DOCSLIB.ORG

The 2015 CSO Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The 2015 CSO Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia The 2015 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 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................. i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................................................ ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................ 1 2015 CSO SUSTAINABILITY INDEX SCORES ......................................................................................................... 11 ALBANIA ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 12 ARMENIA ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 AZERBAIJAN ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 32 BELARUS ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 43 BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA ............................................................................................................................................................. 54 BULGARIA ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 64 CROATIA ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 73 CZECH REPUBLIC ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 83 ESTONIA ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 92 GEORGIA ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 101 HUNGARY ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 110 KOSOVO ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 120 LATVIA .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 129 LITHUANIA ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 139 MACEDONIA .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 149 MOLDOVA ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 159 MONTENEGRO ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 171 POLAND ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 181 ROMANIA .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 191 RUSSIA ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 202 SERBIA .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 214 SLOVAKIA ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 225 SLOVENIA ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 234 UKRAINE ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 244 ANNEX A: CSO SUSTAINABILITY INDEX METHODOLOGY ........................................................................... 255 ANNEX B: STATISTICAL DATA.............................................................................................................................. 271 ANNEX C: REGIONAL MAP ..................................................................................................................................... 282 THE 2015 CSO SUSTAINABILITY INDEX FOR CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AND EURASIA INTRODUCTION The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is pleased to present the nineteenth edition of the CSO Sustainability Index (CSOSI) for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia, covering developments in 2015. 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 Ocean.1 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, advocacy, 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). All of the scores are then averaged to produce an overall sustainability score for the CSO sector of a given country. An editorial committee composed of technical and regional experts reviews each panel’s scores and 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 corresponding 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 twenty-six countries; CSO Sustainability Index for the Middle East and North Africa, which covers seven countries; CSO Sustainability Index for Asia, covering seven countries; and CSO Sustainability Index for Afghanistan and CSO Sustainability Index for Pakistan, supported by the Aga Khan Foundation. These various editions of the CSO Sustainability Index bring the total number of countries surveyed in 2015 to more than seventy. A publication of this type would not be possible without the contributions of many individuals and organizations. 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 representatives 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 due to funding limitations, the five countries of Central Asia are no longer covered by this publication. THE 2015 CSO SUSTAINABILITY INDEX FOR CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AND EURASIA i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Albania Erisa Lame and Aleka
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Request for Quotation Rfq 046/17
    REQUEST FOR QUOTATION RFQ 046/17 DATE: 17 July, 2017 NAME & ADDRESS OF FIRM REFERENCE: Supply of fruit tree seedlings for orchards in Ditavan and Baghanis villages Dear Bidder: We kindly request you to submit your quotation for “Supply of fruit tree seedlings for orchards in Ditavan and Baghanis villages” detailed in Annex 1 of this RFQ. Quotations may be submitted on or before 18:00 (local time), August 8, 2017 and via ☒ e- mail, or☒ courier mail to the address below: [email protected] or United Nations Development Programme 14 Petros Adamyan street, 0010, Yerevan Quotations submitted by email must be limited to a maximum of 5MB, virus-free and no more than 3 transmissions. They must be free from any form of virus or corrupted contents, or the quotations shall be rejected. It shall remain your responsibility to ensure that your quotation will reach the address above on or before the deadline. Quotations that are received by UNDP after the deadline indicated above, for whatever reason, shall not be considered for evaluation. If you are submitting your quotation by email, kindly ensure that they are signed and in the .pdf format, and free from any virus or corrupted files. Please take note of the following requirements and conditions pertaining to the supply of the above mentioned good/s: 1 Delivery Terms ☒ DAP Ditavan and Baghanis villages, Tavush region, Armenia [INCOTERMS 2010] Customs clearance1, if ☒ by UNDP needed, shall be done by: Exact Address of Delivery Ditavan and Baghanis villages, Tavush region, Armenia Location: Latest Expected Delivery ☒ 45 days from the issuance of the Purchase Order (PO) Delivery Schedule ☒Required Mode of Transport ☒LAND (preferred) ☒AIR Preferred ☒United States Dollars(preferred) or 2 Currency of Quotation ☒Local Currency: Armenian drams Value Added Tax on Price ☒Must be exclusive of VAT and other applicable indirect taxes 3 Quotation After-sales services required ☒ N/A.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Level Risk Management M a N U
    LOCAL LEVEL RISK MANAGEMENT M A N U A L Y E R E V A N 2012 1 LLRM EXECUTIVE LOCAL LEVEL RISK IMPLEMENTATION BACKGROUND 2 3 SUMMARY MANAGEMENT (LLRM) / FORMAT EXPERIENCE IN ARMENIA VULNERABILITY AND GENERAL APPROACHES AND CAPACITY 1.1 INFORMATION 2.1 3.1 PRINCIPLES APPLIED ASSESSMENT (VCA) HAZARDS RESOURCES AND THREATENING 3.2 PRACTICAL CASES TOOLS ARMENIA PROCESS A PREPARATORY PHASE DATA COLLECTION B AND RESEARCH C ANALYSIS D TOOL KIT PLANNING DRR MAINSTREAMING INTO DEVELOPMENT PLANS / DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING TOOLS IMPLEMENTATION, MONITORING AND EVALUATION DRR AND CLIMATE LLRM RISK MANAGEMENT DRR AND GENDER M A N U A L EQUITY 2 Authors: Ashot Sargsyan UNDP, DRR Adviser Armen Chilingaryan UNDP, DRR Project Coordinator Susanna Mnatsakanyan UNDP DRR Project VCA Expert Experts: Hamlet Matevosyan Rector of the Crisis Management State Academy of the Ministry of Emergency Situations Hasmik Saroyan Climate Risk Management Expert LLRM/VCA implementation Armen Arakelyan Specialist Head of “Lore” Rescue Team This manual is prepared and published with financial support from UNDP within the framework of the Project Strengthening of National Disaster Preparedness and Risk Reduction Capacities in Armenia. Empowered lives The views expressed in the publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the Resilient nations United Nations or UNDP. 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This manual is a result of consolidation of collective efforts of many professionals and experts from different organizations and agencies – members of the UN extended Disaster Management Team, which worked during the years hand-to-hand to support and facilitate the strengthening of Disaster Management national system in Armenia.
    [Show full text]
  • Agricultural Value-Chains Assessment Report April 2020.Pdf
    1 2 ABOUT THE EUROPEAN UNION The Member States of the European Union have decided to link together their know-how, resources and destinies. Together, they have built a zone of stability, democracy and sustainable development whilst maintaining cultural diversity, tolerance and individual freedoms. The European Union is committed to sharing its achievements and its values with countries and peoples beyond its borders. ABOUT THE PUBLICATION: This publication was produced within the framework of the EU Green Agriculture Initiative in Armenia (EU-GAIA) project, which is funded by the European Union (EU) and the Austrian Development Cooperation (ADC), and implemented by the Austrian Development Agency (ADA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Armenia. In the framework of the European Union-funded EU-GAIA project, the Austrian Development Agency (ADA) hereby agrees that the reader uses this manual solely for non-commercial purposes. Prepared by: EV Consulting CJSC © 2020 Austrian Development Agency. All rights reserved. Licensed to the European Union under conditions. Yerevan, 2020 3 CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 5 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................... 6 2. OVERVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT DYNAMICS OF AGRICULTURE IN ARMENIA AND GOVERNMENT PRIORITIES.....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Republic of Armenia Infrastructure and Rural Finance Support Programme Final Project Design Report Main Report
    Republic of Armenia Infrastructure and Rural Finance Support Programme Final Project Design Report Main report and annexes Document Date: May 2014 Project No. 1690 Report No: ____-AM Near East, North Africa and Europe Division Programme Management Department Republic of Armenia Infrastructure and Rural Finance Support Programme Final project design report Main report Contents Page Currency equivalents iii Abbreviations and acronyms iii Map of IFAD Operations in the Country v Map of the Programme area vi Executive Summary vii Logical Framework xiii I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE 1 A. Background 1 B. Country and Rural Development Context 2 C. Rationale 6 II. PROGRAMME DESCRIPTION 9 A. Development Objectives 9 B. Programme Components 9 C. Target Group and Programme Area 10 D. Description of Inputs and Outputs/Outcomes 12 III. PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION 17 A. Approaches 17 B. Implementation Schedule for Civil Works 20 C. Planning, M&E, Learning and Knowledge Management 23 D. Financial Management 24 E. Procurement and Governance 26 F. Supervision 28 G. Risk Identification and Mitigation 29 IV. PROGRAMME COSTS, FINANCING, BENEFITS AND SUSTAINABILITY 32 A. Estimated Programme Costs 32 B. Proposed Programme Financing 33 C. Summary Benefits and Economic Analysis 34 D. Sustainability 38 TABLES Table 1: Armenia: Reduction in the Incidence of Poverty 1998/99 to 2007 4 Table 2: Programme Costs by Component 32 Table 3: Proposed Programme Financing Sources by Type of Investment 33 Table 4: Proposed Programme Financing Sources by Component 33 Table
    [Show full text]
  • Citi's 2018 Global Citizenship Report
    2018 Global Citizenship Report Citizenship at Citi Solutions for Impact How We Do Business Appendices A What’s Inside “We consistently assess Citi’s role in response to three questions: What are we doing to help create inclusive and resilient communities? How can we use our voice to help drive dialogue toward solutions? Is Citi walking the talk — are we doing the right things within our own firm? The short answer to all three Citizenship at Citi of these questions continues to be the same: pg. 5 Letter from Our CEO that we can and should do more.” pg. 7 Citi at a Glance — Michael L. Corbat, CEO pg. 9 Citizenship Approach Solutions for Impact pg. 23 Inclusive and Resilient Communities pg. 45 Environmental Finance 1 How We Do Business pg. 59 Environmental and Social Risk Management pg. 67 Human Rights pg. 75 Operations and Supply Chain pg. 91 Digital Innovation pg. 101 Talent and Diversity pg. 121 Ethics and Culture ABOUT THIS REPORT This report illustrates how we bring our mission to life through our business; it covers our corporate citizenship activities and performance for 2018. Our report- ing focuses on the issues we determined to be of greatest importance through a materiality assessment completed in 2017. This report has been prepared in accordance with the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Standards: Core option. We also used the United Nations (UN) Global Compact and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights frame- works to guide our reporting. (See related indexes.) Appendices We have embedded the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into relevant sections of the report.
    [Show full text]
  • TANZIMAT in the PROVINCE: NATIONALIST SEDITION (FESAT), BANDITRY (EŞKİYA) and LOCAL COUNCILS in the OTTOMAN SOUTHERN BALKANS (1840S to 1860S)
    TANZIMAT IN THE PROVINCE: NATIONALIST SEDITION (FESAT), BANDITRY (EŞKİYA) AND LOCAL COUNCILS IN THE OTTOMAN SOUTHERN BALKANS (1840s TO 1860s) Dissertation zur Erlangung der Würde einer Doktorin der Philosophie vorgelegt der Philosophisch-Historischen Fakultät der Universität Basel von ANNA VAKALIS aus Thessaloniki, Griechenland Basel, 2019 Buchbinderei Bommer GmbH, Basel Originaldokument gespeichert auf dem Dokumentenserver der Universität Basel edoc.unibas.ch ANNA VAKALIS, ‘TANZIMAT IN THE PROVINCE: NATIONALIST SEDITION (FESAT), BANDITRY (EŞKİYA) AND LOCAL COUNCILS IN THE OTTOMAN SOUTHERN BALKANS (1840s TO 1860s)’ Genehmigt von der Philosophisch-Historischen Fakultät der Universität Basel, auf Antrag von Prof. Dr. Maurus Reinkowski und Assoc. Prof. Dr. Yonca Köksal (Koç University, Istanbul). Basel, den 05/05/2017 Der Dekan Prof. Dr. Thomas Grob 2 ANNA VAKALIS, ‘TANZIMAT IN THE PROVINCE: NATIONALIST SEDITION (FESAT), BANDITRY (EŞKİYA) AND LOCAL COUNCILS IN THE OTTOMAN SOUTHERN BALKANS (1840s TO 1860s)’ TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………..…….…….….7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………...………..………8-9 NOTES ON PLACES……………………………………………………….……..….10 INTRODUCTION -Rethinking the Tanzimat........................................................................................................11-19 -Ottoman Province(s) in the Balkans………………………………..…….………...19-25 -Agency in Ottoman Society................…..............................................................................25-35 CHAPTER 1: THE STATE SETTING THE STAGE: Local Councils
    [Show full text]
  • The EU and Belarus – a Relationship with Reservations Dr
    BELARUS AND THE EU: FROM ISOLATION TOWARDS COOPERATION EDITED BY DR. HANS-GEORG WIECK AND STEPHAN MALERIUS VILNIUS 2011 UDK 327(476+4) Be-131 BELARUS AND THE EU: FROM ISOLATION TOWARDS COOPERATION Authors: Dr. Hans-Georg Wieck, Dr. Vitali Silitski, Dr. Kai-Olaf Lang, Dr. Martin Koopmann, Andrei Yahorau, Dr. Svetlana Matskevich, Valeri Fadeev, Dr. Andrei Kazakevich, Dr. Mikhail Pastukhou, Leonid Kalitenya, Alexander Chubrik Editors: Dr. Hans-Georg Wieck, Stephan Malerius This is a joint publication of the Centre for European Studies and the Konrad- Adenauer-Stiftung. This publication has received funding from the European Parliament. Sole responsibility for facts or opinions expressed in this publication rests with the authors. The Centre for European Studies, the Konrad-Adenauer- Stiftung and the European Parliament assume no responsibility either for the information contained in the publication or its subsequent use. ISBN 978-609-95320-1-1 © 2011, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung e.V., Sankt Augustin / Berlin © Front cover photo: Jan Brykczynski CONTENTS 5 | Consultancy PROJECT: BELARUS AND THE EU Dr. Hans-Georg Wieck 13 | BELARUS IN AN INTERnational CONTEXT Dr. Vitali Silitski 22 | THE EU and BELARUS – A Relationship WITH RESERvations Dr. Kai-Olaf Lang, Dr. Martin Koopmann 34 | CIVIL SOCIETY: AN analysis OF THE situation AND diRECTIONS FOR REFORM Andrei Yahorau 53 | Education IN BELARUS: REFORM AND COOPERation WITH THE EU Dr. Svetlana Matskevich 70 | State bodies, CONSTITUTIONAL REALITY AND FORMS OF RULE Valeri Fadeev 79 | JudiciaRY AND law
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Hadley Z. Renkin
    Hadley Z. Renkin HADLEY Z. RENKIN Bimbó út 184/B 1026 Budapest, Hungary 36-70-232-3265 [email protected] Current Position: 2009-present Assistant Professor Co-Director, 2-year MA Program in Critical Gender Studies Director, Internship Program for 2-year MA Program in Critical Gender Studies Department of Gender Studies Central European University Budapest, Hungary Education: University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI PhD in Anthropology (Ethnology), 2007 Central European University Budapest, Hungary MA in Gender Studies, 1997 Swarthmore College Swarthmore, PA BA in Anthropology (Senior Thesis), 1988 Previous Teaching Experience: 2009 Faculty Fellow Depts. of Anthropology and International Studies Colby College, Waterville, ME 2008 Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology and Sociology Albion College, Albion, MI 2006 Visiting Lecturer Department of Sociology University of Latvia, Riga 2004 Adjunct Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology and Sociology Albion College, Albion, MI 2001 Visiting Lecturer Department of Sociology 1 Hadley Z. Renkin University of Latvia, Riga Spring, 2000 Visiting Lecturer Gender Studies Program University of Latvia, Riga Publications forthcoming. “Biopolitical Mythologies: Géza Róheim and the Sexual Science of Eastern European Otherness.” Special Issue: “The science of sex in a space of uncertainty: naturalizing and modernizing Europe's east, past and present.” (eds. Renkin, Hadley and Agnieszka Koscianska). Sexualities. forthcoming (with Agnieszka Koscianska) “Introduction.” Special Issue: “The science of sex in a space of uncertainty: naturalizing and modernizing Europe's east, past and present.” Sexualities. forthcoming. “Caging Desire: Budapest Pride and the Borders of European Difference.” in Borders as Productive of Desire: Gender and Sexuality at the Eastern Borders of Europe, Helms, Elissa and Tuija Pulkkinen, eds.
    [Show full text]
  • Young People's Initiatives to Address Homophobic and Transphobic Hate
    Young People’s Initiatives to Address Homophobic and Transphobic Hate Speech Desktop Study Vincent W.J. van Gerven Oei DDCP/EYCB/IGLYO/2014/012 The views expressed in this study do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Council of Europe. Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Framework ........................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Definitions of hate speech .................................................................................... 4 2. Youth initiatives that address homophobic and transphobic hate speech ..................... 4 2.1 Monitoring and Research ..................................................................................... 4 2.2 Receiving and investigating complaints ............................................................... 6 2.3 Working with Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and the law ................................ 7 2.4 Education, training and awareness raising .......................................................... 7 2.5 Victim support and community building ................................................................ 9 2.6 Public campaigns ................................................................................................. 9 3. Conclusion and Recommendations ..................................................................... 11 2 1. Introduction The following desktop study maps out a
    [Show full text]
  • INTERNATIONAL ELECTION OBSERVATION MISSION Russian Federation – Presidential Election, 18 March 2018
    INTERNATIONAL ELECTION OBSERVATION MISSION Russian Federation – Presidential Election, 18 March 2018 STATEMENT OF PRELIMINARY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS The 18 March presidential election took place in an overly controlled legal and political environment marked by continued pressure on critical voices, while the Central Election Commission (CEC) administered the election efficiently and openly. After intense efforts to promote turnout, citizens voted in significant numbers, yet restrictions on the fundamental freedoms of assembly, association and expression, as well as on candidate registration, have limited the space for political engagement and resulted in a lack of genuine competition. While candidates could generally campaign freely, the extensive and uncritical coverage of the incumbent as president in most media resulted in an uneven playing field. Overall, election day was conducted in an orderly manner despite shortcomings related to vote secrecy and transparency of counting. Eight candidates, one woman and seven men, stood in this election, including the incumbent president, as self-nominated, and others fielded by political parties. Positively, recent amendments significantly reduced the number of supporting signatures required for candidate registration. Seventeen prospective candidates were rejected by the CEC, and six of them challenged the CEC decisions unsuccessfully in the Supreme Court. Remaining legal restrictions on candidates rights are contrary to OSCE commitments and other international standards, and limit the inclusiveness of the candidate registration process. Most candidates publicly expressed their certainty that the incumbent president would prevail in the election. With many of the candidates themselves stating that they did not expect to win, the election lacked genuine competition. Thus, efforts to increase the turnout predominated over the campaign of the contestants.
    [Show full text]
  • Trydiy FMO 2016.Indd
    ISSN 2219-2085 БЕЛОРУССКИЙ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННЫЙ УНИВЕРСИТЕТ ТРУДЫ ФАКУЛЬТЕТА МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫХ ОТНОШЕНИЙ Научный сборник Основан в 2010 году Выпуск VII МИНСК БГУ 2016 УДК 3(062.522)(082) Представлены научные статьи ведущих ученых факультета международных отношений Бело- русского государственного университета, в которых рассматриваются международные отношения и внешняя политика, международное право, мировые экономические процессы, межкультурная ком- муникация. Редакционная коллегия : доктор исторических наук, профессор В. Г. Шадурский (главный редактор); доктор исторических наук, доцент Л. М. Гайдукевич; доктор исторических наук, профессор А. А. Розанов; доктор исторических наук, профессор В. Е. Снапковский; доктор исторических наук, профессор А. А. Челядинский; доктор исторических наук, профессор А. В. Шарапо; кандидат исторических наук, доцент В. А. Острога; кандидат исторических наук, доцент А. В. Русакович; кандидат исторических наук А. В. Селиванов; доктор юридических наук, профессор С. А. Балашенко; доктор юридических наук, профессор Ю. П. Бровка; доктор юридических наук, профессор М. Ф. Чудаков; кандидат юридических наук, доцент Е. В. Бабкина; кандидат юридических наук, доцент А. Е. Вашкевич; кандидат юридических наук, доцент Е. Б. Леанович; кандидат юридических наук, доцент Ю. А. Лепешков; доктор экономических наук, доцент Е. Л. Давыденко; доктор экономических наук, профессор А. В. Данильченко; доктор экономических наук, профессор С. Ю. Солодовников; доктор экономических наук, профессор А. Е. Дайнеко; кандидат экономических наук, доцент
    [Show full text]