October 2003
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Northeast Asia: Obstacles to Regional Integration the Interests of the European Union
Zentrum für Europäische Integrationsforschung Center for European Integration Studies Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn Discussion Paper Ludger Kühnhardt Northeast Asia: Obstacles to Regional Integration The Interests of the European Union ISSN 1435-3288 ISBN 3-936183-52-X Zentrum für Europäische Integrationsforschung Center for European Integration Studies Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn Walter-Flex-Straße 3 Tel.: +49-228-73-4952 D-53113 Bonn Fax: +49-228-73-1788 C152 Germany http: //www.zei.de 2005 Prof. Dr. Ludger Kühnhardt, born 1958, is Director at the Center for European Integration Studies (ZEI). Between 1991 and 1997 he was Professor of Political Science at Freiburg University, where he also served as Dean of his Faculty. After studies of history, philosophy and political science at Bonn, Geneva, Tokyo and Harvard, Kühnhardt wrote a dissertation on the world refugee problem and a second thesis (Habilitation) on the universality of human rights. He was speechwriter for Germany’s Federal President Richard von Weizsäcker and visiting professor at various universities all over the world. His recent publications include: Europäische Union und föderale Idee, Munich 1993; Revolutionszeiten. Das Umbruchjahr 1989 im geschichtlichen Zusammenhang, Munich 1994 (Turkish edition 2003); Von der ewigen Suche nach Frieden. Immanuel Kants Vision und Europas Wirklichkeit, Bonn 1996; Beyond divisions and after. Essays on democracy, the Germans and Europe, New York/Frankfurt a.M. 1996; (with Hans-Gert Pöttering) Kontinent Europa, Zurich 1998 (Czech edition 2000); Zukunftsdenker. Bewährte Ideen politischer Ordnung für das dritte Jahrtausend, Baden-Baden 1999; Von Deutschland nach Europa. Geistiger Zusammenhalt und außenpoliti- scher Kontext, Baden-Baden 2000; Constituting Europe, Baden- Baden 2003. -
Pension Reforms in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe: Legislation, Implementation and Sustainability
Department of Political and Social Sciences Pension Reforms in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe: Legislation, Implementation and Sustainability Igor Guardiancich Thesis submitted for assessment with a view to obtaining the degree of Doctor of Political and Social Sciences of the European University Institute Florence, October 2009 EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE Department of Political and Social Sciences Pension Reforms in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe: Legislation, Implementation and Sustainability Igor Guardiancich Thesis submitted for assessment with a view to obtaining the degree of Doctor of Political and Social Sciences of the European University Institute Examining Board: Prof. Martin Rhodes, University of Denver/formerly EUI (Supervisor) Prof. Nicholas Barr, London School of Economics Prof. Martin Kohli, European University Institute Prof. Tine Stanovnik, Univerza v Ljubljani © 2009, Igor Guardiancich No part of this thesis may be copied, reproduced or transmitted without prior permission of the author Guardiancich, Igor (2009), Pension Reforms in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe: Legislation, implementation and sustainability European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/1700 Guardiancich, Igor (2009), Pension Reforms in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe: Legislation, implementation and sustainability European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/1700 Acknowledgments No PhD dissertation is a truly individual endeavour and this one is no exception to the rule. Rather it is a collective effort that I managed with the help of a number of people, mostly connected with the EUI community, to whom I owe a huge debt of gratitude. In particular, I would like to thank all my interviewees, my supervisors Prof. Martin Rhodes and Prof. Martin Kohli, as well as Prof. Tine Stanovnik for continuing intellectual support and invaluable input to the thesis. -
Dignity М Freedom М Human Rights
Differences in the understanding of human dignity are born from the rejection by EU legislation of the religious element and DIGNITY – FREEDOM the laws of nature, which for Christians are essential sources of human dignity, freedom and human rights. The EU developed – HUMAN RIGHTS them mostly from the state endowment, and relative stability is not attributed to them. In reading the convergences and divergences in the understanding of these three fundamental The Role of the Catholic Church concepts of human dignity, freedom and human rights, a particular difficulty in dialogue with the EU comes from the in the European Integration Process language which we use to express our views. The terms dignity, freedom and human rights mean something completely different This publication contains the transcripts in both the Christian and Union contexts. This discrepancy arose from speeches and discussions during the conference because Christianity derives dignity, freedom and human rights in Krakow on 25-26 September 2015 from the truth, and this is the revealed truth, while the EU has adopted the principle of freedom as its source. [...] Bp Prof. Tadeusz Pieronek 0*%)$#$%0$ 8#*0$99: <$;9(&$ <<<=>*90(*4?$"#*6,=*#-=64 )"%.9 8,#&L 8,#4(,+$%& DIGNITY – FREEDOM HUMAN RIGHTS NBO ! M M 8 5 3 N 2 7 M B @ The Pontifical University The Robert Schuman The Konrad Adenauer The Group ‘Wokó³ nas’ European People’s Party Commission of John Paul II Foundation Foundation of the European People's Party Publishing House of -
Pierwsze Notowania Rządu Ewy Kopacz
Warszawa, październik 2014 ISSN 2353-5822 NR 145/2014 PIERWSZE NOTOWANIA RZĄDU EWY KOPACZ Znak jakości przyznany CBOS przez Organizację Firm Badania Opinii i Rynku 14 stycznia 2014 roku Fundacja Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej ul. Świętojerska 5/7, 00-236 Warszawa e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] http://www.cbos.pl (48 22) 629 35 69 Okoliczności powołania rządu Ewy Kopacz są nietypowe. Dotychczas do zmiany premiera w trakcie kadencji Sejmu dochodziło zazwyczaj w efekcie negatywnych zjawisk i procesów na scenie politycznej, np. takich jak podważenie osobistej wiarygodności szefa rządu, brak stabilnej większości parlamentarnej czy wyczerpanie się społecznego poparcia dla ustępującego gabinetu. Tym razem powołanie nowego rządu nastąpiło w wyniku awansu premiera z polityki polskiej do europejskiej. Oprócz prezesa Rady Ministrów z rządu odeszła wicepremier Elżbieta Bieńkowska, która została unijnym komisarzem ds. rynku wewnętrznego i usług, przemysłu, przedsiębiorczości oraz małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw. Mimo tych zmian skład personalny nowego rządu jest zbliżony do składu poprzedniego gabinetu, większość ministrów bowiem zachowała swoje stanowiska. Wprawdzie odejście Donalda Tuska z krajowej polityki – w przekonaniu nie tylko wielu komentatorów politycznych, ale także znacznej części opinii publicznej w Polsce – osłabia Platformę Obywatelską i współtworzony przez nią rząd1, ale jednocześnie stwarza szansę na kolejne „nowe otwarcie” i odbudowanie nadwyrężonego wizerunku rządzącej partii. Rząd Ewy Kopacz budzi umiarkowanie pozytywne reakcje2. W to, że sytuacja w kraju się poprawi w wyniku działań nowego gabinetu, wierzy 36% badanych. Niepokój przed pogorszeniem wyraża 15% ankietowanych. Prawie jedna piąta (19%) uważa, że nic się nie zmieni. 1 Por. komunikat CBOS „Polska polityka po nominacji Donalda Tuska na szefa Rady Europejskiej”, wrzesień 2014 (oprac. -
European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast
Briefing May 2019 European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast Austria – 18 MEPs Staff lead: Nick Dornheim PARTIES (EP group) Freedom Party of Austria The Greens – The Green Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) (EPP) Social Democratic Party of Austria NEOS – The New (FPÖ) (Salvini’s Alliance) – Alternative (Greens/EFA) – 6 seats (SPÖ) (S&D) - 5 seats Austria (ALDE) 1 seat 5 seats 1 seat 1. Othmar Karas* Andreas Schieder Harald Vilimsky* Werner Kogler Claudia Gamon 2. Karoline Edtstadler Evelyn Regner* Georg Mayer* Sarah Wiener Karin Feldinger 3. Angelika Winzig Günther Sidl Petra Steger Monika Vana* Stefan Windberger 4. Simone Schmiedtbauer Bettina Vollath Roman Haider Thomas Waitz* Stefan Zotti 5. Lukas Mandl* Hannes Heide Vesna Schuster Olga Voglauer Nini Tsiklauri 6. Wolfram Pirchner Julia Elisabeth Herr Elisabeth Dieringer-Granza Thomas Schobesberger Johannes Margreiter 7. Christian Sagartz Christian Alexander Dax Josef Graf Teresa Reiter 8. Barbara Thaler Stefanie Mösl Maximilian Kurz Isak Schneider 9. Christian Zoll Luca Peter Marco Kaiser Andrea Kerbleder Peter Berry 10. Claudia Wolf-Schöffmann Theresa Muigg Karin Berger Julia Reichenhauser NB 1: Only the parties reaching the 4% electoral threshold are mentioned in the table. Likely to be elected Unlikely to be elected or *: Incumbent Member of the NB 2: 18 seats are allocated to Austria, same as in the previous election. and/or take seat to take seat, if elected European Parliament ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• www.eurocommerce.eu Belgium – 21 MEPs Staff lead: Stefania Moise PARTIES (EP group) DUTCH SPEAKING CONSITUENCY FRENCH SPEAKING CONSITUENCY GERMAN SPEAKING CONSTITUENCY 1. Geert Bourgeois 1. Paul Magnette 1. Pascal Arimont* 2. Assita Kanko 2. Maria Arena* 2. -
Association of Accredited Lobbyists to the European Parliament
ASSOCIATION OF ACCREDITED LOBBYISTS TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT OVERVIEW OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT FORUMS AALEP Secretariat Date: October 2007 Avenue Milcamps 19 B-1030 Brussels Tel: 32 2 735 93 39 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.lobby-network.eu TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction………………………………………………………………..3 Executive Summary……………………………………………………….4-7 1. European Energy Forum (EEF)………………………………………..8-16 2. European Internet Forum (EIF)………………………………………..17-27 3. European Parliament Ceramics Forum (EPCF………………………...28-29 4. European Parliamentary Financial Services Forum (EPFSF)…………30-36 5. European Parliament Life Sciences Circle (ELSC)……………………37 6. Forum for Automobile and Society (FAS)…………………………….38-43 7. Forum for the Future of Nuclear Energy (FFNE)……………………..44 8. Forum in the European Parliament for Construction (FOCOPE)……..45-46 9. Pharmaceutical Forum…………………………………………………48-60 10.The Kangaroo Group…………………………………………………..61-70 11.Transatlantic Policy Network (TPN)…………………………………..71-79 Conclusions………………………………………………………………..80 Index of Listed Companies………………………………………………..81-90 Index of Listed MEPs……………………………………………………..91-96 Most Active MEPs participating in Business Forums…………………….97 2 INTRODUCTION Businessmen long for certainty. They long to know what the decision-makers are thinking, so they can plan ahead. They yearn to be in the loop, to have the drop on things. It is the genius of the lobbyists and the consultants to understand this need, and to satisfy it in the most imaginative way. Business forums are vehicles for forging links and maintain a dialogue with business, industrial and trade organisations. They allow the discussions of general and pre-legislative issues in a different context from lobbying contacts about specific matters. They provide an opportunity to get Members of the European Parliament and other decision-makers from the European institutions together with various business sectors. -
The Collective Action Problems of Political Consolidation: Evidence from Poland1
The Collective Action Problems of Political Consolidation: Evidence from Poland1 Marek M. Kaminski University of California, Irvine The problem of collective action, while noticed early by Rousseau and Hume, received its first model in the 1950s in the celebrated Prisoner's Dilemma introduced by Flood and Drescher and motivated by Albert Tucker's familiar story. Later, with the development of game theory, problems of collective action were thoroughly formalized as variants of the Prisoner's Dilemma, coordination games, or just strategic games with a unique Nash equilibrium that is strictly Pareto dominated (Hardin 1982; Sandler 1992). Among the early social scientists who analyzed social dilemmas with simple models was Thomas Schelling. Mancur Olson, Schelling's student, focused in his dissertation on the intersection of economics and politics. He made studying the problems of collective action his lifetime research program. He applied his framework and its variants to the workings of professional associations and labor unions (1965), maintaining the NATO (1966, with R. Zeckhauser), interest group formation and their impact on the aggregated welfare (1982), revolution-making (1990), or incentives facing various rulers to cultivate economic growth (2000). He demonstrated that political and economic collective action problems are not mere curiosities, paradoxes, or aberrations of otherwise efficient markets. They underlie every aspect of human activity and have profound political and economic consequences. Since Olson's seminal dissertation-turned-book on collective action, systematic failures of various social, economic, and political players to coordinate on mutually beneficial solutions received increasingly more attention from political scientists and economists. The 1989 Eastern European revolutions produced a new crop of such failures. -
Poland by Piotr Arak, Piotr Żakowiecki
Poland by Piotr Arak, Piotr Żakowiecki Capital: Warsaw Population: 38 million GNI/capita, PPP: $23,930 Source: World Bank World Development Indicators. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 National Democratic 3.25 3.50 3.25 3.25 2.75 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.75 Governance Electoral Process 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.75 1.50 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.50 1.50 Civil Society 1.50 1.25 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Independent Media 2.25 2.25 2.00 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.75 Local Democratic 2.25 2.25 2.00 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.50 1.50 1.50 Governance Judicial Framework 2.25 2.50 2.25 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.75 and Independence Corruption 3.00 3.00 2.75 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.50 3.50 3.50 Democracy Score 2.36 2.39 2.25 2.32 2.21 2.14 2.18 2.18 2.21 2.32 NOTE: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. If consensus cannot be reached, Freedom House is responsible for the final ratings. The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. -
Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej
CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ SEKRETARIAT 629 - 35 - 69, 628 - 37 - 04 UL. ŻURAWIA 4A, SKR. PT.24 OŚRODEK INFORMACJI 693 - 46 - 92, 625 - 76 - 23 00 - 503 W A R S Z A W A TELEFAX 629 - 40 - 89 INTERNET http://www.cbos.pl E-mail: [email protected] BS/16/2005 ZAUFANIE DO POLITYKÓW W STYCZNIU KOMUNIKAT Z BADAŃ WARSZAWA, STYCZEŃ 2005 PRZEDRUK MATERIAŁÓW CBOS W CAŁOŚCI LUB W CZĘŚCI ORAZ WYKORZYSTANIE DANYCH EMPIRYCZNYCH JEST DOZWOLONE WYŁĄCZNIE Z PODANIEM ŹRÓDŁA ZAUFANIE DO POLITYKÓW W STYCZNIU ¾ Spośród polityków uwzględnionych w styczniowym sondażu największym zaufaniem społecznym cieszą się Zbigniew Religa (64%) oraz Aleksander Kwaśniewski (62%). Co drugi Polak deklaruje zaufanie do Lecha Kaczyńskiego (50%), Jarosława Kaczyńskiego i Jana Rokity (po 49%). Niewiele mniej osób ufa Włodzimierzowi Cimoszewiczowi i Józefowi Zychowi (po 47%). ¾ Największą nieufność budzi Leszek Miller, któremu nie ufa prawie trzy czwarte respondentów (71%). Ponad połowa badanych (54%) nie ma zaufania do Józefa Oleksego, a połowa (51%) - do Andrzeja Leppera. ¾ W porównaniu z sondażem realizowanym w grudniu ubiegłego roku notowania większości polityków nie zmieniły się w znaczącym stopniu. Wyraźne zmiany dotyczą jedynie obecnego i byłego marszałków Sejmu. Zaufanie do Włodzimierza Cimoszewicza wzrosło o 9 punktów (przy 4-punktowym spadku nieufności), natomiast do Józefa Oleksego spadło o 15 punktów przy jednoczesnym wzroście nieufności aż o 20 punktów procentowych. Badanie „Aktualne problemy i wydarzenia” (176), 7-10 stycznia 2005 roku, reprezentatywna próba losowa dorosłych Polaków (N=1089). Styczniowe badanie1 zaufania do polityków było realizowane wkrótce po zmianie na stanowisku marszałka Sejmu. Na liście umieściliśmy m.in., oprócz byłego i obecnego marszałka, kandydata opozycji na to stanowisko, a także rzecznika interesu publicznego, który w grudniu zakończył 6-letnią kadencję. -
The Question of Kosovo Independence in Polish Political Debate
POLISH POLITICAL SCIENCE VOL XXXVII 2008 PL ISSN 0208-7375 THE QUESTION OF KOSOVO INDEPENDENCE IN POLISH POLITICAL DEBATE by Renata Podgórzańska ! e proclamation of independence of Kosovo, although expected, had a destabi- lizing impact on the international situation. International community had various opinions on the decision of Kosovo authorities. 1 Numerous conditions in" uenced the positions of individual countries. Countries acknowledging independence of Kosovo, that is some EU countries and the United States, recognized the proclama- tion of independence of Kosovo as a # nal stage of the Yugoslavia’s break-up with the basis for peaceful cooperation on the Balkans. Whereas, countries opposing the secession of Kosovo found it against the international law. ! ey perceived this act as an example of western countries’ dominance and feared that it would form a danger- ous precedent threatening international stability and security. 2 1 Kosovo authorities paid no heed to the suggestions of Brussels encouraging to postpone the decision on independence until Serbia and Kosovo were admitted to the European Union. ! eir position, to a large extent was in" uenced by a failure in the attempts of the interna- tional community concerning the Kosovo status. See A. Balcer, W. Górecki, M. Kaczmarski, R. Sadowski, W. Stanisławski, Kosowo Proclaims Independence , “Best – Weekly OSW”, No. 41, 20.02.2008, http://osw.waw.pl/pub/BiuletynOSW/2008/0802/080220/best01.htm 2 On 17 February 2008 the Parliament of Kosovo passed a 12 point-declaration of inde- pendence during a special session (boycotted by 11 Serbian representatives). See: Kosova Declaration of Indipendance , http://www.assembly-kosova.org/common/docs/declaration_in- dipendence.pdf 128 Renata PODGÓRZAŃSKA Considering the reasons of the Kosovo’s secession, irrespective of political, legal and moral aspects of this decision, its potential outcomes shall be emphasized 3. -
Economic Transition and Elections in Poland1
Economics of Transition Volume 11 (1) 2003, 41–66 EconomicBlackwellOxford,ECOTThe0967-0750©2003111000OriginalJackson, The Economics European UKArticle Klich Publishingtransition and of Bank Transition Poznánska and Ltd for elections Reconstruction in Poland and Development transition and elections in Poland1 John E. Jackson*, Jacek Klich** and Krystyna Pozna-ska*** *Dept of Political Science and William Davidson Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA. E-mail: [email protected] **School of Business and School of Public Health, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland. E-mail: [email protected] ***Warsaw School of Economics, Warsaw, Poland. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Poland’s economic and political transition, one of the most successful, has depended very heavily on job creation in new firms to replace the jobs lost in the formerly state-owned enterprises. This paper uses survey and aggregate data from three Polish elections to suggest that these de novo firms, the individuals they employ, and the residents in the local areas where they exist become an important constituency supporting pro-reform political parties and constraining the actions of parties less sympathetic to the reforms. The creation of this political constituency helps explain how countries can successfully pursue both economic and political reforms. JEL classification: D72, P26. Keywords: Poland; economic and political transitions; voting and elections. 1 Paper initially presented at the WDI/CEPR Annual Conference on Transitional Economies, Portoroz, Slovenia, June 23–26, 2001. This work was supported in part by a grant from the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation to the University of Michigan and while Jackson was a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences. -
Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej
CBOS CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ SEKRETARIAT 629 - 35 - 69, 628 - 37 - 04 UL. ŻURAWIA 4A, SKR. PT.24 OŚRODEK INFORMACJI 693 - 58 - 95, 625 - 76 - 23 00 - 503 W A R S Z A W A TELEFAX 629 - 40 - 89 INTERNET http://www.cbos.pl E-mail: [email protected] BS/130/2000 KANDYDACI NA PREZYDENTA I ICH SZANSE WYBORCZE - PEWNOŚĆ GŁOSOWANIA, ALTERNATYWY WYBORCZE, ELEKTORATY NEGATYWNE KOMUNIKAT Z BADAŃ WARSZAWA, SIERPIEŃ 2000 PRZEDRUK MATERIAŁÓW CBOS W CAŁOŚCI LUB W CZĘŚCI ORAZ WYKORZYSTANIE DANYCH EMPIRYCZNYCH JEST DOZWOLONE WYŁĄCZNIE Z PODANIEM ŹRÓDŁA KANDYDACI NA PREZYDENTA I ICH SZANSE WYBORCZE - CBOS PEWNOŚĆ GŁOSOWANIA, ALTERNATYWY WYBORCZE, ELEKTORATY NEGATYWNE !"Najbardziej pewni trafności swego wyboru są zwolennicy Aleksandra Kwaśniewskiego. Trwająca kampania wyborcza dobrze służy mobilizacji zwolenników Mariana Krzaklewskiego - w ciągu ostatniego miesiąca wzrosła liczba tych jego sympatyków, którzy deklarują, że w nadchodzących wyborach na pewno poprą kandydaturę przewodniczącego „Solidarności”. Na tle pozostałych kandydatów relatywnie pewniejsi swojej decyzji wyborczej są także zwolennicy Jana Olszewskiego. !"Potencjalni wyborcy Aleksandra Kwaśniewskiego przeciętnie na 83% określają szanse zwycięstwa obecnego prezydenta w tegorocznych wyborach. Wyborcy Mariana Krzaklewskiego także nie wątpią w jego wyborczy sukces i średnio na 63% oceniają prawdopodobieństwo, że przewodniczący „Solidarności” wygra wybory prezydenckie. Elektorat Jana Olszewskiego średnio na 61% ocenia szanse jego zwycięstwa. Zwolennicy Andrzeja Olechowskiego oraz sympatycy