DOCSLIB.ORG

Forest for All Forever

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Forest for All Forever FSC National Risk Assessment For Germany DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO PROCEDURE FSC-PRO-60-002 V3-0 Version V1-1 Code FSC-NRA-DE V1-1 National approval National decision Body: FSC Germany – Verein für verantwortungsvolle Waldwirtschaft Date: 29.11.2017 International approval FSC International Center: Performance and Standards Unit Date: 03 April 2018 (updated 31 July 2020) International contact Name: Ulrich Malessa Email address: [email protected] Period of validity Date of approval: 03 April 2018 Valid until: (date of approval + 5 years) Body responsible for NRA FSC Germany – Verein für verantwortungsvolle maintenance Waldwirtschaft FSC-NRA-DE V1-1 NATIONAL RISK ASSESSMENT FOR GERMANY 2020 – 1 of 248 – Contents Risk designations in finalized risk assessments for Germany ..................................................... 4 Background information .............................................................................................................. 5 Background to the risk assessment .................................................................................... 5 What do we mean by FSC Controlled Wood? ..................................................................... 5 Why is the risk assessment necessary? .............................................................................. 5 Is all that is happening in German forests identified as ‘low risk’ correct? ........................... 6 Proceeding in a participatory process ................................................................................. 6 Timeline for the approval of the German FSC risk assessment ........................................... 6 Structure of the document ................................................................................................... 8 Evaluation and control measures ........................................................................................ 8 Underlying policy ................................................................................................................ 8 List of abbreviations .......................................................................................................... 10 Experts ..................................................................................................................................... 12 National Risk Assessment maintenance ................................................................................... 14 Complaints and disputes regarding the approved National Risk Assessment ........................... 14 List of key stakeholders for consultation ................................................................................... 15 Risk assessments ..................................................................................................................... 17 Controlled wood category 1: Illegally harvested wood .............................................................. 17 Overview ........................................................................................................................... 17 Sources of legal timber in Germany .................................................................................. 20 Risk assessment ............................................................................................................... 20 Control measures ............................................................................................................. 82 Controlled wood category 2: Wood harvested in violation of traditional and human rights ........ 83 Risk assessment ............................................................................................................... 83 Control measures ............................................................................................................. 83 Detailed analysis ............................................................................................................... 84 Controlled wood category 3: Wood from forests in which high conservation values are threatened by management activities ..................................................................................... 117 Overview ......................................................................................................................... 117 Experts consulted ........................................................................................................... 121 Risk assessment ............................................................................................................. 121 Control measures ........................................................................................................... 180 Controlled wood category 4: Wood from forests being converted to plantations or non-forest use ............................................................................................................................................... 181 Risk assessment ............................................................................................................. 181 Control measures ........................................................................................................... 189 Controlled wood category 5: Wood from forests in which genetically modified trees are planted ............................................................................................................................................... 190 FSC-NRA-DE V1-1 NATIONAL RISK ASSESSMENT FOR GERMANY 2020 – 2 of 248 – Risk assessment ............................................................................................................. 190 Control measures ........................................................................................................... 195 Annex A & B ........................................................................................................................... 196 Annex C1 List of information sources ................................................................................. 196 Annex C2 Identification of applicable legislation ................................................................. 226 Update and Revision History .................................................................................................. 248 1. Updates ................................................................................................................ 248 2. Revisions .............................................................................................................. 248 FSC-NRA-DE V1-1 NATIONAL RISK ASSESSMENT FOR GERMANY 2020 – 3 of 248 – Risk designations in finalized risk assessments for Germany Indicator Risk designation (including functional scale when relevant) Controlled wood category 1: Illegally harvested wood 1.1 Low Risk 1.2 Not applicable in Germany 1.3 Low Risk 1.4 Not applicable in Germany 1.5 Not applicable in Germany 1.6 Low Risk 1.7 Low Risk 1.8 Low Risk 1.9 Low Risk 1.10 Low Risk 1.11 Low Risk 1.12 Low Risk 1.13 Low Risk 1.14 Low Risk 1.15 Not applicable in Germany 1.16 Not applicable in Germany 1.17 Low Risk 1.18 Low Risk 1.19 Low Risk 1.20 Low Risk 1.21 Low Risk Controlled wood category 2: Wood harvested in violation of traditional and human rights 2.1 Low Risk 2.2 Low Risk 2.3 Low Risk Controlled wood category 3: Wood from forests where high conservation values are threatened by management activities 3.0 Low Risk 3.1 Low Risk 3.2 Low Risk 3.3 Low Risk 3.4 Low Risk 3.5 Low Risk 3.6 Low Risk Controlled wood category 4: Wood from forests being converted to plantations or non-forest use 4.1 Low Risk Controlled wood category 5: Wood from forests in which genetically modified trees are planted 5.1 Low Risk FSC-NRA-DE V1-1 NATIONAL RISK ASSESSMENT FOR GERMANY 2020 – 4 of 248 – Background information Background to the risk assessment What do we mean by FSC Controlled Wood? The FSC mix label makes it possible to trade on the market products that contain not only FSC- certified materials but also material sourced from non-certified forests. These non-certified materials must, however, fulfil certain minimum requirements and are referred to as FSC Controlled Wood. FSC Controlled Wood guarantees in a sense a minimum code of behaviour whereby ‘bad’ forestry practices are excluded from products bearing the FSC mix label. The five named inacceptable practices are: • Illegally harvested wood • Wood harvested in violation of traditional and human rights • Wood from forests where high conservation values are threatened by management activities • Wood from forests being converted to plantations or non-forest use • Wood from forests in which genetically modified trees are planted The objective of controlled wood is, therefore, to facilitate the production of FSC mix products while simultaneously securing a minimum code for non-certified product components. The labelling of products (e.g., by means of a separate symbol) is not possible! Why is the risk assessment necessary? Enterprises wishing to declare FSC Controlled Wood material for incorporation in FSC mix products must: • Verify/prove the source of the wood • Assess the risk of non-acceptable sources • Where risk is identified, evaluate the supply chain and adopt measures to avoid risk Up to now, enterprises using non-certified wood could advance an internal system for risk assessment (enterprise-based risk assessment). With the revision of the FSC Controlled System, however, this will no longer be possible. The FSC is working towards a state-based risk assessment to which enterprises can resort. This risk analysis process is implemented
Load more

Recommended publications
  • BT Drs. 19/17750
    Deutscher Bundestag Drucksache 19/17750 19. Wahlperiode 10.03.2020 Vorabfassung Antrag der Abgeordneten Renate Künast, Dr. Irene Mihalic, Dr. Konstantin von Notz, Tabea Rößner, Luise Amtsberg, Canan Bayram, Katja Dörner, Erhard Grundl, Britta Haßelmann, Katja Keul, Monika Lazar, Steffi Lemke, Cem Özdemir, Filiz Polat, Claudia Roth, Dr. Manuela Rottmann, Ulle Schauws, Charlotte Schneidewind- Hartnagel, Kordula Schulz-Asche, Margit Stumpp, Beate Walter-Rosenheimer und der Fraktion BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN - wird Hass und Hetze wirksam bekämpfen, Betroffene stärken und Bürgerrechte schützen durch Der Bundestag wolle beschließen: I. Der Deutsche Bundestag stellt fest: die Zur wirksamen Bekämpfung von Rechtsextremismus, der Bedrohung ganzer Be- völkerungsgruppen sowie von Hass und Hetze im Netz bedarf es einer koordinier- ten Gesamtstrategie, die das Problemfeld auf seinen sämtlichen Ebenen bearbei- lektorierte tet: als rechtsextreme Strategie zur Aushöhlung der Demokratie, als gesamtgesell- schaftliches Phänomen einer Verrohung der Debattenkultur und als Fortsetzung wie Befeuerung analoger Formen von Diskriminierung und Gewalt. Rassistischer, antisemitischer, antiziganistischer, muslimfeindlicher, völkischer, antifeministischer, homo- und transfeindlicher Propaganda und Agitation muss mit aller Entschlossenheit begegnet werden. Menschenverachtenden Ideologien der Ungleichwertigkeit muss entschieden widersprochen und der Strategie einer Normalisierung des vormals Unsagbaren entschlossen begegnet werden. Die dem Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung
    [Show full text]
  • Motion: Europe Is Worth It – for a Green Recovery Rooted in Solidarity and A
    German Bundestag Printed paper 19/20564 19th electoral term 30 June 2020 version Preliminary Motion tabled by the Members of the Bundestag Agnieszka Brugger, Anja Hajduk, Dr Franziska Brantner, Sven-Christian Kindler, Dr Frithjof Schmidt, Margarete Bause, Kai Gehring, Uwe Kekeritz, Katja Keul, Dr Tobias Lindner, Omid Nouripour, Cem Özdemir, Claudia Roth, Manuel Sarrazin, Jürgen Trittin, Ottmar von Holtz, Luise Amtsberg, Lisa Badum, Danyal Bayaz, Ekin Deligöz, Katja Dörner, Katharina Dröge, Britta Haßelmann, Steffi Lemke, Claudia Müller, Beate Müller-Gemmeke, Erhard Grundl, Dr Kirsten Kappert-Gonther, Maria Klein-Schmeink, Christian Kühn, Stephan Kühn, Stefan Schmidt, Dr Wolfgang Strengmann-Kuhn, Markus Tressel, Lisa Paus, Tabea Rößner, Corinna Rüffer, Margit Stumpp, Dr Konstantin von Notz, Dr Julia Verlinden, Beate Walter-Rosenheimer, Gerhard Zickenheiner and the Alliance 90/The Greens parliamentary group be to Europe is worth it – for a green recovery rooted in solidarity and a strong 2021- 2027 EU budget the by replaced The Bundestag is requested to adopt the following resolution: I. The German Bundestag notes: A strong European Union (EU) built on solidarity which protects its citizens and our livelihoods is the best investment we can make in our future. Our aim is an EU that also and especially proves its worth during these difficult times of the corona pandemic, that fosters democracy, prosperity, equality and health and that resolutely tackles the challenge of the century that is climate protection. We need an EU that bolsters international cooperation on the world stage and does not abandon the weakest on this earth. proofread This requires an EU capable of taking effective action both internally and externally, it requires greater solidarity on our continent and beyond - because no country can effectively combat the climate crisis on its own, no country can stamp out the pandemic on its own.
    [Show full text]
  • Deutscher Bundestag Drucksache 19/6961 11.01.2019 19
    Deutscher Bundestag Drucksache 19/6961 11.01.2019 19. Wahlperiode ersetzt. - wird durch die lektorierte Version Vorabfassung Schriftliche Fragen mit den in der Woche vom 7. Januar 2019 eingegangenen Antworten der Bundesregierung Verzeichnis der Fragenden Abgeordnete Nummer Abgeordnete Nummer der Frage der Frage Amtsberg, Luise (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) .... 54 Dehm, Diether, Dr. (DIE LINKE.) ................... 29, 100 Andreae, Kerstin Domscheit-Berg, Anke (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) ................................ 24 (DIE LINKE.) ...................................... 30, 31, 74, 117 Badum, Lisa Ernst, Klaus (DIE LINKE.) .............................. 75, 118 (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) ........................ 55, 126 Faber, Marcus, Dr. (FDP) ....................................... 101 Baerbock, Annalena (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) Fricke, Otto (FDP) .............................................. 92, 93 ................................................................................. 114 Frömming, Götz, Dr. (AfD) ..................................... 61 Barrientos, Simone (DIE LINKE.) ..................... 1, 2, 3 Gastel, Matthias Bause, Margarete (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) ............................. 119 (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) .................... 25, 56, 57 Hänsel, Heike (DIE LINKE.) ................................... 76 Bayaz, Danyal, Dr. (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) .... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 Höferlin, Manuel (FDP) ..................................... 32, 33 Bayram, Canan Holm, Leif-Erik (AfD) ................................. 4, 5, 6, 34 (BÜNDNIS
    [Show full text]
  • CER Bulletin Issue 139 | August/September 2021
    CER Bulletin Issue 139 | August/September 2021 Three questions on the German election By Christian Odendahl The ‘Fit for 55’ climate proposals explained By Elisabetta Cornago A new migration crisis may be brewing By Camino Mortera-Martinez and Luigi Scazzieri Three questions on the German election by Christian Odendahl As the floods in Germany change the dynamics of the race, the CDU could win the most votes yet end up in opposition. In that case, the chancellor could be the SPD’s Olaf Scholz. The German federal election on September 26th But just as the press was full of articles asking is fast approaching. Angela Merkel is stepping whether the Greens should have instead down as chancellor after 16 years, and will leave nominated the more popular Robert Habeck Armin Laschet, current prime minister of North as their candidate, torrential rains caused Rhine-Westphalia, in charge of the Christian severe floods in Germany and Laschet’s state Democrats (CDU) and well-placed to succeed her in particular, killing more than 160 people. as chancellor. But Germany’s political landscape This was an opportunity for Laschet to display is evolving: the largest parties – the CDU and his leadership credentials. But he made every the Social Democrats (SPD) – are a lot smaller conceivable mistake. He ignored detailed than they were and the Greens have become and alarming flood warnings and travelled to a serious contender for the chancellery. The southern Germany to campaign, leaving the current strength of the Free Democrats (FDP), affected counties to deal with the fallout. He a conservative-liberal party, also adds coalition failed to realise that the severity of the situation options to the menu.
    [Show full text]
  • All Together Now!
    Foto: Mauritius Foto: All together DIE BUNDESTAGSFRAKTION IN DER 19. WAHLPERIODE now! UNS GEHT'S UMS GANZE INHALT . _____ S. 4 Die Fraktionsvorsitzenden . _____ S. 8 Der Fraktionsvorstand . _____ S. 10 So arbeitet der Vorstand . _____ S. 12 All together now – die grüne Bundestagsfraktion . _____ S. 14 So arbeiten die Abgeordneten . _____ S. 16 Organigramm der Fraktion . _____ S. 18 Arbeitskreis 1 . _____ S. 26 Arbeitskreis 2 . _____ S. 34 Arbeitskreis 3 . _____ S. 40 Arbeitskreis 4 . _____ S. 48 Arbeitskreis 5 . _____ S. 53 Kontakt . _____ S. 54 Index der MdB 2 3 Nach der längsten Regierungsbildung in Mit ihrer Wahlentscheidung haben die Bürgerinnen und Bürger der Geschichte der Bundesrepublik folgt einen unübersehbaren Hinweis gegeben, dass es in unserem DIE FRAKTIONSVORSITZENDEN in dieser 19. Wahlperiode zum ersten Land wieder ums Grundsätzliche geht. Diese Auseinanderset- Mal unmittelbar auf eine Große Koali- zung über die Grundwerte und Grundordnung unseres Zusam- tion gleich die nächste. Was eigentlich menlebens sowie über die Rolle der parlamentarischen Demo- DR. ANTON HOFREITER KATRIN GÖRING-ECKARDT die Ausnahme sein sollte, wird zur kratie für den Zusammenhalt unserer Gesellschaft nehmen wir Regel. Es ist schon absehbar, dass dieser entschieden an. Regierung Mut, Weitblick und Tatkraft Wir gehen mit einem klaren Kompass in diese Wahlperiode. fehlen werden. Und zum allerersten Mal Dem Klein-Klein, wie es von der Großen Koalition des gegenseiti- sitzt im Bundestag eine rechtspopulisti- gen Misstrauens zu erwarten ist, setzen wir genau umrissene sche, teils rechtsextreme Fraktion. Schwerpunkte entgegen: Zur Bewältigung der großen Zukunfts- Unsere Aufgabe als Opposition sehen aufgaben wollen wir vernetzt und jenseits starrer Ressortzustän- Fraktionsvorsitzender Fraktionsvorsitzende wir natürlich darin, notwendige Kritik digkeiten in sechs übergreifenden Arbeitsfeldern innovative und Dipl.
    [Show full text]
  • Commander's Guide to German Society, Customs, and Protocol
    Headquarters Army in Europe United States Army, Europe, and Seventh Army Pamphlet 360-6* United States Army Installation Management Agency Europe Region Office Heidelberg, Germany 20 September 2005 Public Affairs Commanders Guide to German Society, Customs, and Protocol *This pamphlet supersedes USAREUR Pamphlet 360-6, 8 March 2000. For the CG, USAREUR/7A: E. PEARSON Colonel, GS Deputy Chief of Staff Official: GARY C. MILLER Regional Chief Information Officer - Europe Summary. This pamphlet should be used as a guide for commanders new to Germany. It provides basic information concerning German society and customs. Applicability. This pamphlet applies primarily to commanders serving their first tour in Germany. It also applies to public affairs officers and protocol officers. Forms. AE and higher-level forms are available through the Army in Europe Publishing System (AEPUBS). Records Management. Records created as a result of processes prescribed by this publication must be identified, maintained, and disposed of according to AR 25-400-2. Record titles and descriptions are available on the Army Records Information Management System website at https://www.arims.army.mil. Suggested Improvements. The proponent of this pamphlet is the Office of the Chief, Public Affairs, HQ USAREUR/7A (AEAPA-CI, DSN 370-6447). Users may suggest improvements to this pamphlet by sending DA Form 2028 to the Office of the Chief, Public Affairs, HQ USAREUR/7A (AEAPA-CI), Unit 29351, APO AE 09014-9351. Distribution. B (AEPUBS) (Germany only). 1 AE Pam 360-6 ● 20 Sep 05 CONTENTS Section I INTRODUCTION 1. Purpose 2. References 3. Explanation of Abbreviations 4. General Section II GETTING STARTED 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Really Blocking a Banking Union? Germany’S Reluctance Towards Pan-European Banking Resolution
    Name Annika Maria Petra Stahlhut University 1 University of Twente Enschede Universiteit Twente, UT UT Faculty School of Management & Governance UT Supervisor Dr. Shawn Donnelly UT Diploma MSc European Studies University 2 Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster WWU Faculty Institut für Politikwissenschaft WWU Supervisor Prof. Dr. Oliver Treib WWU Diploma MA European Studies Start of Thesis March 1st, 2014 End of Thesis June 21st, 2014 MASTERTHESIS EUROPEAN STUDIES Really Blocking a Banking Union? Germany’s Reluctance Towards pan-European Banking Resolution by Annika Stahlhut (June 2014) Abstract In the recent two years the European Banking Union has been a chief project in European financial integration. Apart from European banking supervision and attempts to integrate deposit insurance on EU-level the member states have agreed to also harmonize the resolution of banks: A Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM) seeks to protect taxpayers in Europe from assuming the costs of resolution and to maintain financial stabilty in the internal market when banks are wound up. Although states have therefor charged the Commission to develop a common policy for banking resolution, Germany gains particular attention in European negotiations for objecting to the regulation establishing a single framework. Newspapers report that the German finance minister has announced to block the resolution mechanism (Schäfers, 2014, January 21), for which he is criticized sharply – even by parties on domestic level. It therefore seems as if domestic opinions on European banking resolution depart substantially wherefore the German position appears worth for an in-depth study. To this end European integration of banking resolution is embedded into the theoretical framework of liberal intergovernmentalism that provides for a liberal theory on national preference formation.
    [Show full text]
  • Top 17 Cases Version 4/27/2020, with Addendum
    2020 DNA Hit of the Year Top 17 Cases Version 4/27/2020, with Addendum * All addenda written by submitters. 1. Headless Outlaw’s Torso in Old Lava Tube Name of Submitter: Clark County Sheriff Bart May Location: Dubois, Idaho, U.S.A. Agency: Clark County Sheriff’s Office, Idaho Date of Crime: 1916 Date and Type of Hit: 2018-2019 (genetic genealogy to match with general family tree); 2018-2019 (familial match with living grandson to confirm family relationship) Executive Summary: 100-year-old unidentified human remains found in an old lava tube in 1979 leads to a cold case identification effort that lasts many years. However, his head was never located, baffling the FBI and other investigators for years. They could only establish that he was of European descent, with reddish-brown hair, and was about 40-years-old at the time of death. His arms, hand, and legs were found in 1991. Over the years, investigators enlisted the help of Idaho State University and its team of forensic genetic genealogists (anthropology students and staffers). This also included experts from the Smithsonian Institution and the FBI. Last year investigators further enlisted the help of the DNA Doe Project, hoping to use DNA and ancestral analysis to identify the man. Experts from Othram, a forensic DNA analysis company, analyzed samples taken from the remains, while a forensic genealogist from the DNA Doe Project worked with her colleagues to build a ‘genealogical tree’. The man’s DNA profile was then uploaded to various genetic genealogy DNA databases for relatives. This led to the man’s living 87-year-old grandson, whose sample was taken and tested to confirm a familial relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • Antrag Der Fraktion BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN – Regionale Und Kommunale Flüchtlingsaufnahme Stärken Vom 10.04.2019
    Deutscher Bundestag Drucksache 19/9275 19. Wahlperiode 10.04.2019 Vorabfassung Antrag der Abgeordneten Luise Amtsberg, Filiz Polat, Dr. Franziska Brantner, Agnieszka Brugger, Britta Haßelmann, Dr. Konstantin von Notz, Annalena Baerbock, Margarete Bause, Canan Bayram, Kai Gehring, Stefan Gelbhaar, Ottmar von Holtz, Katja Keul, Christian Kühn (Tübingen), Monika Lazar, Dr. Irene Mihalic, Tabea Rößner, Claudia Roth (Augsburg), Dr. Manuela Rottmann, Markus Tressel, Dr. Julia Verlinden und der Fraktion BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN - wird Regionale und kommunale Flüchtlingsaufnahme stärken Eine lebendige Zivilgesellschaft ist essentiell für den Rechtsstaat und eine wehrhafte Demokratie. Angriffe gegen zivilgesellschaftliche Akteure und Or- durch ganisationen in der Bundesrepublik haben in jüngster Zeit jedoch in beunru- higendem Maße zugenommen. Sie reichen vom Entzug staatlich institutionel- ler Förderung bis hin zu gezielten Diffamierungen und treffen eine breite Pa- lette an gesellschaftlichen Bewegungen: von den Schülerinnen und Schülern der Protestbewegung „Fridays for Future“, der Deutschen Umwelthilfe, der die zivilen Seenotrettung oder den Flüchtlingsräten und Beratungsstellen für Flüchtlinge. So beinhaltet das sogenannte „Geordnete-Rückkehr-Gesetz“, welches sich gegenwärtig noch im Ressortverfahren befindet, zwei neue Straf- tatbestände, die auf die zivilgesellschaftliche Unterstützung von geflüchteten lektorierte Menschen abzielen: einerseits die Veröffentlichung und Verbreitung von Ab- schiebeterminen, die strafbar werden sollen und andererseits
    [Show full text]
  • The Green Party of Germany: Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen [PDF]
    THE GREEN PARTY OF GERMANY BÜNDNIS 90 / DIE GRÜNEN 1. Historical Context and democratic structure of Germany The political structures that existed before a united German state emerged were dominated by relatively small political entities, which enjoyed varying degrees of political autonomy. The Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany) is formally only 70 years old. Unsurprisingly, this history of federalism is represented in the Bundesrepublik as well. Today we have 16 federal states. This decentralization is one of the most important parts of our democracy. Berlin, as the capital, was and is the best symbol of Germany’s colourful past. West Berlin’s location deep within the territory of Eastern Germany made it an island of the Bundesrepublik (Western Germany). West Berlin has had a very special phase after WWII that was deeply intertwined with the Cold War. With the end of the Cold War, the two German states the German Democratic Republic or GDR (East Germany) and Bundesrepublik finally became a united state again. Today, Berlin with its 3.6 million inhabitants, is Germany’s biggest city, its capital and the place to be for culture, arts, lifestyle, politics and science. Germany’s democratic system is a federal parliamentary republic with two chambers: the Bundestag (Germany’s parliament) and the Bundesrat (the representative body of the federal states). Germany’s political system is essentially a multi-party system, which includes a 5% threshold (parties representing recognised national minorities, for example Danes, Frisians, Sorbs and Romani people are exempt from the 5% threshold, but normally only run in state elections).
    [Show full text]
  • STRENGTHENING TRANSATLANTIC DIALOGUE 2018 ANNUAL REPORT Table of Contents
    STRENGTHENING TRANSATLANTIC DIALOGUE 2018 ANNUAL REPORT Table of Contents 1 A Message from the President The ACG and Its Mission 3 Policy Programs 2018 Event Highlights German-American Conference Eric M. Warburg Chapters Congress-Bundestag Seminar Deutschlandjahr 11 Programs for the Successor Generation American-German Young Leaders Conference Changemakers in Action Fellowships and Leadership Exchanges 17 Partners in Promoting Transatlantic Cooperation McCloy Awards Dinner Co-Sponsors and Collaborating Organizations Corporate Membership Program Corporate and Foundation Support Individual Support 21 Officers, Directors, and Staff Visit the ACG’s website at www.acgusa.org for: • A full calendar of events; • Our weekly news digest, monthly newsletter, podcasts, and publications; • A membership roster; • Lists of our program participants, including Young Leaders and fellows; • Ways to support our work; and • Much more. A Message from the President 2018 was a volatile year – and I am not just talking about the markets. For U.S. and European domestic politics, 2018 was marked by unexpected developments and a high degree of uncertainty. Some might even say it was a chaotic year. Together the ambiguity in domestic politics and a complex global ACG President Dr. Steven E. Sokol (lower right) with 2018 Young Leaders environment have had a profound impact on the transatlantic partnership. The volatility and uncertainty that characterized 2018 are likely to continue well into 2019 – and even beyond. There is no question: It was an intense year for German, European, understanding of how common challenges are addressed on and U.S. politics, for the overarching transatlantic relationship – the other side of the Atlantic. We also launched the DZ BANK and of course for the American Council on Germany.
    [Show full text]
  • Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law
    MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR FOREIGN AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW COUNTERTERRORISM POLICIES IN GERMANY* HANS-JÖRG ALBRECHT Contents: 1. Introduction into Experiences with Terrorism and the Development of Counterterrorism Strategies in Germany................................................................... 2 1.1 Terrorist Phenomena in Germany........................................................................ 2 1.2 Responses to Terrorist Activities and Organizations between 1970 and 2000.... 5 2. After 9/11 Counterterrorism Strategies ...................................................................... 44 2.1 Introduction........................................................................................................ 44 2.2 Counterterrorism Policy after 9/11 .................................................................... 49 2.3 The Flow of Legislation after 9/11 .................................................................... 50 2.4 Dangerousness and incapacitation ..................................................................... 58 3. Summary........................................................................................................................ 61 3.1 Legislation issues............................................................................................... 61 3.2 Policies............................................................................................................... 61 Literature ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]