Competing Norms and Strategic Visions: A Critical Appraisal of V4 Security Potential

Abstract

Despite shared historical experience and cultural proximity, the Visegrad group (V4) struggles to institutionalise its cooperation through stable mechanisms ensuring internal cohesion and external credibility. This is especially evident in the field of security and defence, which requires a shared strategic vision, in particular, common norms regarding the legitimate use of military force. While in the 1990s the four countries exhibited solidarity and unity in their collective ambition under the narrative of the ‘Return to Europe’, their general perception of security threats and strategic culture prevents deeper integration into a security community.     

Collaborative innovation in emerging innovation systems: Evidence from Central and Eastern Europe

The Journal of Technology Transfer - Firms often lack competences and capabilities for creation and commercialization of innovations. The solution to this problem lies in sharing or acquisition of...     

Investments in Global Warming Mitigation: The Case of “Activities Implemented Jointly”

This paper examines bilateral cooperation between developed countries (home country) and developing countries (host country) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to enhance carbon dioxide sinks. With the home-host country pair as the unit of analysis, our logistic regression model examines 158 Activities Implemented Jointly (AIJ) investment projects from 1993 until 2002 across 2541 country-pairs. Because the marginal costs of reducing emissions may be lower in developing countries, the AIJ projects served as a policy laboratory to assess whether such investments might be advantageous to both countries in the event future regimes allowed emission credits from such bilateral projects. Instead of investing in home countries where maximum pollution reductions (or carbon sequestration) might be possible, home countries invest in locations where they can conduct their policy experiments at low transaction costs. Prior trade and aid relationships were used as a proxy. Regarding energy projects, location decisions are driven by home countries’ desire to reduce air pollution that they receive from abroad. Geography – proximity of a host country to a home country – in interaction with host country's coal production, is a very important driver of location decision in AIJ energy sector projects. Location of sequestration projects is impacted by the host country's potential for avoiding deforestation as well as by previous aid and trade patterns between a home and a host country. Proximity is not important in this case.     

Big dreams and small steps: comparative perspectives on the social movement struggle for democracy in Serbia and North Macedonia

ABSTRACT

This paper provides a comparative analysis of social movements’ characteristics and capacities to struggle against illiberal tendencies and incite political change in Serbia and North Macedonia. First, we discuss the illiberal elements of political regimes in the countries in question, Serbia and North Macedonia. Then, we provide a comprehensive overview of progressive social movements in the two countries, formed and organized as a response to different authoritarian and non-democratic tendencies. Finally, we point to some differences in their organizing, coalition-forging and issue-defining principles, which, we believe, may help to explain the relative success of social movements in North Macedonia in producing relevant political outcomes, compared to the weak political impact of social movements in Serbia. Empirical data were collected during the summer of 2018 through in-depth interviews with members of social movements in North Macedonia and Serbia.     

CHILDREN'S RIGHTS IN EUROPEAN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: WHY ARE FAMILY PRACTICES SO DIFFERENT FROM LEGAL THEORIES?

Debates about child custody following parental separation often have been framed in terms of a battle between the competing rights of different family members. In the United States, advocates of mothers’ rights square off against proponents of fathers’ rights, with each side claiming to truly represent children's rights. Of course, not all advocates lay claim to children's rights in contact and custody disputes merely as a tactical maneuver. Some experts believe that children are entitled to (and benefit from) their own, independent legal advocate in custody cases. In theory, at least, the position that children lay claim to a third set of independent rights is strongly held in Europe, more strongly than in many U.S. states, because of the adoption of United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in Europe, but not in the United States. In this article, we examine children's rights in custody disputes from a European perspective, particularly children's legal right to contact with their parents, as well as the children's right to be heard in custody and contact disputes. We find that, despite differences in legal theory, tradition, and family demographics, European countries ultimately face a familiar reality: Custody and contact disputes are, in reality, more about renegotiating family relationships than they are a matter of a mother's, father's, or child's rights.