Nicht ermittelbar
Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (336) (remove)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (98)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (77)
- Part of a Book (75)
- Conference Proceeding (43)
- Other (13)
- Doctoral Thesis (8)
- Review (8)
- Working Paper (8)
- Report (5)
- Preprint (1)
Language
- English (336) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (336)
Keywords
- social media (6)
- artificial intelligence (5)
- coordination (4)
- Europe (3)
- big data (3)
- conversational agents (3)
- intergovernmental relations (3)
- knowledge management (3)
- automation (2)
- browser platforms (2)
Institute
- Fachgruppe Betriebswirtschaftslehre (64)
- Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft (47)
- Institut für Mathematik (46)
- Institut für Informatik und Computational Science (23)
- Öffentliches Recht (19)
- Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik (18)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (16)
- Institut für Physik und Astronomie (12)
- Fachgruppe Volkswirtschaftslehre (11)
- Department Psychologie (9)
In this chapter, we conduct bibliometric performance analyses and a co-citation analysis on all articles relating to family firms indexed in Scopus and Web of Science and all articles published in the Family Business Review, Journal of Family Business Management, and the Journal of Family Business Strategy. Based on the literature sample of 4,056 articles published between 1960 and 2020 by 3,600 authors in 783 journals and their 175,163 references, we identify the most productive and most cited journals, the most cited authors, and the 25 most cited articles. Our science mapping reveals the agency theory, definitions, entrepreneurship, internationalization, ownership, resources, socioemotional wealth, and succession as the predominant research themes in family firm research. Whereas entrepreneurship explicitly appears in one of the clusters, innovation does not yet. Based on our findings, we propose a research framework and point to several research gaps to be addressed by future research.
How do social changes, new technologies or new management trends affect communication work? A team of researchers at Leipzig University and the University of Potsdam (Germany) observed new developments in related disciplines. As a result, the five most important trends for corporate communications are identified annually and published in the Communications Trend Radar. Thus, Communications managers can identify challenges and opportunities at an early stage, take a position, address issues and make decisions. For 2023, the Communications Trend Radar identifies five key trends for corporate communications: State Revival, Scarcity Management, Unimagination, Parallel Worlds, Augemented Workflows.
Would the world be a better place if one were to adopt a European approach to state immunity?
(2021)
This chapter argues not only that there is no European Sonderweg (or ‘special way’) when it comes to the law of state immunity but that there ought not to be one. Debates within The Hague Conference on Private International Law in the late 1990s and those leading to the adoption of the 2002 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States, as well as the development of the EU Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement, as amended in 2015, all demonstrate that state immunity was not meant to be limited by such treaties but ‘safeguarded’. Likewise, there is no proof that regional European customary law limits state immunity when it comes to ius cogens violations, as Italy and (partly) Greece are the only European states denying state immunity in such cases while the European Court of Human Rights has, time and again, upheld a broad concept of state immunity. It therefore seems unlikely that in the foreseeable future a specific European customary law norm on state immunity will develop, especially given the lack of participation in such practice by those states most concerned by the matter, including Germany. This chapter considers the possible legal implications of the jurisprudence of the Italian Constitutional Court for European military operations (if such operations went beyond peacekeeping). These implications would mainly depend on the question of attribution: if one where to assume that acts undertaken within the framework of military operations led by the EU were to be, at least also, attributable to the troop-contributing member states, the respective troop-contributing state would be entitled to enjoy state immunity exactly to the same degree as in any kind of unilateral military operations. Additionally, some possible perspectives beyond Sentenza 238/2014 are examined, in particular concerning the redress awarded by domestic courts ‘as long as’ neither the German nor the international system grant equivalent protection to the victims of serious violations of international humanitarian law committed during World War II. In the author’s opinion, strengthening the jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals, bringing interstate cases for damages before the International Court of Justice, as well as providing for claims commissions where individual compensation might be sought for violations of international humanitarian law would be more useful and appropriate mechanisms than denying state immunity.
Article 15bis. Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu)
(2022)
Article 15ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral)
(2022)
This chapter focuses on the features of Article 1's paragraph 1 of the 1951 Convention. The article primarily determines the scope of application of the Convention's ratione personae while outlining the basis of the protection of refugees. Additionally, Article 1 addresses the concerns surrounding the inclusion, cessation, and exclusion of refugees. The chapter then tackles the historical development of the article by considering the instruments used prior to the 1951 Convention. It also cites that the Constitution of the International Refugee Organization appears to contain an ambiguity as to how the refugee notion was perceived, so refugees only became the IRO Constitution's concern when they have valid objections to returning to their home country.
As part of the current overall process of de-formalization in international law States increasingly chose informal, non-legally binding agreements or ‘Memoranda of Understanding’ (‘MOUs') to organize their international affairs. The increasing conclusion of such legally non-binding instruments in addition to their flexibility, however, also leads to uncertainties in international relations. Against this background, this article deals with possible indirect legal consequences produced by MOUs. It discusses the different legal mechanisms and avenues that may give rise to secondary legal effects of MOUs through a process of interaction with and interpretation in line with other (formal) sources of international law. The article further considers various strategies how to avoid such eventual possible unintended or unexpected indirect legal effects of MOUs when drafting such instruments and when dealing with them subsequent to their respective ‘adoption’.
This paper consists of two parts: In the first part, some of the challenges with which the Internationaal Criminal Court is currently confronted are being presented. First of all, the article will describe the current state of the International Criminal Court and the Rome Statue. Afterwards, the article analyses the Court’s efforts to deal with cases against third-country nationals and the challenges it is facing in that regard. In addition, the Court’s case law will be analyzed in order to determine an increasing ‘emancipation’ of the case law of the International Criminal Court from international humanitarian law. The second part of the paper will briefly discuss the role of domestic international criminal law and domestic courts in the further development and enforcement of international criminal law. As an example of the role that domestic courts may have in clarifying classic issues in international law, the judgment of the German Supreme Court of January 28, 2021 (3 StR 564/19), which deals with the status of costumary international law on functional immunity of State officials before domestic courts, shall be assessed.