TY - JOUR A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus A1 - Gehring, Thomas T1 - Liability for Transboundary Environmental Damage : Towards a General Liability Regime? JF - European Journal of International Law N2 - Since 1980, the International Law Commission (ILQ has been engaged in drafting a comprehensive convention on liability for damage arising out of acts not prohibited by international law. During its work, the TLC has increasingly focused on transboundary environmental damage. Thus, the project may have considerable impact on the further development of this area of international law. This article analyzes the bask concepts of the project which have emerged so far. It assesses the political feasibility of the project in the light of the current state of international law concerning liability for environmental damage, given that a number of specific ultra-hazardous activities are already regulated by multilateral liability regimes. It concludes that the international community has increasingly accepted the obligation to regulate liability issues, which has improved the chances for victims to mount successful claims. However, this does not mean that states were prepared to compensate for transboundary environmental damage. Y1 - 1993 UR - http://www.ejil.org/article.php?article=1228&issue=67 SN - 0938-5428 N1 - Free online access: http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/4/1/1228.pdf Freier online Zugriff: http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/4/1/1228.pdf VL - 4 IS - 1 SP - 92 EP - 106 PB - Oxford Univ.Press CY - Oxford ER - TY - BOOK A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus T1 - Die Konstruktion Europas. Verfassungsideen und institutionelle Entwicklung N2 - Ist der Verlauf der europäischen Integration nur von materiellen Interessen bestimmt oder spielen auch Ideen eine Rolle? Zur Beantwortung dieser Frage wird zunächst eine konstruktivistische Theorie der Bildung staatlicher Präferenzen entwickelt. Der zweite Teil bietet eine methodisch reflektierte, systematisch vergleichende Untersuchung europapolitischer Vorstellungen ("Verfassungsideen") in Deutschland, Frankreich und Großbritannien seit 1950. Der dritte Teil analysiert ihre politische Wirksamkeit anhand der Verhandlungen zum Amsterdamer Vertrag. Ergebnis ist, daß in Bereichen, wo objektive Interessenlagen unklar sind, Ideen auch in zwischenstaatlichen Verfassungskonferenzen eine wesentliche Rolle spielen. Y1 - 2002 SN - 3-7890-7906-5 N1 - Available as print in your Hertie Library. Als Druckversion in der Hertie Bibliothek verfügbar. PB - Nomos-Verl.-Ges. CY - Baden-Baden ER - TY - BOOK A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus T1 - International Policy-Making as a Learning Process? : The European Union and the Greenhouse Effect Y1 - 1996 SN - 978-1859721735 N1 - Available as print in your Hertie Library. Als Druckversion in der Hertie Bibliothek verfügbar. PB - Avebury CY - Aldershot [u.a.] ER - TY - BOOK A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus A1 - Gehring, Thomas T1 - Haftung und Umwelt : Interessenkonflikte im internationalen Weltraum-, Atom- und Seerecht. N2 - Multilaterale Regelungen zur Haftung für Umweltschäden im Weltraum-, Atom- und Seerecht sind nicht nur statische Völkerrechtsnormen, sondern auch Produkte eines Prozesses der Interessendurchsetzung. Dieser dynamische Rechtserzeugungsprozeß wird mittels eines interdisziplinären Ansatzes untersucht, der die politischen Grundlagen des Völkerrechts unterstreicht. Bislang übernehmen Staaten nur dann völkerrechtliche Haftpflicht, wenn dies zur Durchsetzung eigener Interessen dient (Raumfahrt,Atomenergie). Im Regelfall versuchen sie dagegen, die risikoschaffende Industrie zur Haftung heranzuziehen. Sie haben dafür wegweisende Modelle entwickelt (Ölhaftungsfonds). Diese Untersuchung des Entstehungsprozesses der wichtigsten Umwelthaftungskonventionen bildet schließlich die Grundlage für die Beurteilung des Vorhabens der ILC zur Haftung für Schäden durch völkerrechtlich nicht verbotene Aktivitäten. Y1 - 1988 SN - 978-3-631-40341-9 PB - Peter Lang CY - Frankfurt am Main [u.a.] ER - TY - EDBOOK A1 - Chalmers, Damian A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus A1 - Joerges, Christian T1 - Adjusting to European Diversity : The End of the Eurocrats' Dream? Y1 - 2016 SN - 978-1-107-10718-2 PB - Cambridge Univ. Press. CY - Cambridge ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Flonk, Danielle A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus A1 - Obendiek, Anke S. T1 - Authority conflicts in internet governance: Liberals vs. sovereigntists? JF - Global Constitutionalism N2 - We analyse conflicts over norms and institutions in internet governance. In this emerging field, dispute settlement is less institutionalised and conflicts take place at a foundational level. Internet governance features two competing spheres of authority characterised by fundamentally diverging social purposes: A more consolidated liberal sphere emphasises a limited role of the state, private and multistakeholder governance and freedom of speech. A sovereigntist challenger sphere emphasises state control, intergovernmentalism and push against the preponderance of Western institutions and private actors. We trace the activation and evolution of conflict between these spheres with regard to norms and institutions in four instances: the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12), the fifth session of the United Nations Group of Governmental Experts (UNGGE) and the Budapest Convention of the Council of Europe. We observe intense norm collisions, and strategic attempts at competitive regime creation and regime shifting towards intergovernmental structures by the sovereigntist sphere. Despite these aggressive attempts at creating new institutions and norms, the existing internet governance order is still in place. Hence, authority conflicts in global internet governance do not necessarily lead to fragmentation. KW - contested multilateralism KW - internet governance KW - norm collisions KW - sovereignty Y1 - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381720000167 SN - 2045-3817 VL - 9 IS - 2 SP - 364 EP - 386 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Bremer, Björn A1 - Genschel, Philipp A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus T1 - Juncker's Curse? Identity, Interest, and Public Support for the Integration of Core State Powers† JF - JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies N2 - Abstract In this study we analysed the patterns and covariates of public support for the European integration of core state powers based on an original new survey. We found considerable variation across integration instruments, member states and policy issues. Horizontal transfers are supported more than vertical capacity building; member states from the EU's South‐East are more supportive than states from the North‐West; and support increases from debt relief to unemployment assistance, sharing the burdens of refugees, and military defence to disaster aid. Identity is a strong and fairly consistent predictor for individual variations in support. The association with respondents’ interest is less consistent, but can be quite strong with respect to specific policy issues such as debt and unemployment. Overall, support for the integration of core state powers is higher and more variable than expected. This suggests there is considerable room for political agency rather than a general constraining dissensus. KW - - KW - capacity KW - core state powers KW - European integration; identity KW - interests KW - public opinion Y1 - 2020 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-36077 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12980 SN - 1468-5965 VL - 58 IS - 1 SP - 56 EP - 75 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Freudlsperger, Christian A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus T1 - A member state like any other? Germany and the European integration of core state powers JF - Journal of European Integration N2 - The EU has integrated core state powers in a largely unsustainable manner. Why is this? In this introduction to a special issue on Germany, we take an in-depth look at national preference-formation. We trace the impact of state elites, as emphasised by functionalist theories, and mass publics and political parties, as stressed by postfunctionalism. We find that across policy fields and with striking continuity over time, Germany acts as a normal member state. The country prefers the regulation of national capacities over the creation of European capacities, and (increasingly) the intergovernmental rather than supranational control of those capacities. Only in existential crises, Germany supports European capacity-building under intergovernmental control. This leads to unstable integration but is not an indicator of hegemonic dominance. Crucial from both a practical and theoretical perspective, there exists no major gap between state elites and political parties or public opinion on German preferences. Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2021.1877695 SN - Print ISSN: 0703-6337, Online ISSN: 1477-2280 VL - 43 IS - 2 SP - 117 EP - 135 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Genschel, Philipp A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus T1 - Capacity-Building and the New Intergovernmentalism JF - JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies Y1 - 2025 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13755 VL - 63 IS - S1 SP - 65 EP - 76 ER - TY - EDBOOK A1 - Dawson, Mark A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus ED - Dawson, Mark ED - Jachtenfuchs, Markus T1 - Autonomy without collapse in a Better European Union N2 - The European Union's history exhibits numerous episodes in which Member States have sought to re-enforce their national autonomy in the face of deepening integration. Efforts to re-gain autonomy, however, are often accompanied by legitimate concerns that autonomy will lead to dis-integration or will have wider destructive consequences. The EU thus faces a dilemma. Calls for autonomy cannot all be dismissed as mere populist rhetoric or national egoism but instead represent a legitimate questioning of the degree of uniformity that EU law and politics presently carry. At the same time, the fear that greater autonomy may carry dis-integrative effects is also legitimate -uniformity is not an accidental by-product of the EU's construction but intrinsically related to its policy goals. Giving too much room for autonomy might create an opportunity structure for the loss of collective goods, deficits in problem-solving, and perhaps even to self-destruction. The EU requires autonomy, but in doing so, it must also avoid collapse. Can it achieve it, and if so, how? Autonomy without Collapse is devoted to exploring innovative answers to this question. It draws together scholars in law and political science interested in exploring how to overcome the central dilemma of preserving sustainable yet real autonomy in the future European Union. Y1 - 2022 UR - https://global.oup.com/academic/product/autonomy-without-collapse-in-a-better-european-union-9780192897541?cc=de&lang=en&# SN - 9780192897541 PB - Oxford University Press CY - Oxford ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Dawson, Mark A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus ED - Dawson, Mark ED - Jachtenfuchs, Markus T1 - Autonomy without Collapse? Towards a Better European Union. T2 - Autonomy without Collapse in a Better European Union Y1 - 2022 UR - https://global.oup.com/academic/product/autonomy-without-collapse-in-a-better-european-union-9780192897541?cc=de&lang=en&# SN - 9780192897541 SP - 3 EP - 20 PB - Oxford University Press CY - Oxford ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Freudlsperger, Christian A1 - Jachtenfuchs, Markus T1 - Wendepunkt Corona-Krise? Deutsche Präferenzen zur europäischen Integration staatlicher Kerngewalten seit Maastricht JF - integration N2 - Did the Covid-19 crisis prompt a turn in German EU policy? Investigating the long-term development of German preferences on the European integration of core state powers, we find striking continuity. German governments persistently seek to minimise their costs from and maximise their control over integration. Consequently, they back supranational capacity-building primarily as a last resort in existential systemic crises. The Corona recovery fund, which is temporary and placed under intergovernmental control, is in line with this general long-term preference and does little to alleviate the structural flaws of the Euro area. Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.5771/0720-5120-2021-2-81 VL - 44 IS - 2 SP - 81 EP - 96 ER -