favoured in the Mediterranean, the chapter traces the shift from direct to indirect forms of interdiction, increasingly performed by third countries or private actors, culminating in practices of interdiction by omission, which not only tolerate but purposively embed the risk of death as part of the migration control toolbox of destination States. The final effect is one that paradoxically transforms rescue into an interdiction tool that denies access to asylum to ‘boat migrants’.
The Evolution of Safe Third Country Law and Practice
Authors: Freier Luisa Feline , Karageorgiou Eleni , Ogg Kate 
Published: June 2021

Abstract
This chapter details how States and regions use safe third country (STC) practices to deny protection to asylum seekers and refugees on the grounds that they have, or may have, protection in another country. The STC notion originated in Switzerland in 1979, spread throughout Europe in the 1980s, and was adopted by the European Union and countries such as Australia and Canada in the 1990s. Since then, developments in STC law and practice globally include new bilateral agreements, reforms to STC provisions in domestic and supranational legislation, and landmark decisions of superior courts. The chapter studies these changes in Europe, Australia, and North and South America, focusing in particular on the period from 2010 to 2020. It argues that there has been a dilution of STC protection standards in these four regions. The thresholds for effective protection have diminished and are lower than the minimum laid down in international treaties. Moreover, in the introduction and evolution of these STC practices, lawmakers and judges have disregarded the legal principle of international solidarity. While STC practices have long been critiqued as burden-shifting rather than -sharing, new STC law and jurisprudence exacerbates inequities between States with respect to responsibility for hosting refugees.