This book takes up traditional approaches to political science. It aims to offer a mixture of conventional and specific analyses and insights for different groups of readers. In view of the European Union's multi-level and multi-actor polity, the book highlights the complex procedural and institutional set-up of nation states preparing and implementing decisions made by the institutions of the European Community (EC). In looking at the emerging and evolving realities of the European polity, it shows how European institutions and Member States (re-)act and interact in a new institutional and procedural set-up. It explores how governmental and non-governmental actors in different national settings adapt to common challenges, constraints and opportunities for which they are mainly themselves responsible. The book discusses the Belgian policy toward European integration as a significant demonstration of its commitment to multilateralism and international co-operation in security and economic affairs. Attitudes to European integration in Denmark, Germany, Finland, Greece, and Spain are discussed. Tendencies towards 'Europeanisation' and 'sectoralisation' of the ministerial administration during the process of European integration and the typical administrative pluralism of the Italian political system seem to have mutually reinforced each other. Strong multi-level players are able to increase their access and influence at both levels and to use their position on one level for strengthening their say on the other. German and Belgian regions might develop into these kinds of actors. A persistent trend during the 1990s is traced towards stronger national performers, particularly in terms of adaptations and reactions to Maastricht Treaty.
A Framework for Measuring Effectiveness in Humanitarian Response
Vincenzo Bollettino and Birthe Anders
provided in a timely fashion.
c) Foreign military capabilities do not provide a unique capability.
2. Failure to utilise military assets in the emergency response may lead to loss of life and/or property, suffering, or further inhibit access to the affected people.
3. In your opinion, use of foreign military assets may lead to a lack of distinction between humanitarian organisations, military and other governmentactors.
4. Bilateral military-to-military support is coordinated with the international humanitarian community
Four Decisive Challenges Confronting Humanitarian Innovation
Gerard Finnigan and Otto Farkas
perspective of non-governmentactors involved in the
implementation of humanitarian response programmes. The first challenge relates to
the meaning of innovation itself and how the sector interprets and applies the
action of innovating. The second challenge concerns the changing nature of
humanitarian assistance. This article posits that humanitarian action is losing
efficacy not because of poor design or implementation but due to the changing nature
of the context that requires
Marie-Luce Desgrandchamps, Lasse Heerten, Arua Oko Omaka, Kevin O'Sullivan, and Bertrand Taithe
space for the
involvement of the non-governmentalactors. For example, at the end of 1967, as they
could not intervene directly, Unicef played a major role in prompting the ICRC to
undertake relief activities. In other words, the trauma arising from the
international community’s management of the Congo crisis participated in
creating the conditions for what happened in Biafra. When the famine appeared on TV
screens and the pressure in the public mounted, the UN and
parliament. In addition, there are non-governmentalactors such as interest groups, political parties and the media.
Although there is an old tradition of local government, and renewed
regionalisation, the Swedish unitary polity must be considered as relatively centralised compared to several of the other EU Member States,
especially the federal or semi-federal states. In the making of Swedish
policies towards the Union, the degree of centralisation is striking.
However, there is a certain fragmentation at the central level insofar as
there is an interministerial rivalry
Given the significant similarities and differences between the welfare states of Northern Europe and their reactions to the perceived 'refugee crisis' of 2015, the book focuses primarily on the three main cases of Denmark, Sweden and Germany. Placed in a wider Northern European context – and illustrated by those chapters that also discuss refugee experiences in Norway and the UK – the Danish, Swedish and German cases are the largest case studies of this edited volume. Thus, the book contributes to debates on the governance of non-citizens and the meaning of displacement, mobility and seeking asylum by providing interdisciplinary analyses of a largely overlooked region of the world, with two specific aims. First, we scrutinize the construction of the 2015 crisis as a response to the large influx of refugees, paying particular attention to the disciplinary discourses and bureaucratic structures that are associated with it. Second, we investigate refugees’ encounters with these bureaucratic structures and consider how these encounters shape hopes for building a new life after displacement. This allows us to show that the mobility of specific segments of the world’s population continues to be seen as a threat and a risk that has to be governed and controlled. Focusing on the Northern European context, our volume interrogates emerging policies and discourses as well as the lived experiences of bureaucratization from the perspective of individuals who find themselves the very objects of bureaucracies.
Governmental power and authority in democratic ecological governance
Lennart J. Lundqvist
legitimately binding long-term
commitments for society as a whole. At the same time, the spatial
dimension calls for multi-level governance, involving several
governmental levels as well as non-governmentalactors (see Hirst
2000:22 ff.). This logically calls for a diffusion of state authority,
upward and/or sideways to the international level as well as
downward to regional and local governmental levels. The scale of
such a problem as climate change necessitates a global approach;
‘ecologism in one country’ is certainly not a sustainable option.
The variation in eco
‘threats’, many of them attributed to non-governmentalactors. The threats in question were usually posed in terms of the
possible ramifications – in several cases highly contested 37 – of
domestic upheaval, including gross violations of human rights,
humanitarian disasters, and breaches of democratic principles. 38
In the relative absence of perceived external threats to
international peace and security
The Member States between procedural adaptation and structural revolution
Jürgen Mittag and Wolfgang Wessels
political systems and of the role, function and weight of their
institutions.35 However, rather than employing an extensive approach,
our examination of the Member States’ political systems focuses on the
institutional framework and the relevant institutions with regard to the
EU policy-making process without considering the particulars of each
Governments: national gatekeepers in European affairs?
Among governmentalactors we observe a uniform instinct to seek out
access and influence in EU policy-cycles and, at the same time, several
‘Fulfilling’ calls for a variety of strategies including monitoring harms arising
from science, enhancing public engagement in decision-making about science
and technology, ensuring access to the benefits of scientific progress on a
non-discriminatory basis, and developing science curricula at all levels of
schooling. Second, the Statement points out that it is also incumbent upon
non-governmentalactors (e.g. scientific societies, for-profit entities, civil
society) to contribute to the realisation of the right to science. The Statement
touches upon the issue