Search

Begin New Search Content Type Working Paper

901. Nationalist Polarization in the Western Balkans and Its Institutional Consequences: A Fate That Can Be changed

Author:
Vedran Dzihic
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:
In Southeastern Europe, the process of democratization and Europeanization since the beginning of the 2000s has been seen as a major paradigm shift and made the inter-national community and the EU believe that time of wars and nationalist excesses was in the past. It seemed a sure sign that all countries of the region were set to reach the membership in the European Union soon. In terms of Europeanization and democratization, we can argue that the second decade of the 21st century has brought no substantial progress in Southeastern Europe. Rather, it has seen the region on the path of constant decline of democracy. The latest reports of Nations in Transit, the Bertelsmann Transformation Index, and other serious academic research prove the continuous trend of de-democratization in the region, with scores either falling or stagnating. Weak democratic institutions often resemble empty facades. Lack of rule of law is evident, the principle has perverted into the rule by law of dominant political parties able to control the judiciary. We see huge deficits in terms of fundamental rights and values including media freedom. Just in April 2019, Re-porters Without Borders published their newest ranking on the freedom of media, listing Serbia as one of the coun-tries in Europe in which the media freedom deteriorated the most. Elections are held, but are dominated by dominant par-ties and are not able to generate genuine political chang-es. All in all, we see a mounting democratic deficit before democracy has even had the chance to become “the only game in town.” On top of everything else – with the excep-tion of North Macedonia – comes a rhetorical democratic and EU-integration mimicry from governing elites, who are also engaged in maintaining or establishing illiberal or semi-authoritarian power structures. Citizens are either disillusioned with the type of governance in their countries or generally frustrated, which results in political disen-gagement or the wish to emigrate. One part of the citizen-ry long ago adjusted to the structures and circumstances, learning to obey or to profit from the clientelist structures. Either way the spaces for political engagement and active participation have been shrinking……
Topic:
Democratization, Nationalism, Governance, Authoritarianism, Citizenship, Polarization, and Freedom of Press
Political Geography:
Europe and Balkans

902. Who Owns What? – Free Trade Policies, Migration Management and the Ambiguity of “Joint Ownership”

Author:
Sherin Gharib
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:
The concept of joint ownership has become a buzzword since the 1990s not only in strategies of international organisations, such as the United Nations (UN), the WorldBank (WB) or the International Monetary Fund (IMF), but also in European Union (EU)foreign policy (Ejdus, 2017). Since the launch of the European Neighbourhood Policy(ENP) in 2004 joint ownership has been defined as one of its main principles.Accordingly, the EU states that “joint ownership of the process, based on the awareness of shared values and common interests, is essential. The EU does not seek to impose priorities or conditions on its partners” (European Commission, 2004, p.8). It continues by holding that there “can be no question of asking partners to accept a pre-determined set of priorities. These will be defined by common consent and will thus vary from country to country. The endorsement of these plans by the highest instance of the agreements in place will give added weight to the agreed priorities for action” (European Commission, 2004, p. 8). Thus, EU policies should be set within a partnership relation between the EU, and its counterparts and priorities should be defined by common consent. The EU aims to engage “governments and all leading local stakeholders, including national parliaments” (European Commission, 2010c cited in Jonasson, 2013, p. 47). The importance of joint ownership was reconfirmed within the revised ENP in 2015,where the EU has declared that “differentiation and greater mutual ownership will be the hallmark of the new ENP, recognising that not all partners aspire to EU rules and standards, and reflecting the wishes of each country concerning the nature and focus ofits partnership with the EU” (European Commission, 2015a, p. 2). The goal, as the EUhas claimed, is to increase cooperation with neighbouring countries to an eye-to-eye level and to follow an approach based on “both partners’ needs and EU interests”(European Commission, 2017). The revised ENP again acknowledges the importance of involving relevant members of civil society as well as social partners in consultations(European Commission, 2015a, p. 3). Despite the appearance of joint ownership in several EU documents and its use as an example of an inclusive approach, the definition offered remains quite vague. Thus, it is unclear to what extent governments, local stakeholders, civil society and social partners should co-own certain policies. Whose considerations should count and should joint ownership be operationalised within the decision-making or implementation process?How can the operationalisation of the concept be evaluated? This policy paper critically investigates the EU’s concept of joint ownership. Drawing on two case studies, namely free trade policies and migration management, the paper 7PAPERSIEMed. Who Owns What? – Free Trade Policies, Migration Management and the Ambiguity of “Joint Ownership” analyses the implications and limitations of the EU’s partnership relation with its southern neighbourhood. The paper focuses mainly on the Egyptian, Tunisian and Moroccan cases. Due to the vague definition of “joint ownership” and in order to be able to analyse the two case studies, the paper suggests, based on EU documents, two types of ownership: 1) governmental ownership and 2) societal ownership. Using this conceptualisation, the paper analyses the involvement of different stakeholders and the main beneficiaries of EU free trade policies and migration management. It argues that there is a lack of governmental as well as societal ownership within the two EU tools, Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (DCFTAs) and Mobility Partnerships (MP) as it is mainly the EU that sets priorities, norms and standards to be adopted by partner countries. Government representatives and civil society actors from Mediterranean Partner Countries (MPCs) perceive their relationship with the EUas asymmetric rather than based on an eye-to-eye level (personal communication with Tunisian and Egyptian officials and civil society actors, 2016-2017). The perceived reluctance to fully engage MPCs – government officials and social actors – in the implementation of EU policies has led to their growing mistrust of the EU. If ownership is applied at all, then it is often reduced to a state-centric approach even though the EU is rhetorically attached to the inclusion of actors going beyond the government. The lack of “societal” ownership becomes evident as consultative mechanisms suggested and applied by the EU to include grassroots organisations have in most cases no implications for policy-drafting processes. Thus, there seems to be a gap between what the EU refers to in official documents and the implementation on the ground. In this case, both MPs and free trade policies might exclusively serve the interests of the government and linked elites in the region – this depends on their ability to “own” certain policies rather than addressing the needs at the grassroots, such as poverty reduction or the creation of job opportunities. In this respect, the legitimacy and sustainability of EU policies is at risk (Ejdus, 2017;Dworkin & Wesslau, 2015). The paper proceeds as follows: the first part investigates the concept of ownership,illustrates several dimensions of its ambiguity, and analyses the EU’s operationalisation of the concept. Subsequently, the paper sheds light on the limits of ownership in the realm of free trade policies in general and DCFTAs in particular.The following section investigates the concept of migration management and MPs. The analysis is based on primary and secondary literature review as well as interviews conducted by the author with Egyptian and Tunisian officials and civil society actors, as well as with EU representatives in 2016 and 2017.
Topic:
Migration, Regional Cooperation, and Free Trade
Political Geography:
Europe, Tunisia, and Mediterranean

903. The Baltic Sea Region after the Ukraine Crisis and Trump: A Russian perspective

Author:
Alexander Sergunin
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies
Abstract:
This DIIS Report identifies Russian national interests in the BSR (Baltic Sea Region) and discusses whether there are continuities and changes in these interests in the post-Crimea era. The Russian discourse on the BSR is explored, including Russian foreign policy schools and official foreign policy and national security doctrines. Different aspects of Moscow’s BSR strategy - political, economic, sub-regional, environmental and military - are examined. The chances for Russia’s participation in the BSR multilateral cooperative framework are assessed. This DIIS Report authored by Alexander Sergunin, professor at St. Petersburg State University, is an outgrowth of a defence and security project on 'The Baltic Sea Region after Crimea and Trump' with Sergunin and Hans Mouritzen, senior researcher at DIIS, as participants (see also DIIS Working Paper 2019:1).
Topic:
Foreign Policy, National Security, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, Crimea, and Baltic Sea

904. States of Refuge: Keywords for Critical Refugee Studies

Author:
Peter Nyers
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute on Globalization and the Human Condition, McMaster University
Abstract:
The phenomenon of displacement is increasingly evident across a wide range of human activity, but there have been few attempts to consider the connections between these movements. For several years the international community has been focused on the displacement of Syrians from their homes and the resulting flow of refugees into neighbouring countries and Europe. More recently, more than 600,000 Rohingya refugees have fled the violence in Myanmar and captured the world’s attention. Less well known, but no less significant, has been the more than one million refugees fleeing the violence in South Sudan. All this public and governmental interest in migrants is not surprising given that, in 2015, the United Nations estimated that there were 244 million migrants in the world, including about 65.3 million forcibly displaced people, of which 20 million are refugees. These numbers – and the stories of suffering and survival that accompany them – have led former United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon (2016), to declare that there exists a global “crisis of solidarity.” However, forced migration is just one case in the movement of peoples between states. An even larger migration occurs within states as rural residents pour into cities around the world, vividly captured in Mike Davis’s (2007) phrase “Planet of Slums.” Within many cities gentrification displaces local communities in favour of new residents with greater purchasing power. These events, moreover, take place in the background of earlier colonial displacements of Indigenous peoples and the legacies of those violent episodes. Displacement occurs both in the physical sense of people being moved from one place to another and in a cultural sense as in the case of the Canadian residential schools system destruction of First Nations culture. Shifting focus to human interaction with the natural world, the planet is on the verge of a historic displacement with the extinction of ecological systems and thousands of species with climate change and further industrialization (Jones 2016).
Topic:
Migration, Refugee Crisis, Displacement, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus

905. Digital Democracy

Author:
Brian Budd, Nicole Goodman, Sarah Shoker, Dominik Stecula, Sara Bannerman, Tony Porter, Netina Tan, Chelsea Gabel, Liam Midzain-Gobin, Devin Ouellette, Norwin Tabassum, Catherine Frost, Marcel Goguen, Brian Detlor, Amelia Joseph, Andrea Zeffiro, and Angela Orasch
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute on Globalization and the Human Condition, McMaster University
Abstract:
As we approach the third decade of the 21st century, there are numerous disturbing signs that two world-historical accomplishments that had seemed so promising are in serious trouble. The first of these is digital networks, which had promised to bring the world closer together, bringing broader popular participation and engagement and new ways of generating wealth and wellness. However, today anxieties about digital networking are proliferating, sparked by growing levels of digital surveillance, the effects of digital devices on our mental health and sociality, and the loss of jobs to artificial intelligence. The second troubled historical accomplishment is democracy, which at the end of the Cold War seemed to be expanding inexorably, but which now is challenged by growing authoritarianism and popular discontent with democratic governments. Freedom House’s 2019 report, entitled “Democracy in Retreat”, documents the 13th consecutive year of weakening democratic norms around the world (2019). These two global developments are related, due to the negative impact of “fake news” spread digitally on elections or the disruptive effects of digitization on the type of social cohesion that should be an important precondition for and effect of democracy. However, the relationships between digitization and democracy are multidimensional and complex, and much work remains to identify and analyze them. This working paper contributes to addressing this need by bringing together a set of interdisciplinary contributions, exploring different facets of the relationship between digitization and democracy in a variety of settings, from the local through to the global. This introduction to the working paper provides an overview of some key issues and literatures relevant to the relationship between digitization and democracy, including the historical shift in assessments of this relationship from optimism to concern; analysis of more specific ways that digitization and democracy interact; and the increasingly global aspects of the problem and the challenges this poses to governance. The final section of this introduction provides a summary of the individual contributions that follow. These short papers were presented at a workshop at McMaster University in September 2018 and then revised for this set of working papers to bring out their common themes more consistently. This final section of the introduction emphasizes the inter-relatedness of digitization and democracy in various settings. This type of global and multidimensional mapping of the problem is crucial if these problems, and the fears about our global futures that accompany them, can be diagnosed, treated, and overcome.
Topic:
Health, Democracy, Media, Surveillance, and Digitization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

906. The German Undervaluation Regime under Bretton Woods How Germany Became the Nightmare of the World Economy

Author:
Martin Höpner
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies
Abstract:
Germany is an undervaluation regime, a regime that steers economic behavior towards deterioration of the real exchange rate and thereby towards export surpluses. This regime has brought the eurozone to the brink of collapse. But it is much older than the euro. It was established during the Bretton Woods years and has survived all subsequent European currency orders. The regime operates in two steps: competitive disinflation against trading partners; and resistance against correcting revaluations. The Bretton Woods order provid- ed perfect conditions for the establishment and perpetuation of the regime: it was flexible enough for sufficient macroeconomic policy autonomy to bring about differential inflation rates, and sticky enough to delay and minimize revaluations.
Topic:
Political Economy, Regional Cooperation, Capitalism, and Inflation
Political Geography:
Europe, Germany, and Central Europe

907. Is There a Motherhood Penalty in Academia? The Gendered Effect of Children on Academic Publications

Author:
Mark Lutter and Martin Schroder
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies
Abstract:
Based on data that tracks CV and publication records as well as survey information from sociologists in German academia, we examine the effects of parenthood on the publication output of male and female academics. Results indicate that having children leads to a sig- nificant decline in the number of publications by women, while not affecting the number of publications by men. We also find that the gendered effect of children on productivity hardly mitigates differences in publication output between men and women, as women still publish about 20 percent less than men after controlling for the adverse effects of chil- dren on productivity. We further find that the gendered effect of childbearing depends partly on prior levels of women’s academic achievements, which suggests mechanisms of performance-driven self-selection. Lower-performing women tend to suffer a stronger motherhood penalty, while the publication output of more successful women (who have been granted academic awards) is not reduced through childbirth. The results indicate that women are better at managing the “double burden” of parenthood and career if external, award-giving committees have bestowed prestige upon them and indicated their potential for a scientific career. Overall, these findings contribute to a better understanding of how to reduce the adverse effect of children on female publication output.
Topic:
Gender Issues, Children, Women, Feminism, and Academia
Political Geography:
Europe, Germany, and Central Europe

908. An Overview of German New Economic Sociology and the Contribution of the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies

Author:
John Wilkinson
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies
Abstract:
New economic sociology (NES) in Germany has many similarities with economic sociology in the United States in its conscious efforts to institutionalize its presence within the broader sociology community, its promotion of a canon via handbooks, and its focus on the sociology of markets. At the same time, it differs in its stronger connections to the German classics, the greater vitality of a macrosociological tradition in Germany, the prior existence of a “bridging” generation of economic sociologists, and its later consolidation in a period of neo-liberal globalization, all of which have giv- en NES in the German-speaking world a distinctive character. In addition, it has been influenced by successive waves of French economic sociology – Bourdieu, convention, and actor-network theory – and its bilingual academic tradition has ensured its integration into English-speaking NES. In its contribution to the sociology of markets, the fact that NES emerged later in Germany than in the US led to a greater concern with quality markets rather than commodity markets, and a concomitantly greater attention to issues of value and price. These latter themes, in their turn, establish a continuity with German economic sociology’s enduring concern with understanding the role of money. Not surprisingly, therefore, German NES is now making key contributions to discussions on the sociol- ogy of money and is increasingly situating its analysis within the broader dynamic of capitalism and current processes of financialization.
Topic:
Economics, Globalization, Sociology, and Capitalism
Political Geography:
Europe, Germany, and Central Europe

909. Strong Firms, Weak Banks The Financial Consequences of Germany’s Export-Led Growth Model

Author:
Benjamin Braun and Richard Deeg
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies
Abstract:
The financial foundation of Germany’s manufacturing success, according to the compara- tive capitalism literature, is an ample supply of long-term capital, provided to firms by a three-pillar banking system and “patient” domestic shareholders. This premise also informs the recent literature on growth models, which documents a shift towards a purely export- led growth model in Germany since the 1990s. We challenge this common assumption of continuity in the German financial system. Export-led growth, characterized by aggregate wage suppression and high corporate profits, has allowed non-financial corporations to increasingly finance investment out of retained earnings, thus lowering their dependence on external finance. This paper documents this trend and shows that business lending by banks has increasingly been constrained on the demand side, reducing the power – and relevance – of banks vis-à-vis German industry. The case study suggests a need for students of growth models to pay greater attention to the dynamic interaction between institutional sectors in general, and between the financial and the non-financial sectors in particular.
Topic:
Banks, Exports, Institutionalism, and Corporations
Political Geography:
Europe, Germany, and Central Europe

910. Changing Perspectives in Political Economy

Author:
Renate Mayntz
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies
Abstract:
The history of a research field called political economy dates back to the eighteenth century, giving rise to a variety of disciplinary approaches, and experienced a renaissance as a mul- tidisciplinary field after the Second World War, combining economic, political science, and sociological approaches. The divergence between economic globalization and the nation- ally restricted scope of economic policy directs interest to the relationship between politics and the economy. A quantitative analysis of the articles published in two dedicated political economy journals shows major trends of the developing research field. The relationship between politics and economy is interpreted rather widely, and research is largely focused on Western capitalist nations. In conclusion, two avenues for further research in the field are briefly discussed.
Topic:
Political Economy, Regional Cooperation, Capitalism, and Global Political Economy
Political Geography:
Europe, Germany, Central Europe, and Western Europe