@article{Baehrens2015,
  author    = {Baehrens, Konstantin},
  title     = {Introduction to Georg Lukacs: Why Democracies are superior to Autocracies? and The real Germany},
  series = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Philosophie : Zweimonatsschrift der internationalen philosophischen Forschung},
  volume    = {63},
  journal   = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Philosophie : Zweimonatsschrift der internationalen philosophischen Forschung},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {De Gruyter},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {0012-1045},
  doi       = {10.1515/dzph-2015-0019},
  pages     = {358 -- 366},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Two short typescripts by G. Lukacs from the archive, dating from 1941/42, shed light on his appraisal of the cultural 'inner reserves' of Germany and the 'moral reserves' of the democracies involved in the Second World War, as well as on Lukacs's political philosophy at that time. The conception of an intrinsic interrelation of a humanist philosophical anthropology and rationalist epistemology elucidates his egalitarian and democratic account. Both texts are located within the intellectual development of the author in an introduction by the editor, which sketches the historical background and indicates relevant contemporaneous theoretical and political debates, such as the controversies over realism and humanism and also a dispute with K. Jaspers on German collective guilt.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{Baehrens2015,
  author    = {Baehrens, Konstantin},
  title     = {Einleitung zu Georg Luk{\´a}cs},
  series = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Philosophie},
  volume    = {63},
  journal   = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Philosophie},
  number    = {2},
  issn      = {2192-1482},
  doi       = {10.1515/dzph-2015-0019},
  pages     = {358 -- 366},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Two short typescripts by G. Lukacs from the archive, dating from 1941/42, shed light on his appraisal of the cultural 'inner reserves' of Germany and the 'moral reserves' of the democracies involved in the Second World War, as well as on Lukacs's political philosophy at that time. The conception of an intrinsic interrelation of a humanist philosophical anthropology and rationalist epistemology elucidates his egalitarian and democratic account. Both texts are located within the intellectual development of the author in an introduction by the editor, which sketches the historical background and indicates relevant contemporaneous theoretical and political debates, such as the controversies over realism and humanism and also a dispute with K. Jaspers on German collective guilt.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{Doerfler2022,
  author    = {D{\"o}rfler, Thomas},
  title     = {The effect of expert recommendations on intergovernmental decision-making},
  series = {International relations : the journal of the David Davies Memorial Institute of International Studies},
  volume    = {36},
  journal   = {International relations : the journal of the David Davies Memorial Institute of International Studies},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Sage},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0047-1178},
  doi       = {10.1177/00471178211033941},
  pages     = {237 -- 261},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {The article explores whether and to what extent expert recommendations affect decision-making within the Security Council and its North Korea and Iran sanctions regimes. The article first develops a rationalist theoretical argument to show why making many second-stage decisions, such as determining lists of items under export restrictions, subjects Security Council members to repeating coordination situations. Expert recommendations may provide focal point solutions to coordination problems, even when interests diverge and preferences remain stable. Empirically, the article first explores whether expert recommendations affected decision-making on commodity sanctions imposed on North Korea. Council members heavily relied on recommended export trigger lists as focal points, solving a divisive conflict among great powers. Second, the article explores whether expert recommendations affected the designation of sanctions violators in the Iran sanctions regime. Council members designated individuals and entities following expert recommendations as focal points, despite conflicting interests among great powers. The article concludes that expert recommendations are an additional means of influence in Security Council decision-making and seem relevant for second-stage decision-making among great powers in other international organisations.},
  language  = {en}
}