The purpose of this article is to offer a contribution to the analysis of the time spent on researching and preparing a PhD thesis and its conceptualization as a ‘phase’. Prior research on PhD experiences used time to explain the doctorate in terms of the different lengths of time involved when comparing different disciplines and scientific areas of study (Bourdieu, 1983; Atkinson, 2000). To date, the PhD has not been considered as a genuine time experience. I intend to do so by bearing in mind the insights provided by time sociology frameworks. Thus, in this article it is assumed that respondents’ understanding of their PhD time as ‘a phase’ translates a deep experience of liminality, in which they understand themselves on the one hand as belonging simultaneously to a ‘now’ and a ‘then’ and, on the other, as being located in a linear temporal structure. In the light of the findings, it is suggested that the phase may be viewed as a key concept for theorizing the temporality of PhD experience.

The uptake ofCOVID-19 vaccines has varied considerably across European countries. This study investigates people's decision-making process regarding vaccination by analyzing qualitative interviews (n = 214) with residents from five European countries: Austria, Germany, Italy, Portugal, and Switzerland. We identify three factors that shape vaccination decision-making: individual experiences and pre-existing attitudes towards vaccination, social environment, and socio-political context. Based on this analysis, we present a typology of decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccines, where some types present stable stances towards vaccines and others change over time. Trust in government and relevant stakeholders, broader social factors, and people's direct social environment were particularly relevant to these dynamics. We conclude that vaccination campaigns should be considered long-term projects (also outside of pandemics) in need of regular adjustment, communication and fine-tuning to ensure public trust. This is particularly pertinent for booster vaccinations, such as COVID-19 or influenza.

This research examines the barriers and facilitators to employers’ engagement with higher education institutions. The data were collected through interviews with a set of employers (n = 19) in the Northern region of Portugal, V.N.de Famalicão, in 2019. We begin by exploring employers’ engagement activities as a potential solution to address local-level skill problems. Empirical evidence suggests that the engagement activities are mostly passive as firms use higher education largely as a recruitment channel. The differences in organizational goals and culture are the most cited barriers to the lack of more active engagement. Some efforts have recently been made to strengthen the ties between higher education and employers, notably through a local multi-stakeholder partnership as a potential broker. However, it will take time for this to bear fruit and contribute to reducing skill gaps and shortages. The data show that despite employers’ apparent willingness, more effort must be made to encourage active engagement.

This text explores the meaning of the expression “mined future,” which has been used by local populations who oppose lithium production in Northern Portugal. We argue that the expression encapsulates the existence of a conflict for the “ownership” of future, unfolding a battle of visions of the future between local populations and governments. The local population sees the exploitation of lithium as a takeover of future. In contrast, the governments justify the project by promising a sociotechnical future in convergence with European green energy rhetoric. This article follows a grounded theory approach. It relies on information collected about the lithium exploration in Portugal, mainly through journalistic pieces and opinion articles disseminated between 2019 and 2020. In particular, the paper proposes that political action that involves large sociotechnical ventures with the potential of contamination needs to consider the local collective perceptions of the future.