DOCSLIB.ORG

2016 Cso Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia 20Th Edition - July 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2016 Cso Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia 20Th Edition - July 2017 2016 CSO SUSTAINABILITY INDEX FOR CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AND EURASIA 20TH EDITION - JULY 2017 Cover Photo: The photo was taken in Cahul (a city from the south part of Moldova as part of the campaign, Europa pentru Tine (Europe for you), that started in 2014 in Moldova. Participants, united by the idea EUROPA PENTRU TINE, formed a live chain in a circle symbolizing united countries on the EU flag. This photograph was taken by FHI 360/MPSCS The 2016 CSO Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia Developed by: United States Agency for International Development Bureau for Europe and Eurasia Technical Support Office (TSO), Democracy and Governance (DG) Division TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................................................ ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................ 1 2016 CSO SUSTAINABILITY INDEX SCORES ......................................................................................................... 12 ALBANIA ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 13 ARMENIA ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 AZERBAIJAN ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 32 BELARUS ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 42 BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA (BiH) ................................................................................................................................................. 53 BULGARIA ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 62 CROATIA ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 71 CZECH REPUBLIC ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 80 ESTONIA ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 89 GEORGIA ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 98 HUNGARY ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 107 KOSOVO ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 118 LATVIA .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 127 LITHUANIA ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 137 MACEDONIA .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 146 MOLDOVA ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 157 MONTENEGRO ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 168 POLAND ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 178 ROMANIA .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 188 RUSSIA ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 198 SERBIA .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 210 SLOVAKIA ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 220 SLOVENIA ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 230 UKRAINE ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 240 ANNEX A: CSO SUSTAINABILITY INDEX METHODOLOGY ........................................................................... 251 ANNEX B: STATISTICAL DATA.............................................................................................................................. 266 ANNEX C: REGIONAL MAP ..................................................................................................................................... 277 THE 2016 CSO SUSTAINABILITY INDEX FOR CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AND EURASIA INTRODUCTION The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is pleased to present the twentieth edition of the CSO Sustainability Index (CSOSI) for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia, covering developments in 2016. This year’s Index reports on the CSO sectors in twenty-four countries in the region, from the Baltics in the north to the Caucasus in the south, and the Visegrad countries in the west to Russia, which stretches east to the Pacific Ocean1. It addresses both advances and setbacks in seven key components or “dimensions” of the sustainability of the civil society sector: legal environment, organizational capacity, financial viability, ad- vocacy, service provision, infrastructure, and public image. The Index’s methodology relies on CSO practitioners and researchers, who in each country form an expert panel to assess and rate these dimensions of CSO sustainability during the year. The panel agrees on a score for each dimension, which can range from 1 (most developed) to 7 (most challenged). The dimension scores are then averaged to produce an overall sustainability score for the CSO sector of a given country. An editori- al committee composed of technical and regional experts reviews each panel’s scores and the corresponding narrative reports, with the aim of maintaining consistent approaches and standards so as to allow cross- country comparisons. Further details about the methodology used to calculate scores and produce narrative reports are provided in Annex A. The Index is a useful source of information for local CSOs, governments, donors, academics, and others who want to better understand and monitor key aspects of sustainability in the CSO sector. The CSO Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia complements similar publications covering other regions: CSO Sustainability Index for Sub-Saharan Africa, which assesses the civil society sector in thirty-one countries; CSO Sustainability Index for the Middle East and North Africa, which covers seven countries; and CSO Sustainability In- dex for Asia, covering seven countries. These various editions of the CSO Sustainability Index bring the total number of countries surveyed in 2016 to sixty-nine. A publication of this type would not be possible without the contributions of many individuals and organiza- tions. We are especially grateful to our implementing partners, who played the critical role of facilitating the expert panel meetings and writing the country reports. We would also like to thank the many CSO repre- sentatives and experts, USAID partners, and international donors who participated in the expert panels in each country. Their knowledge, perceptions, ideas, observations, and contributions are the foundation upon which this Index is based. 1 Please note that the five countries of Central Asia are no longer covered by this publication. THE
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 28 November 2013 GOOD GOVERNANCE, RULE of LAW
    28 November23 May 20132014 GOOD GOVERNANCE, RULE OF LAW AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS THE EU PROJECT ‘SUPPORTING MOLDOVA TO IMPLEMENT THE EU-MOLDOVA ACTION PLAN ON VISA LIBERALISATION’ Strengthening the knowledge of judiciary on protection mechanism for migrants. In the period of 1-2 April in Chisinau was held the third Fighting Irregular Migration in Moldova- FIRMM training for judges. The overall objective of the event was to provide an overview on the principle standards for migrants’ protection under the Council of Europe tools, with a special focus on the European Convention of Human Rights (ECtHR). The seminar topic was chosen at the special request of the Moldovan National Institute of Justice, based on the need to enhance the acquaintance of judges and prosecutors with the CoE standards and European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence. Experts from Human Rights Directorate of the Council of Europe, Strasbourg and a lawyer from the European Court of Human Rights delivered presentations on the main instruments and handbooks of the CoE concerning the status of migrants. The discussions were based on the international jurisprudence and the national judicial practice. An added value of the seminar was the practical talks on selected migrants-related case law, processed in the ECtHR. As well at the seminar was presented the draft of the Resource book on human rights protection of migrants’ for judiciary developed within the project and planned to be printed in the next few months. Contact persons: Diana Hincu, [email protected] or Andrei Vrabie, [email protected] EUBAM LECTURE ON FIGHTING ORGANIZED CRIME AT ‘EU STUDY DAYS’ On April 3, EUBAM delivered a lecture on ‘EU best practices in fighting organised crime’.
    [Show full text]
  • Studia Politica 32014
    www.ssoar.info The 2014 European Elections. The Case of Poland Sula, Piotr Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Sula, P. (2014). The 2014 European Elections. The Case of Poland. Studia Politica: Romanian Political Science Review, 14(3), 395-406. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-445354 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY-NC-ND Lizenz This document is made available under a CC BY-NC-ND Licence (Namensnennung-Nicht-kommerziell-Keine Bearbeitung) zur (Attribution-Non Comercial-NoDerivatives). For more Information Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den CC-Lizenzen finden see: Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.de The 2014 European Elections The Case of Poland PIOTR SULA Introduction This article presents the conduct and consequence of the election to the European Parliament held in Poland on 25 May 2014. It is a commonly accepted view that elections are inherent in the democratic order. Members of the European Parliament are elected following a similar procedure to that governing the elections to national Parliaments. Probably as widespread is the opinion that, since they do not result in the election of the executive branch of government, European elections are of less significance to the competing parties – which appear to prioritise their participation in the future government – than the competition for seats in the national parliament. As a consequence, the lesser impact of the decisions made at the ballot box is also translated into a less intense interest in the European elections expressed by the electorate.
    [Show full text]
  • Codebook Indiveu – Party Preferences
    Codebook InDivEU – party preferences European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies December 2020 Introduction The “InDivEU – party preferences” dataset provides data on the positions of more than 400 parties from 28 countries1 on questions of (differentiated) European integration. The dataset comprises a selection of party positions taken from two existing datasets: (1) The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File contains party positions for three rounds of European Parliament elections (2009, 2014, and 2019). Party positions were determined in an iterative process of party self-placement and expert judgement. For more information: https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/65944 (2) The Chapel Hill Expert Survey The Chapel Hill Expert Survey contains party positions for the national elections most closely corresponding the European Parliament elections of 2009, 2014, 2019. Party positions were determined by expert judgement. For more information: https://www.chesdata.eu/ Three additional party positions, related to DI-specific questions, are included in the dataset. These positions were determined by experts involved in the 2019 edition of euandi after the elections took place. The inclusion of party positions in the “InDivEU – party preferences” is limited to the following issues: - General questions about the EU - Questions about EU policy - Questions about differentiated integration - Questions about party ideology 1 This includes all 27 member states of the European Union in 2020, plus the United Kingdom. How to Cite When using the ‘InDivEU – Party Preferences’ dataset, please cite all of the following three articles: 1. Reiljan, Andres, Frederico Ferreira da Silva, Lorenzo Cicchi, Diego Garzia, Alexander H.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Actions in the Framework of the Action Plan for 2013
    Appendix 6 Summary of Actions in the framework of the Action Plan for 2013-2015 for Implementation of the Strategy of the IGC TRACECA This document is based on the Reports submitted by Azerbaijan, Armenia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Romania, Turkey, Uzbekistan, Ukraine. № Action Short description Obtained results 1 Elaborate five-year Elaboration of national investment In Azerbaijan the implementation of the Governmental concept Programme for infrastructure master plans strategies regarding transport sector development of transport sector is on-going and in accordance with this Programme a based on an adequate methodology for number of laws and normative acts were adopted. infrastructure planning and prioritization The Strategy of transport sector investment is implemented in accordance with the based on the identification of the National Strategy for transport infrastructure planning which is a component of the “bottlenecks” and the use of traffic Governmental concept Programme. forecasts Armenia implements the National Transport Strategy for 2009-2019. One of the priority strategic projects is the infrastructure project for the construction of the North-South Corridor. The programme for development of road infrastructure is composed for 5 years. The allocation programme is updated once in 3 years. In Bulgaria there is applied the Strategy for Development of Transport Infrastructure within the framework of the National Strategy of Integrated Infrastructure Development up to 2015. The Operative Programme of the following programming period 2014-2020 is at the stage of preparation. Annually Georgia works out an action plan for the development of road infrastructure for international main and subsidiary roads. “The Roads Department of Georgia” realized the following construction projects during 2014: - Construction of 32.1 km section Kutaisi bypass-Samtredia of at E60 (JICA) - Construction of 8 km section for Ruisi – Agara E60 Road (WB).
    [Show full text]
  • Polish Eurosceptic Parties in the Light of Ep Elections
    vol. 48/2015, pp. 279–299 ISSN 1505-2192 www.athenaeum.umk.pl DOI: 10.15804/athena.2015.48.18 POLISH EUROSCEPTIC PARTIES IN THE LIGHT OF EP ELECTIONS. ANALYSIS OF THE EUROSCEPTIC “OPPORTUNITY STRUCTURE” Aleksandra Moroska-Bonkiewicz*, Joanna Kozierska** — ABSTRACT — The objective of this article is to explain the differing levels of support achieved by Eurosceptic parties in European Parliament elections in Poland for the years 2004, 2009, and 2014. Taking into account the specificity of EP elections, which in theory assign greater importance to European issues, the analysis is conducted using the “Eurosceptic opportunity structure”, which is composed of: political space, social attitudes towards integration, and the external factor (the dynamics of the European integration process). Additionally, there is analysis of the attitudes of Eurosceptic parties stand- ing for election. The analysis demonstrates that the supply and demand sides created a similar opportunity structure for Eurosceptic parties in all three elections, while the external factor provided those parties with greater possibilities in 2004 and 2014. Analysis of the attitudes of Eurosceptic par- ties, however, indicated that they had greater chances to attract voters by invoking the European question in 2004 and 2014. The combination of these conclusions along with the support received by Eurosceptics in particular elections confirms the validity and the explanatory function of the adopted assumptions, while emphasizing the fundamental role played by the parties themselves in the examined aspect. Nonetheless, to confirm the primary * University of Lower Silesia, Department of Security and International Aff airs. ** University of Wrocław, Institute of Political Science. 280 ATHENAEUM vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Evaluation of Environmental Policy in Ukraine
    Public Council of All-Ukrainian Environmental NGOs under the aegis of the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources of Ukraine Organising Committee of Ukrainian Environmental NGOs for preparation to Fifth Pan-European Ministerial Conference "Environment for Europe" Public Evaluation of Environmental Policy in Ukraine Report of Ukrainian Environmental NGOs Кyiv — 2003 Public Evaluation of Environmental Policy in Ukraine. Report of Ukrainian Environmental NGOs. — Kyiv, 2003. — 139 pages The document is prepared by the Organising Committee of Ukrainian Environmental NGOs in the framework of the «Program of Measures for Preparation and Conduction of 5th Pan-European Ministerial Conference» «Environment for Europe» for 2002–2003» approved by the National Organising Committee of Ukraine. Preparation and publication of the report was done wit the support of: Regional Ecological Center - REC-Kyiv; Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources of Ukraine; Milieukontakt Oost Europa in the framework of the project «Towards Kyiv-2003» with financial support of the Ministry of Territorial Planning, Construction and the Environment; UN office in Ukraine Contents Foreword . 1. Environmental Policy and Legislation . 1.1. Legislative Background of Environmental Policy . 1.2. Main State Documents Defining Environmental Policy . 1.3. Enforcement of Constitution of Ukraine . 1.4. Implementation of Environmental Legislation . 1.5. State of Ukrainian Legislation Reforming after Aarhus Convention Ratification . 1.6.Ukraine's Place in Transition towards Sustainable Development . 2. Environmental Management . 2.1. Activities of State Authorities . 2.2 Activities of State Control Authorities . 2.3. Environmental Monitoring System . 2.4. State Environmental Expertise . 2.5. Activities of Local Administrations in the Field of Environment .
    [Show full text]
  • They Did It Again! Pdf 1.28 MB
    ECONOMIC RESEARCH DEPARTMENT Summary They did it again! ■Another dovish rate increase from the Fed ■And a fully assumed United Kingdom What if Brexit never happens? symmetric inflation target For the moment, anything is possible, even what is currently considered impossible. The Fed did it again: raising rates while US YIELD CURVE Maybe Brexit will never happen. using a dovish tone. As fully expected, ► Page 2 the Fed raised its key rate by a quarter of -- 16 March ; -- 2 February ; -- 15 December, 2016 a point. From the beginning, it was 3,50 Emerging countries obvious the Fed would use any opportunity to advance the normalisation Argentina-Venezuela: a tale of two 3,00 of monetary policy, in order to move stories away from the discomfort zone that is Argentina and Venezuela were both hit by 2,50 the downturn in commodity prices. zero. As the labour market strength remains unquestioned and inflation is 2,00 Argentina succeeded in clearing its slowly but surely moving back to target, external debt arrears while Venezuela is 1,50 close to default. A look back at two the March meeting could not be missed. Still, this second rate increase comes opposing trajectories. 1,00 ► Page 3 only three months after the previous one, and FOMC members were willing to 0,50 make it clear that they were not rushing, 3-m 6-m 1-y 2-y 3-y 5-y 7-y 10-y 30-y Market overview that this was not the sign of a steeper ► Page 4 hiking cycle in the making.
    [Show full text]
  • N°21-05 5 February 2021
    ECOWEEK N°21-05 5 February 2021 2-3 4-5 6-8 EDITORIAL MARKETS OVERVIEW ECONOMIC PULSE United Kingdom: Some light at the end "Eurozone inflation: more noise than Recent market developments (foreign of the tunnel signal" exchange, stock markets, interest rates, commodities, etc.) Retail footfall between recovery and stabilisation 9 10-11 12 ECONOMIC SCENARIO CALENDARS FURTHER READING Main economic and financial This week’s main economic data and Latest articles, charts, videos and forecasts. key releases for next week podcasts of Group Economic Research The bank for a changing world Eco week 21-05 // 5 February 2021 economic-research.bnpparibas.com EDITORIAL 2 EUROZONE INFLATION: MORE NOISE THAN SIGNAL The preliminary estimation for euro area inflation surprised to the upside, with annual core inflation reaching 1.4% in January. Monthly inflation was negative however, at -0.5%. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, inflation data have become very noisy and hence more difficult to interpret. Survey data show rising input prices and lengthening of delivery times, which could exert some upward pressure on inflation. These factors should dissipate during the course of the year. Given the economic slack, any lasting pick-up in inflation should be a very gradual process The preliminary estimate for euro area inflation surprised to the PMI surveys show that output prices have increased less than input upside, with annual core inflation reaching 1.4% in January. Monthly prices. Moreover, the influence of these factors should wane during inflation was negative however, at -0.5%. This may explain why the the course of the year, as producers are better able to gauge the level bond market was unimpressed.
    [Show full text]
  • STATE CAPTURE in the REPUBLIC of MOLDOVA a Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate Schoo
    THE PUBLIC HAS NO OUTRAGE LEFT: STATE CAPTURE IN THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Conflict Resolution By Ryan Knight, B.A. Washington, DC April 23, 2019 THE PUBLIC HAS NO OUTRAGE LEFT: STATE CAPTURE IN THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA Ryan Knight, B.A. Thesis Advisors: Molly Inman, Ph.D. and Alan Tidwell, Ph.D. ABSTRACT Since the theft of $1 billion from its economy in 2014, the Republic of Moldova’s nominally pro-European ruling coalition has failed to implement reforms needed to deal with endemic corruption. Instead, power has become increasingly centralized in the hands of controversial oligarch Vladimir Plahotniuc. This thesis tracks Plahotniuc’s consolidation of power and analyzes Moldova’s recent political history to define the unique characteristics of corruption in a small state. ii This thesis is dedicated to Moldovans working for justice. Thank you to all those generous souls who helped along the way. A special thanks to my thesis advisers, Dr. Molly Inman, and Dr. Alan Tidwell, for their patience and support through the writing process. Thank you as well to Igor Ciurea, Stephanie Roland, and Lyndon Allin for their long hours explaining Moldovan politics, to my graduate colleagues and friends, Brian Kerr and Anna Khandros, for their help and support during the writing and research of this thesis. And to my parents, Steve and Dianne, and my sister, Sarah, for their support over the years.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study on Structural Reform in Poland 2013-2018
    A STUDY ON STRUCTURAL REFORM IN POLAND 2013-2018 Written by: Anna Dzienis, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, World Economy Research Institute Arkadiusz Michał Kowalski, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, World Economy Research Institute Marek Lachowicz, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, World Economy Research Institute Marta Mackiewicz, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, World Economy Research Institute Tomasz M. Napiórkowski, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, World Economy Research Institute Marzenna Anna Weresa, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, World Economy Research Institute 2018 EUROPEAN COMMISSION EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs Directorate A — Competitiveness and European Semester Unit A.2 — European Semester and Member States’ Competitiveness Contact: Tomas Brännström E-mail: [email protected] European Commission B-1049 Brussels 2 A Study on Structural Reform in Poland 2013–2018 A STUDY ON STRUCTURAL REFORM IN POLAND 2013–2018 Final Report (30 November 2018) Study carried out within the Framework Service Contract 'Studies in the Area of European Competitiveness' (ENTR/300/PP/2013/FC-WIFO) World Economy Research Institute (WERI), Collegium of World Economy SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Poland Warsaw, December 2018 1 A Study on Structural Reform in Poland 2013–2018 Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you).
    [Show full text]
  • Kin-States and Kin Majorities from the Bottom-Up: Developing a Model of Nested Integration in Crimea & Moldova
    Kin-States and Kin Majorities from the Bottom-Up: Developing a Model of Nested Integration in Crimea & Moldova Eleanor Knott a thesis presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Government London School of Economics September 2015 Abstract With the increasing importance and prevalence of kin-state policies, this thesis identifies three gaps in existing kin-state research. Theoretically, existing literature focuses on how kin relations can induce or reduce conflict between states, overlooking the dynamics of interaction between kin-states andkin communities. Conceptually, existing literature focuses on kin communities as minorities, overlooking kin majorities. Methodologically, existing literature focuses on top-down institutional and state-level analyses of kin-state relations, overlooking bottom-up agency-centred perspectives. To address these gaps, the thesis develops a model of nested integration, to analyse relations been kin-states and kin majorities from a bottom-up perspective. Nested integration does not challenge the borders separating kin-state from kin communities, but affects the meaning of this border. The thesis examines the comparative explanatory power of this model of nested integration by generating evidence about the meanings of kin identification and engagement with different kin-state practices, through a cross-case comparison of Crimea vis-à-vis Russia and Moldova vis-à-vis Romania. These cases are selected from a wider kin majority typology as two contrasting examples of kin-state policies: Romanian citizenship in Moldova and Russian quasi-citizenship Compatriot policy in Crimea. Overall, the thesis argues that Moldova exhibits more nested integration than Crimea because of the type, legitimacy and availability of kin-state provision, which the thesis argues is consequential for the degree of nested integration observed.
    [Show full text]
  • English the Chief Inspector for Environmental Protection), Warszawa
    Report No: AUS0000585 . Poland Air Quality Management - Poland Final Report Public Disclosure Authorized . January 2019 . ENV . Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized . Document of the World Bank . © 2017 The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org Some rights reserved This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Attribution—Please cite the work as follows: “World Bank. {YEAR OF PUBLICATION}. {TITLE}. © World Bank.” All queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: [email protected]. AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN POLAND FINAL REPORT January 2019 i AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN POLAND DRAFT FINAL REPORT vember 2018 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This analytical work was conducted by a team led by Yewande Awe (Task Team Leader) and comprised of Maja Murisic, Anna Koziel, Grzegorz Wolsczack, Filip Kochan, Joanne Green, Elena Strukova, Oznur Oguz Kuntasal, Heey Jin Kim, Rahul Kanakia, and Michael Brody.
    [Show full text]