Part of a Book
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (923) (remove)
Language
- English (649)
- German (249)
- French (10)
- Spanish (7)
- Italian (3)
- Other (2)
- Multiple languages (1)
- Dutch (1)
- Portuguese (1)
Keywords
- social innovation (10)
- Governance Report (7)
- Social Entrepreneurship (4)
- Sociology (4)
- Centre for Fundamental Rights (3)
- Liberal Order (3)
- Ministerial advisers (3)
- Social Policy (3)
- Social entrepreneurship (3)
- China (2)
Tracing Transparency: Public Governance of Algorithms and the Experience of Contact Tracing Apps
(2022)
Bürger:innenprognosen in einem Mischwahlsystem: Die deutsche Bundestagswahl 2021 als Testfall
(2024)
Wie viele Wahlkreise gewinnt welche Partei bei der Bundestagswahl? Diese Frage war im Vorfeld der Bundestagswahl 2021 trotz des deutschen Mischwahlsystems unter Fachleuten wie auch einer breiteren Öffentlichkeit von besonderem Interesse. Diesem Bedarf an Vorhersagen bedient in jüngerer Zeit eine zunehmende Zahl von Prognosemodellen, die sich jedoch fast ausschließlich auf die Zweitstimme abzielen. Für Wahlkreise gibt es nicht nur in Deutschland, sondern auch in reinen Mehrheitswahlsystemen, kaum relevante Umfragen. Wir führten daher eine Wahlerwartungsumfrage durch, um den Wahlausgang in jedem einzelnen Bundestagswahlkreis zu prognostizieren. Wir nennen unseren Ansatz Bürger:innenprognose, weil er auf den Erwartungen der Bürger:innen über das Wahlverhalten ihrer Mitbürger:innen beruht und nicht auf deren selbstberichteten Wahlabsichten. In diesem Beitrag stellen wir unsere Bürger:innenprognose vor, evaluieren ihre Genauigkeit und vergleichen sie mit anderen Ansätzen zur Wahlprognose.
4.2 Interdisciplinarity
(2024)
Resettlement
(2023)
This chapter discusses the dialectic relationship of general principles and the evolution of human rights in the EU legal order. Human (or fundamental) rights are of specific signifcance for general principles as an area of reference in a number of ways: in regard to the methodology of defining and identifying general principles; their link to constitutional values of the EU, the relationship between different sources of human rights in the EU; the relationship between unwritten general principles and a codified source; the specific, active and multidimensional dynamics of general principles in the context of fundamental rights; the relationship of general principles in the area of fundamental rights with their codification in the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights; and their possible continued relevance for courts in adjudicating human rights in the UK in post-Brexit.
Turkey
(2020)
This contribution takes Turkey’s use of the derogation mechanism in the aftermath of the failed military coup of 15 July 2016 as a springboard to critically address the operation and the fallacies of the contemporary European derogation regime. The assessment will reveal whether the European system of human rights protection has succeeded in adopting an adequate and viable approach that can counterbalance the increased leeway accorded to derogating states, and formulate safeguards to mitigate human rights abuses. The contribution concludes by providing a road map proposal for adequate oversight marked by rigorous scrutiny of derogation claims that can be described as a ‘consultation and cooperation process’. This process would place the Secretary General of the Council of Europe in a more active and operationally focused position to influence state decisions, to counterbalance the increased leeway accorded to derogating states, and to formulate safeguards to mitigate human rights abuses.
This chapter analyses IOM’s practices and policies on immigration detention from the 1990s to date, spanning a period of significant change in its approaches to detention. The chapter first distills pertinent international human rights law (IHRL) on migration-related detention, and then examines IOM’s normative statements concerning detention. It shows that while IOM generally emphasises international legal standards, it also tends to stress states’ ‘prerogative’ to detain, frame alternatives to detention (ATDs) as a desirable option rather than a legal obligation, and weave an operational role for itself, notably through assisted voluntary returns (AVRs). The chapter then interrogates IOM’s involvement in detention through four case studies. These reveal not only IOM’s changing role regarding detention, but its enduring part in a global system whereby powerful states and regions seek to contain protection seekers ‘elsewhere.’ The chapter concludes that, without constitutional and institutional change to ensure it meets its positive human rights obligations, and deeper critical reflection on its humanitarian duties, IOM’s practice risks expanding and legitimating detention.
Die Verwaltungssysteme
(2023)
Dieser Beitrag gibt auf Basis der Daten des Mikrozensus einen Überblick über den Wandel der Familienformen in Deutschland. Es wird untersucht, inwieweit alleinerziehende, nichteheliche und eheliche Familien sozialstrukturell differenziert sind und in welchem Ausmaß sich die ökonomische Lebenslage der verschiedenen Familienformen unterscheidet.
This chapter introduces the contribution of Europe to the development of human rights ideas, law, and institutions. In a spirit of ‘provincialising Europe’, it argues that Europe’s contributions to human rights are ambivalent and dynamic. The chapter first examines natural rights and rights of citizens as twin, but also potentially conflicting, developments in demarcating Europe’s contributions to human rights. Europe is historically a home of human rights ideas as well as strong critiques and double standards in the use of these ideas. The chapter then examines European contributions to the legalization of human rights with a focus on two institutional Europes: that of the Council of Europe and the European Union. Finally, the chapter reviews contemporary human rights debates, against the backdrop of authoritarianization in Europe on the one hand and demands for new human rights to tackle the climate crisis, and digitalization of modern societies on the other.
The aim of this chapter is to consider whether accusations of judicial activism towards the European Courts are rooted not in the activity of the CJEU per se but rather a wider ‘imbalance’ between law and politics in the present-day EU. Revisiting an earlier chapter, the chapter considers three sources of such an imbalance: the gap between the jurisdiction of the CJEU and the EU’s legislative competence; judicial reasoning at the EU level; and the imbalance in the EU between market and non-market objectives. While the chapter argues that the EU retains such an imbalance, recent developments, particularly the increasing dynamism of the EU legislature, have significantly narrowed the gap between the EU’s political and legal capacities in the last decade. As the chapter will conclude, the EU carries a less institutionally ‘lonely’ Court than in the past, providing the Union’s judiciary with greater leverage to temper activist claims.
The Court inhabits a ‘political space’ to which it is called upon to respond. This points to its need to develop cooperative relationships not only with courts but also with political actors (such as national governments and the EU legislature) and even to directly address and explain decisions to EU citizens themselves. This book is aimed at answering the question of ‘How does the CJEU position itself as a political as well as a legal actor?’ with a view to better understanding the work of the Court and addressing its contestation. For that purpose, we explore in this introductory chapter what is meant by judicial ‘activism’ and judicial ‘politics’, before examining the different varieties of judicial politics our authors have shown an interest in. This will pave the way to drawing some lessons on the factors to take into account when seeking to address and respond to contestation of the work of the Court.
Contrary to conventional wisdom, even Xi Jinping, who is often depicted in the media and pundit world as having centralized control over nearly every dimension of Chinese governance, still must rely on powerful technology corporations to carry out his will in the increasingly important Internet sector. This suggests a model of political control significantly more nuanced than most observers realize. This chapter argues that Xi Jinping does not rule the Internet and more specifically social media via a tight command-and-control structure, which implies that he is the ultimate decision-maker and companies simply implement his policy decisions. Instead, the chapter demonstrates based on process-tracing that China’s governance of the Internet is best understood as a corporate management model, whereby the Chinese state engages in a partnership with technology companies. Xi Jinping assumes a leadership role enforced by state instruments of control and cooptation strategies. At the same time, the state remains dependent on companies due to their informational, organizational, and institutional resources.
As the most powerful executive actor in the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), the Eurogroup has faced continuous demands to improve its accountability record since the euro crisis. One reform introduced to meet these demands were the Economic Dialogue – a regular exchange of views between the European Parliament and the President of the Eurogroup designed to ‘ensure greater transparency and accountability’ in the EMU. This chapter investigates the practical functioning of the Economic Dialogues with the Eurogroup between 2013 and the 2019 European Parliament elections. Applying the theoretical framework of the introduction, the purpose is to examine the extent to which the Parliament focuses on procedural or substantive accountability when questioning the Eurogroup President. Moreover, the chapter investigates the reasoning of parliamentary questions in line with the four accountability goods identified at the outset (openness, non-arbitrariness, effectiveness, and publicness). The findings show that Members of the European Parliament are eager to question the extent to which Eurogroup decisions are substantively open and effective, and to a lesser extent whether they are arbitrary or protect EU interests more generally. The analysis is based on fourteen transcripts of Economic Dialogues with the Eurogroup President, which took place between 2013 and 2019.
This chapter provides the volumes general conceptual framework. It begins by addressing why new approaches to accountability are needed, arguing that accountability literature has reached a stalemate as a result of an impasse between deductive and inductive approaches to accountability in the EU. It then argues that overcoming the stalemate requires developing a generalised framework of what accountability is for, deriving four accountability goods to be used in subsequent chapters. The chapter argues that each of the goods can be delivered in procedural or substantive ways, focusing either on the process by which decisions are made or the substantive worth of decisions themselves. The chapter concludes by discussing the strengths and weaknesses of both varieties of accountability before mapping out how the concepts will be applied across policy fields and institutions in subsequent chapters.
This chapter serves as the general introduction to the volume. It discusses two major impasses plaguing EMU in the 2020s: the first, a clash between politicization of EMU decisions, on the one hand, and an institutional structure designed to reject political conflict, on the other; the second, a scholarly impasse between those analysing EMU accountability comparatively and those doing so through EMU specific standards. The chapter briefly introduces the core concepts used in the volume as a means of overcoming this impasse: the distinction between procedural and substantive accountability as well as the normative goods framework developed in Chapter 1. It finally provides an overview of the structure and content of the volume, concluding with a plea to focus scholarly attention on EMUs substantive accountability deficits.
Social constructivism
(2023)
From a social constructivist perspective, NATO is not just another alliance or security institution, but the institutional embodiment of the transatlantic security community, which is based on a collective identity of liberal democracies. This collective identity serves as the main explanatory factor for social constructivist research dealing with NATO’s creation, its specific institutional design and its unique culture of consultation. It also helps understand NATO’s persistence after the end of the Cold War, its enlargement and its (liberal) out-of-area operations and missions in the post-Cold War period. Constructivism has become one of the key theoretical approaches in NATO research, offering a broader view of the Alliance and accounting for empirical anomalies that competitors fail to explain. Still, constructivist research has arguably not yet reached its full potential and could offer additional insights into NATO’s past, presence and future. These lacunae are addressed in the chapter.
Brexit initially raised the prospect of new forms of external differentiation in the European Union (EU), should the United Kingdom continue to participate in a number of the Union’s policy areas. Security and defence was one area where agreement on the terms of UK participation was more likely, given the clear interests of both sides in the development of a close partnership in this area. But agreement has been so difficult to reach, and the final Brexit deal makes no mention of collaboration in foreign, security and defence policy. We argue that the key to understanding this puzzle lies in understanding the politics of differentiated disintegration, of which Brexit is the prime example, and the distinction between strategic and political interests. While strategic interests constitute a driver for external differentiation, the political interests arising from the withdrawal process make it difficult to reach an agreement. Divorcing strategic cooperation from the short-term politics of negotiations is the first step to overcoming the stalemate, and this chapter presents several ways this can be achieved. By perceiving Brexit as a case of differentiated disintegration, this chapter accounts for the significant constraints associated with external differentiation as a mode of integration in the EU.
KI und datengesteuerte Kampagnen: Eine Diskussion der Rolle generativer KI im politischen Wahlkampf
(2023)
Corruption and Development
(2023)
Diasporas and Proxy Wars
(2023)
This chapter discusses the role of diasporas in connection with proxy wars. It argues that diaspora support differs from external state support in important ways, from the sources and motivations of support to the means and types of support provided. Diasporas are often drawn into the conflict by kinship support or feelings of guilt, and often send foreign fighters or financial support to their kin, rather than direct military support. Diasporas are also more susceptible to pressures by rebel groups to provide support, and their assistance tends to be more reliable than that of state sponsors. Finally, diasporas have greater stakes in reducing harm to civilians than most state supporters and will therefore be inclined to support long-term solutions, including those involving rebel governance.
This chapter seeks to bridge existing research on the politicisation of top civil servants and the roles of ministerial advisers by proposing a new conceptual approach for the comparative analysis of executive policy-making. We conceive of the executive triangle as a set of interdependent relationships between ministers, civil servants, and advisers. Those relationships may take different forms, depending on the distinct tasks performed by each actor and their roles in policy-making, which define mutual expectations. Thus understood, the executive triangle is an institution performing particular functions in policy-making (such as assessing policy alternatives, anticipating political support, and coordinating with other actors both inside and outside government). Those functions are performed by actors within the triangle and reflected in their roles and their direct and indirect relationships. The chapter conceptually explores such a system-perspective on the executive triangle; sketches analytical dimensions for understanding similarities and differences of executive triangles across contexts; provides empirical illustrations of variations of the executive triangle in Europe; and develops a research agenda using this concept to better understand the roles of ministers, ministerial advisers, and top civil servants in executive policy-making in a comparative perspective.
The chapter examines ministerial advisory structures in Austria, Germany, and the Netherlands and discusses if and how their emergence and roles are linked to the Continental administrative tradition - one which emphasises the rule of law, and a procedural orientation within and political responsiveness of the standing bureaucracy. The chapter reviews the state of the research on ministerial advisers in the three countries and finds various similarities. In all three contexts ministerial advisory positions have emerged: however, they are less formalised and have received less attention than their counterparts in other parts of the world in recent years.
Das vorliegende Szenario kombiniert zwei für die Sicherheitspolitik relevante Dimensionen: Der Kampf gegen Klimawandel und Terrorismus. Aufbauend auf den jüngsten Ereignissen in Südeuropa und Afghanistan entwerfen wir ein Szenario, in dem dramatische Geschehnisse erfolgreichen Bemühungen vorweggehen - erst der Schock weiterer Niederlagen an beiden Fronten (z.B. die Folgen eines verheerenden Waldbrandes rund um Athen) führt dazu, dass die internationale Gemeinschaft zu Handeln beginnt und letztlich ambitionierte Maßnahmen ergreift, um beiden Bedrohungen erfolgreich zu begegnen. Die entscheidenden Meilensteine dieses Szenarios werden dabei in Schlagzeilen und kurzen Nachrichten dargestellt. Zum Abschluss werden zwei Handlungsempfehlungen formuliert: Eine Förderung von Solarstrom-Pilotprojekten in Nordafrika und der Sahelzone sowie eine Evaluation bestehender Anti-Terror-Strategien vor dem Hintergrund holistischer Präventionskonzepte.
Insufficient access to medicines is a persistent global problem that affects billions of people in low- and middle-income countries. In this chapter, we use access to medicines as a case to understand how business can become instrumental in making progress on persistent and global problems we associate with sustainable development. We examine the emergence and evolution of access to medicines as a mandate for the pharmaceutical industry to contribute to sustainable development. More specifically, we trace the historical developments of corporate social initiatives in the industry and revisit existing research on access to medicines in management and related fields. We then introduce three distinct analytical perspectives - field emergence and change, firm heterogeneity, organizational processes - to examine access to medicine, expose managerial challenges and offer a research agenda that helps to advance research on access to medicines and, more generally, on corporate efforts to address pressing global problems subsumed under the Sustainable Development Goals.
In this chapter, we examine the issue of competence to confer residence and citizenship based on a donation or investment in the light of international and European law as they stand today. We show that the national competence to do this is part of the sovereign nature of the modern state, which implies the ability to create a people and delimit the scope of the population granted a right to settle in the national territory, underpinned by rules behind such delimitation. We also explain why investment migration per se cannot be presented as unlawful and outlines the avenues for the eventual disciplining of its offshoots in areas unrelated to migration as such, thus connecting particularly well with Peter Spiro’s analysis of relevant international law.
How to Square the Circle Between Economic Globalization, Social Cohesion, and Liberal Democracy?
(2022)
Searching for the centre of power in the German political system can be a cumbersome endeavour due to the strong separation of powers rooted in German history. Considering both formal and informal institutions, this chapter analyses the current state of the core executive in Germany at the end of the ‘era Merkel’. It outlines the German institutional setting with the role of the chancellor and the chancellery, defines main characteristics of politico-administrative relations and mechanisms of government coordination and discusses changes in the distribution of power related to recent developments of crisis management, Europeanisation and summitry, and personalisation and mediatisation. The analysis shows that the steering capacity of the German core executive is institutionally limited due to the strong coordination requirements stemming from administrative federalism, coalition governments and the strong departmental principle. Accordingly, the German core executive is no strong centre of power despite the international developments that have contributed to centralisation in many countries. The German core executive remains remarkably stable in formal terms and in international comparison despite some short-term power shifts in reaction to a changing environment.