<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<export-example>
  <doc>
    <id>2058</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2013</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>deu</language>
    <pageFirst>190</pageFirst>
    <pageLast>212</pageLast>
    <pageNumber>412</pageNumber>
    <edition/>
    <issue/>
    <volume/>
    <type>bookpart</type>
    <publisherName>Suhrkamp</publisherName>
    <publisherPlace>Berlin</publisherPlace>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>1</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>2016-07-20</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="deu">Transgouvernementalisierung und die ausbleibende gesellschaftliche Politisierung der inneren Sicherheit</title>
    <parentTitle language="deu">Die Politisierung der Weltpolitik</parentTitle>
    <subTitle language="deu">umkämpfte internationale Institutionen</subTitle>
    <note>ISBN-13: 978-3518126592</note>
    <licence>Metadaten / metadata</licence>
    <author>Markus Jachtenfuchs</author>
    <submitter>Angelika Behlen</submitter>
    <editor>Michael Zürn</editor>
    <author>Christiane Kraft-Kasack</author>
    <editor>Matthias Ecker-Ehrhardt</editor>
    <author>Eva Herschinger</author>
  </doc>
  <doc>
    <id>284</id>
    <completedYear>2012</completedYear>
    <publishedYear>2012</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>deu</language>
    <pageFirst>493</pageFirst>
    <pageLast>514</pageLast>
    <pageNumber/>
    <edition/>
    <issue>3</issue>
    <volume>53</volume>
    <type>article</type>
    <publisherName>VS-Verl.</publisherName>
    <publisherPlace>Wiesbaden</publisherPlace>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>1</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>2014-07-28</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="deu">Informell oder institutionalisiert? Die Internationalisierung der inneren Sicherheit</title>
    <abstract language="eng">Although international police cooperation is not a new phenomenon and despite its relevance for the monopoly of force, studies applying a political science or international&#13;
relations (IR) perspective are scarce. Through a ‘competition of claims’, this article reviews and organizes current literature on cooperation in internal security to highlight crucial points of entry for IR- and political science approaches. While both claims argue along the lines of functionalist regime theory, the ‘informality claim’ stresses state’s interest to uphold autonomy and their accordant preference for informal cooperation. In contrast, the ‘institutionalization claim’ underscores the willingness of states to create formal and strong institutions as they promise effi ciency gains in light of transborder problems. By focusing on central issues in police cooperation (terrorism, drugs, money laundering, organized crime) this review highlights that internal security can become a prospering fi eld for IR- and political science theorizing.</abstract>
    <parentTitle language="deu">Politische Vierteljahresschrift</parentTitle>
    <identifier type="issn">0720-4809</identifier>
    <identifier type="doi">10.5771/0032-3470-2012-3-493</identifier>
    <note>Available as print and ebook in your Hertie Library. &#13;
&#13;
Als Druckversion und eBook in der Hertie Bibliothek verfügbar.</note>
    <licence>Metadaten / metadata</licence>
    <author>Markus Jachtenfuchs</author>
    <submitter>Hertie Library Hertie Library</submitter>
    <author>Eva Herschinger</author>
    <subject>
      <language>eng</language>
      <type>uncontrolled</type>
      <value>Internal security</value>
    </subject>
    <subject>
      <language>eng</language>
      <type>uncontrolled</type>
      <value>International cooperation</value>
    </subject>
    <subject>
      <language>eng</language>
      <type>uncontrolled</type>
      <value>International institutions</value>
    </subject>
    <subject>
      <language>eng</language>
      <type>uncontrolled</type>
      <value>Informality</value>
    </subject>
    <subject>
      <language>eng</language>
      <type>uncontrolled</type>
      <value>History of police cooperation</value>
    </subject>
  </doc>
  <doc>
    <id>459</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2008</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>eng</language>
    <pageFirst/>
    <pageLast/>
    <pageNumber>29</pageNumber>
    <edition/>
    <issue>28</issue>
    <volume/>
    <type>workingpaper</type>
    <publisherName>Hertie School of Governance</publisherName>
    <publisherPlace>Berlin</publisherPlace>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>1</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>2014-07-18</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="eng">Policing Among Nations: Internationalizing the Monopoly of Force</title>
    <abstract language="eng">International cooperation in the field of policing is linked to the definitional core of the state, the monopoly of the legitimate use of force (Max Weber). Whereas international cooperation in other fields has been widely analyzed, there is no systematic measure of the development and intensity of international police cooperation over time. The paper disaggregates the monopoly of force into three components (legitimation, methods and authorization) and analyzes how international police coop eration in Western Europe has developed since the 1960s and how strongly it impinges upon state sovereignty. &#13;
&#13;
Whereas in the 1960s, most international institutions in the field were only weak, the state monopoly of the legitimate use of force has been embedded, pooled or even delegated since the 1990s. Even in its core activity, the Western European state has become part of a multi-level system of governance.</abstract>
    <identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-4597</identifier>
    <licence>Creative Commons - CC BY - 4.0 International</licence>
    <author>Markus Jachtenfuchs</author>
    <submitter>Andrea Derichs</submitter>
    <author>Jörg Friedrichs</author>
    <author>Eva Herschinger</author>
    <author>Christiane Kasack</author>
    <series>
      <title>Hertie School Working Papers Series</title>
      <number>28</number>
    </series>
    <thesisPublisher>Hertie School</thesisPublisher>
  </doc>
  <doc>
    <id>422</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2011</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>eng</language>
    <pageFirst>445</pageFirst>
    <pageLast>468</pageLast>
    <pageNumber/>
    <edition/>
    <issue>3</issue>
    <volume>3</volume>
    <type>article</type>
    <publisherName>Cambridge Univ. Press</publisherName>
    <publisherPlace>Cambridge</publisherPlace>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>1</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>2014-07-16</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="eng">Scratching the Heart of the Artichoke? : How International Institutions and the European Union Constrain the State Monopoly of Force.</title>
    <abstract language="eng">In recent years, a growing literature has argued that European Union (EU) member states have undergone a profound transformation caused by international institutions and by the EU, in particular. However, the state core – the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force, embodied by the police – seemed to remain intact. The literature has argued that in this area, international institutions are weak, and cooperation has remained informal and intergovernmental. We take issue with these claims and evaluate the strength of international institutions in two core areas of policing (terrorism and drugs) over time. We find that in terms of decision-making, precision, and adjudication, international institutions have become considerably stronger over time. Even when international institutions remain intergovernmental they strongly regulate how EU member states exercise their monopoly of force. Member states are even further constrained because adjudication is delegated to the European Court of Justice. Thus, even the state core is undergoing a significant transformation.</abstract>
    <parentTitle language="eng">European Political Science Review</parentTitle>
    <identifier type="issn">1862-2860</identifier>
    <identifier type="doi">10.1017/S175577391100004X</identifier>
    <note>Available as print and e-publication in your Hertie Library. &#13;
&#13;
Als Druckversion und elektronische Ausgabe in der Hertie Bibliothek verfügbar.</note>
    <licence>Metadaten / metadata</licence>
    <author>Markus Jachtenfuchs</author>
    <submitter>Andrea Derichs</submitter>
    <author>Eva Herschinger</author>
    <author>Christiane Kasack</author>
    <subject>
      <language>eng</language>
      <type>uncontrolled</type>
      <value>Drugs</value>
    </subject>
    <subject>
      <language>eng</language>
      <type>uncontrolled</type>
      <value>International institutions</value>
    </subject>
    <subject>
      <language>eng</language>
      <type>uncontrolled</type>
      <value>Police</value>
    </subject>
    <subject>
      <language>eng</language>
      <type>uncontrolled</type>
      <value>State transformation</value>
    </subject>
    <subject>
      <language>eng</language>
      <type>uncontrolled</type>
      <value>Terrorism</value>
    </subject>
  </doc>
</export-example>
