@article{HeckeFuhrWolfs2021, author = {Hecke, Steven van and Fuhr, Harald and Wolfs, Wouter}, title = {The politics of crisis management by regional and international organizations in fighting against a global pandemic}, series = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration}, volume = {87}, journal = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration}, number = {3}, publisher = {Sage}, address = {Los Angeles, Calif. [u.a.]}, issn = {0020-8523}, doi = {10.1177/0020852320984516}, pages = {672 -- 690}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Despite new challenges like climate change and digitalization, global and regional organizations recently went through turbulent times due to a lack of support from several of their member states. Next to this crisis of multilateralism, the COVID-19 pandemic now seems to question the added value of international organizations for addressing global governance issues more specifically. This article analyses this double challenge that several organizations are facing and compares their ways of managing the crisis by looking at their institutional and political context, their governance structure, and their behaviour during the pandemic until June 2020. More specifically, it will explain the different and fragmented responses of the World Health Organization, the European Union and the International Monetary Fund/World Bank. With the aim of understanding the old and new problems that these international organizations are trying to solve, this article argues that the level of autonomy vis-a-vis the member states is crucial for understanding the politics of crisis management.
Points for practitioners
As intergovernmental bodies, international organizations require authorization by their member states. Since they also need funding for their operations, different degrees of autonomy also matter for reacting to emerging challenges, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The potential for international organizations is limited, though through proactive and bold initiatives, they can seize the opportunity of the crisis and partly overcome institutional and political constraints.}, language = {en} } @article{BobzienKalleitner2020, author = {Bobzien, Licia and Kalleitner, Fabian}, title = {Attitudes towards European financial solidarity during the Covid-19 pandemic}, series = {European societies}, volume = {23}, journal = {European societies}, number = {Sup. 1}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {1461-6696}, doi = {10.1080/14616696.2020.1836669}, pages = {S791 -- S804}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Whilst the Covid-19 pandemic affects all European countries, the ways in which these countries are prepared for the health and subsequent economic crisis varies considerably. Financial solidarity within the European Union (EU) could mitigate some of these inequalities but depends upon the support of the citizens of individual member states for such policies. This paper studies attitudes of the Austrian population - a net-contributor to the European budget - towards financial solidarity using two waves of the Austrian Corona Panel Project collected in May and June 2020. We find that individuals (i) who are less likely to consider the Covid-19 pandemic as a national economic threat, (ii) who believe that Austria benefits from supporting other countries, and (iii) who prefer the crisis to be organized more centrally at EU-level show higher support for European financial solidarity. Using fixed effects models, we further show that perceiving economic threats and preferring central crisis management also explain attitude dynamics within individuals over time. We conclude that cost-benefit perceptions are important determinants for individual support of European financial solidarity during the Covid-19 pandemic.}, language = {en} } @article{Paasch2022, author = {Paasch, Jana}, title = {Revisiting policy preferences and capacities in the EU}, series = {Journal of common market studies : JCMS}, volume = {60}, journal = {Journal of common market studies : JCMS}, number = {3}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0021-9886}, doi = {10.1111/jcms.13286}, pages = {783 -- 800}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Research on multi-level implementation of EU legislation has almost exclusively focused on the national level, while little is known about the role of subnational authorities. Nevertheless, it is a prerequisite for the functioning of the European Union that all member states and their subnational authorities apply and enforce EU legislation in due time. I address this research gap and take a closer look at the legal transposition process in the German regional states. Using a novel data set comprising detailed information on about 700 subnational measures, I show that state-level variables, such as political preferences and ministerial resources, account for variation in the timing of legal transposition and repeatedly lead to subnational delay. To conclude, the paper addresses the role of subnational authorities in the EU multi-level system and points to their interest in shaping legal transposition in order to counterbalance their loss of competences to the national level.}, language = {en} } @article{SchmidtWellenburg2018, author = {Schmidt-Wellenburg, Christian}, title = {Struggling over crisis}, series = {Historical Social Research}, volume = {43}, journal = {Historical Social Research}, number = {3}, publisher = {GESIS, Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences}, address = {Cologne}, issn = {0172-6404}, doi = {10.12759/hsr.43.2018.3.147-188}, pages = {147 -- 188}, year = {2018}, abstract = {If you put two economists in a room, you get two opinions, unless one of them is Lord Keynes, in which case you get three opinions." Following the premise of this quotation attributed to Winston Churchill, varying perceptions of the European crisis by academic economists and their structural homology to economists' positions in the field of economics are examined. The dataset analysed using specific multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and hierarchical agglomerative clustering (HAC) comprises information on the careers of 480 German-speaking economists and on statements they made concerning crisis-related issues. It can be shown that the main structural differences in the composition and amount of scientific and academic capital held by economists as well as their age and degree of transnationalisation are linked to how they see the crisis: as a national sovereign debt crisis, as a European banking crisis, or as a crisis of European integration and institutions.}, language = {en} } @article{DavydchykMehlhausenPriesmeyerTkocz2017, author = {Davydchyk, Maria and Mehlhausen, Thomas and Priesmeyer-Tkocz, Weronika}, title = {The price of success, the benefit of setbacks}, series = {Futures : the journal of policy, planning and futures studies}, volume = {97}, journal = {Futures : the journal of policy, planning and futures studies}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0016-3287}, doi = {10.1016/j.futures.2017.06.004}, pages = {35 -- 46}, year = {2017}, abstract = {This article explores the various futures of relations between the European Union (EU) and Ukraine. After distilling two major drivers we construct a future compass in order to conceive of four futures of relations between the EU and Ukraine. Our scenarios aim to challenge deep-rooted assumptions on the EU's neighbourhood with Ukraine: How will the politico-economic challenges in the European countries influence the EU's approach towards the East? Will more EU engagement in Ukraine contribute to enduring peace? Does peace always come with stability? Which prospects does the idea of Intermarium have? Are the pivotal transformation players in Ukraine indeed oligarchs or rather small- and medium-sized entrepreneurs? After presenting our scenarios, we propose indicators to know in the years to come, along which path future relations do develop. By unearthing surprising developments we hope to provoke innovative thoughts on Eastern Europe in times of post truth societies, confrontation between states and hybrid warfare.}, language = {en} }