@phdthesis{Boehme2011,
  author    = {B{\"o}hme, Dimo},
  title     = {EU-Russia energy relations: What chance for solutions? : A focus on the natural gas sector},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-120-2},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-50210},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {xix, 322},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {Public debate about energy relations between the EU and Russia is distorted. These distortions present considerable obstacles to the development of true partnership. At the core of the conflict is a struggle for resource rents between energy producing, energy consuming and transit countries. Supposed secondary aspects, however, are also of great importance. They comprise of geopolitics, market access, economic development and state sovereignty. The European Union, having engaged in energy market liberalisation, faces a widening gap between declining domestic resources and continuously growing energy demand. Diverse interests inside the EU prevent the definition of a coherent and respected energy policy. Russia, for its part, is no longer willing to subsidise its neighbouring economies by cheap energy exports. The Russian government engages in assertive policies pursuing Russian interests. In so far, it opts for a different globalisation approach, refusing the role of mere energy exporter. In view of the intensifying struggle for global resources, Russia, with its large energy potential, appears to be a very favourable option for European energy supplies, if not the best one. However, several outcomes of the strategic game between the two partners can be imagined. Engaging in non-cooperative strategies will in the end leave all stakeholders worse-off. The European Union should therefore concentrate on securing its partnership with Russia instead of damaging it. Stable cooperation would need the acceptance that the partner may pursue his own goals, which might be different from one's own interests. The question is, how can a sustainable compromise be found? This thesis finds that a mix of continued dialogue, a tit for tat approach bolstered by an international institutional framework and increased integration efforts appears as a preferable solution.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Kilgus2018,
  author    = {Kilgus, Tobias},
  title     = {Der Integrationsprozess Kosovos in die Europ{\"a}ische Union},
  series = {Region - Nation - Europa},
  journal   = {Region - Nation - Europa},
  number    = {84},
  publisher = {LIT},
  address   = {M{\"u}nster},
  isbn      = {978-3-643-14079-1},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {558},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Die Republik Kosovo stellt einen Beitrittskandidaten sui generis in der Erweiterungsgeschichte der Europ{\"a}ischen Union dar. Die besonderen Beziehungen zwischen der EU und dem "potenziellen" Kandidaten resultieren aus dem ungel{\"o}sten Territorialkonflikt mit Serbien, dem unvollendeten Staatsaufbau sowie der eingeschr{\"a}nkten Souver{\"a}nit{\"a}t Kosovos. Diese Einzelfallstudie untersucht Kosovos Integrationsprozess in den Staatenverbund im Kontext der Spezifika des Beitrittsaspiranten, der stockenden EU-S{\"u}dosterweiterung und der multiplen EU-Krise. Davon ausgehend werden vier Zukunftsszenarien f{\"u}r Kosovos Integrationsverlauf, auch mit Blick auf differenzierte Integrationsoptionen, entwickelt.},
  language  = {de}
}
@phdthesis{Hanschmann2019,
  author    = {Hanschmann, Raffael Tino},
  title     = {Stalling the engine? EU climate politics after the 'Great Recession'},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-44044},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-440441},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {XXVIII, 303},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {This dissertation investigates the impact of the economic and fiscal crisis starting in 2008 on EU climate policy-making. While the overall number of adopted greenhouse gas emission reduction policies declined in the crisis aftermath, EU lawmakers decided to introduce new or tighten existing regulations in some important policy domains. Existing knowledge about the crisis impact on EU legislative decision-making cannot explain these inconsistencies. In response, this study develops an actor-centred conceptual framework based on rational choice institutionalism that provides a micro-level link to explain how economic crises translate into altered policy-making patterns. The core theoretical argument draws on redistributive conflicts, arguing that tensions between 'beneficiaries' and 'losers' of a regulatory initiative intensify during economic crises and spill over to the policy domain. To test this hypothesis and using social network analysis, this study analyses policy processes in three case studies: The introduction of carbon dioxide emission limits for passenger cars, the expansion of the EU Emissions Trading System to aviation, and the introduction of a regulatory framework for biofuels. The key finding is that an economic shock causes EU policy domains to polarise politically, resulting in intensified conflict and more difficult decision-making. The results also show that this process of political polarisation roots in the industry that is the subject of the regulation, and that intergovernmental bargaining among member states becomes more important, but also more difficult in times of crisis.},
  language  = {en}
}