Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (55) (remove)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (55) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (55) (remove)
Keywords
- Immobilienpreise (2)
- United Nations (2)
- Wohnimmobilien Deutschland (2)
- international law (2)
- labor supply (2)
- rule of law (2)
- Agenda 2030 (1)
- Banken (1)
- CARICOM (1)
- Caribbean (1)
- Clusteranalyse (1)
- Colonialism (1)
- Compensation (1)
- Föderalismus (1)
- Haushaltssicherungskonzept (1)
- Human Rights Defender (1)
- International Court of Justice (1)
- International Law Commission (1)
- Kennzahlensystem (1)
- Law of State Responsibility (1)
- Mapper (1)
- OWG (1)
- Persistente Homologie (1)
- Regionale Mieten (1)
- Regionale Preise (1)
- Reparation (1)
- SDG 16 (1)
- SDGs (1)
- Special Rapporteur (1)
- Staatsanleihen (1)
- Staatsverschuldung (1)
- Topologische Datenanalyse (1)
- Women's Rights (1)
- banking (1)
- childcare provision (1)
- crowding out (1)
- customary international law (1)
- decline (1)
- decomposition (1)
- fiscal capacity (1)
- fiskalische Kapazität (1)
- gender (1)
- gender wage gap (1)
- generalized difference-in-difference (1)
- habit formation (1)
- hate crime (1)
- hours restrictions (1)
- human capital (1)
- inequality (1)
- inequality of opportunity (1)
- international criminal law (1)
- international humanitarian law (1)
- international rule of law (1)
- involuntary unemployment (1)
- kommunale Daseinsvorsorge (1)
- kommunale Selbstverwaltung (1)
- kommunaler Haushaltsplan (1)
- mental health (1)
- migration (1)
- mother’s labor supply (1)
- non-state actors (1)
- non-state armed actors (1)
- obesity (1)
- objective health measures (1)
- opinio juris (1)
- parental leave (1)
- physical activity (1)
- primary school (1)
- public debt (1)
- quantile regression (1)
- refugees (1)
- rise (1)
- school health examinations (1)
- selection into employment (1)
- sovereign exposure (1)
- state practice (1)
- sustainable development goals (1)
- systemic risk (1)
- systemisches Risiko (1)
- taxpayer subsidies (1)
- voucher (1)
- wages (1)
- wealth (1)
- windfall gains (1)
Kommunalfinanzen
(2008)
Die vorliegende Arbeit untersucht über den Zeitraum von 1994 bis 2004 die kommunale Finanzsituation der Stadt Potsdam. Anhand eines Kennzahlensystems, das aus den Daten der entsprechenden kommunalen Haushaltspläne entwickelt wurde, konnten Aussagen über die Entwicklung der Einnahmen und Ausgaben sowie deren Beeinflussbarkeit durch kommunales Handeln herausgearbeitet werden. Die Analyse brachte zwei Ergebnisse hervor: Zum einen, dass Potsdam nicht als „dauernd finanziell leistungsfähig“ gilt und zum anderen, dass sowohl die Ausgaben und Einnahmen von Potsdam stark exogenen Einflüssen unterliegen und demzufolge geringe Gestaltungsspielräume besitzt. Vor diesem Hintergrund hat sich die Stadt Potsdam für verschiedene Maßnahmen zur Haushaltskonsolidierung entschieden, um eine stetige Aufgabenerfüllung zu gewährleisten.
This paper will turn into a contribution to a book on community obligations. It focusses on third parties' rights and obligations in armed conflict.
It is often said that international law has developed from a legal order which is designed to protect sovereignty to a system which also promotes community interests. This shift is said to be reflected in structural changes of the legal system. The creation of rights and obligations for third parties is generally seen as a part of this perceived paradigmatic shift. Community interests can be furthered either by negative duties of abstention, by an entitlement for third states, or even by duties to take positive measures. Since the shift towards protecting community interests apparently requires some form of cooperation, positive rights and duties to protect and to promote appear to be indispensable. Authors relying on a community perspective often dismiss duties of abstention as an expression of indifference in the face of a violation of a fundamental norm. Solidarity seems to require that third states take a more proactive role in actively enforcing community interests.
The paper aims to test this understanding on the basis of an analysis of rights and obligations of third states in armed conflict. In order to argue that duties of abstention of third states are a central instrument for promoting community interests in relation to armed conflicts, the paper will first trace pertinent structural changes in international law. In particular, it will question the extent to which positive rights and obligations of third states have been firmly established in international law. In a second step, this contribution will evaluate the overall tendencies in the ongoing lawmaking process for promoting community interests in relation to armed conflict.
The paper undertakes a preliminary assessment of current developments of international law for the purpose of mapping the ground for a larger research project. The research project pursues the goal of determining whether public international law, as it has developed since the end of the Cold War, is continuing its progressive move towards a more human-rights- and multi-actor-oriented order, or whether we are seeing a renewed emphasis of more classical elements of international law. In this context the term “international rule of law” is chosen to designate the more recent and “thicker” understanding of international law. The paper discusses how it can be determined whether this form of international law continues to unfold, and whether we are witnessing challenges to this order which could give rise to more fundamental reassessments.
Das dritte Working Paper in der KFG Working Paper Series analysiert Zustand und Perspektiven völkerrechtlicher Abrüstungsverträge unter der Ägide der Vereinten Nationen. Während die dreißig Jahre zwischen der Kuba-Krise und dem Fall des Eisernen Vorhangs für die Abrüstung eine erfolgreiche Periode gewesen seien, seien in den Vereinten Nationen seither außer dem Waffenhandelsvertrag keine weiteren Abrüstungsverträge abgeschlossen worden. Die gegenwärtige Stimmung sei abwartend bis negativ, obwohl es ein Nachholbedürfnis gebe, Abrüstungsverträge an die heutigen politischen Gegebenheiten sowie an den Stand der Technik anzupassen. Die Verfasserin schlägt als Lösung vor, durch eine Politik der kleinen Schritte ein besseres Abrüstungsklima zu schaffen, indem dem Diskurs auf Grundlage zusätzlicher Protokolle zu bestehenden Verträgen und notfalls auch durch ein Ausweichen auf andere Gremien eine neue Richtung verliehen werde.
This article re-examines the relationship between Africa and the International Criminal Court (ICC). It traces the successive changes of the African attitude towards this Court, from states' euphoria, to hostility against its work, to regional counter-initiatives through the umbrella of the African Union (AU). The main argument goes beyond the idea of "the Court that Africa wants" in order to identify concrete reasons behind such a formal argument which may have fostered, if not enticed, the majority of African states to become ICC members and actively cooperate with it, when paradoxically some great powers have decided to stay outside its jurisdiction. It also seeks to understand, from a political and legal viewpoint, which parameters have changed since then to provoke that hostile attitude against the Court's work and the entrance of the AU into the debate through the African Common Position on the ICC. Lastly, this article explores African alternatives to the contested ICC justice system. It examines the need to reform the Rome Statute in order to give more independence, credibility and legitimacy to the ICC and its duplication to some extent by the new "Criminal Court of the African Union". Particular attention is paid to the resistance against this idea to reform the ICC justice system.
Caribbean States organised in CARICOM recently brought forward reparation claims against several European States to compensate slavery and (native) genocides in the Caribbean and even threatened to approach the International Court of Justice. The paper provides for an analysis of the facts behind the CARICOM claim and asks whether the law of state responsibility is able to provide for the demanded compensation. As the intertemporal principle generally prohibits retroactive application of today’s international rules, the paper argues that the complete claim must be based on the law of state responsibility governing in the time of the respective conduct. An inquiry into the history of primary (prohibition of slavery and genocide) as well as secondary rules of State responsibility reveals that both sets of rules were underdeveloped or non-existent at the times of slavery and alleged (native) genocides. Therefore, the author concludes that the CARICOM claim is legally flawed but nevertheless worth the attention as it once again exposes imperial and colonial injustices of the past and their legitimization by historical international law and international/natural lawyers.
Over the last few decades, the methodology for the identification of customary international law (CIL) has been changing. Both elements of CIL – practice and opinio juris – have assumed novel and broader forms, as noted in the Reports of the Special Rapporteur of the International Law Commission (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016). This paper discusses these Reports and the draft conclusions, and reaction by States in the Sixth Committee of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), highlighting the areas of consensus and contestation. This ties to the analysis of the main doctrinal positions, with special attention being given to the two elements of CIL, and the role of the UNGA resolutions. The underlying motivation is to assess the real or perceived crisis of CIL, and the author develops the broader argument maintaining that in order to retain unity within international law, the internal limits of CIL must be carefully asserted.
The paper looks at community interests in international law from the perspective of the International Law Commission. As the topics of the Commission are diverse, the outcome of its work is often seen as providing a sense of direction regarding general aspects of international law. After defining what he understands by “community interests”, the author looks at both secondary and primary rules of international law, as they have been articulated by the Commission, as well as their relevance for the recognition and implementation of community interests. The picture which emerges only partly fits the widespread narrative of “from self-interest to community interest”. Whereas the Commission has recognized, or developed, certain primary rules which more fully articulate community interests, it has been reluctant to reformulate secondary rules of international law, with the exception of jus cogens. The Commission has more recently rather insisted that the traditional State-consent-oriented secondary rules concerning the formation of customary international law and regarding the interpretation of treaties continue to be valid in the face of other actors and forms of action which push towards the recognition of more and thicker community interests.
The rule of law is the cornerstone of the international legal system. This paper shows, through analysis of intergovernmental instruments, statements made by representatives of States, and negotiation records, that the rule of law at the United Nations has become increasingly contested in the past years. More precisely, the argument builds on the process of integrating the notion of the rule of law into the Sustainable Development Goals, adopted in September 2015 in the document Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The main sections set out the background of the rule of law debate at the UN, the elements of the rule of law at the goal- and target-levels in the 2030 Agenda – especially in the SDG 16 –, and evaluate whether the rule of law in this context may be viewed as a normative and universal foundation of international law. The paper concludes, with reflections drawn from the process leading up to the 2030 Agenda and the final outcome document that the rule of law – or at least strong and precise formulations of the concept – may be in decline in institutional and normative settings. This can be perceived as symptomatic of a broader crisis of the international legal order.
Seeming consensus has formed among legal scholars and practitioners that a rising China seeks changes in rules and institutions of international law. Yet, attendant accounts of how such changes may and already do restructure global legal order remain relatively underdeveloped. An observed rise in the international rule of law during immediate post-Cold War years has now been disrupted by a confluence of regional shifts in geopolitical power and contestation of law’s normative foundations by newly empowered states. In these circumstances, advocates for stability and continuity in variations of the “liberal international order” or “rules-based order” have sought to defend the authority and resilience of universally defined international legal norms against various regional challenges to the boundary between law and politics. Yet, as both global power and universal conceptions of law fragment, so too will the presumed equilibrium between international law’s political and normative foundations. Signs of fragmentation are now conspicuously playing out in East and Southeast Asia, where the relative rise of China is amplified by alternative Chinese conceptions of foundations and purposes of global legal order. This working paper introduces the concept of “geolegal power” to describe the competitive logic of a territorially bounded leading state restructuring interpretation and development of legal rules and institutions, which is emerging more explicitly within regional subsystems. Fragmentation of the international rule of law by a rising Chinese “geolegal order” is demonstrated by contested maritime rules in three key areas: freedom of navigation; third-party and judicial settlement; and, territorial claims under UNCLOS. Evidence that China is carving out an effective subsystem of rules designated as “law” in the most consequential of security and geopolitical domains poses a critical challenge to the structure of a unified and universal system of international law. Legal scholars and practitioners must better grasp reconfiguring foundations of international law in order to address rising orders of “geolegal power”, in which the regional meaning and operation of law is no longer reconcilable within the terms of an “international” rule of law.