Academic literature on the topic 'Elite (Social sciences)-European Union countries-Case studies'

In modern societies, digitalization plays a tremendously important role for people and businesses. Apart from an economic representation, competitiveness characterizes a society from political, cultural, or human points of view. In this article, we aim to highlight the role of digital development from a competitiveness perspective, as there are few studies related to this relationship. The empirical investigation is based on panel data analysis for European Union countries for 2017–2022, considering the digital economy and society index (DESI) and the index developed by International Institute for Management Development (IMD), respectively IMD world competitiveness index. The results obtained are reported both for general indices and for the components of DESI, presented separately for the groups of Central and Eastern European countries and Western European countries. They indicate different influences for the two groups of countries, with only a few common aspects. The most obvious is the case of skilled labor. This aspect demonstrates the link between the various dimensions of digitalization and changes in human capital development strategies, as they appear in the specialized literature.

The migration crisis was and, in some aspects, still is one of the biggest challenges that the European Union (EU) has faced recently. In the crisis peak in 2015/16, most of its member states were affected in different ways. This paper contributes to the ex-post dialog of this transboundary crisis and attempts to present the level of readiness to solve wicked problems and manage a transboundary crisis, looking at the perspective of two countries—Slovenia and Croatia. The paper focuses on the following areas of migration governance: (1) border management, (2) reception policies, (3) migrant protection regimes, and (4) national security, which represented the main issues for transit countries and are embedded in the capacity assessing tool Survey Tool used in the paper. With its set of questions and using a multiple case studies methodology and comparative analysis, the paper’s results show the rather immature level of mass migration capacities at both transit levels studied. In the absence of migration crisis studies, the proposed paper retains its originality and adds value, especially in multi-level systems, in assessing the complexity of the crisis from a national perspective and providing the numerical assessment of crisis management capacity.

The analysis that will be addressed in this paper will be in the outline of understanding the relationship between gender and politics as a dynamic and variable impact of the women?s movement on public policy and their institutionalization. Within the theoretical framework of ?state feminism?, I will try to give a critical review of the impact and results of the gender equality mechanisms (women?s policy agencies), especially in relation to the policies and practices of the feminist movement in Serbia. My analysis will be primarily based on the theoretical bases derived from the research project on state feminism (2010) conducted by Dorothy E. McBride and Amy G. Mazur for more than thirty years. Also, some academic work dealing with state feminism concept will be examined trough case studies from the Western Balkans countries (Kesic, 2007,Spehar, 2007, 2012, 2014). Examples from the level of the European Union will be also taken into account (Squires 2007; Kantola and Outshoorn, 2007; Kantola and Dahl 2005; Kantola and Squires, 2012). Also, ?state feminism? is examined within the framework of the semi-periphery and policy creation in the process of transition and European Union accession.

Theprocess of European integration is posing a challenge to scholars in the humanities and the social sciences to rethink their frames of analysis. The once dominant nation-state has lost relevance while transnational processes and exchanges are receiving greater attention. This is not only true for the social sciences and economics, but also for history. The closer the European states are integrated, the more questions about Europe's past are asked. But what is European history, and upon which methods and units of analysis can it be built? Is it the sum of national histories, just as the EU is a union of nation-states, or is it something more? Since no one subject of European history can possibly encompass all countries on the continent, it is clear that independent of the general topic there needs to be a certain selection of studies about more than one local or national case. If those studies, no matter whether they cover political, social, or cultural history, are to be synthesized on a European level, comparisons need to be made at a certain stage of any given work. The same holds true for the history of Central Europe, an area with a particularly high degree of internal differentiation.

This paper will discuss the rise of authoritarian tendencies in the political systems of Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia. In all four countries, certain parties and political elites have become entrenched in the political system, and have been able to enhance their grip on power, often beyond, and in some cases through, constitutional frameworks. It will discuss how forms of state capture have enabled political elites to position themselves in a situation in which they not only control the political decision-making institutions, but also exercise excessive influence on the economic and social systems of these systems in transitional states. By extending their networks of patronage, limiting political access for opponents, and holding strong control over media and the judiciary, these elites have been able to develop semi-authoritarian systems, which utilise democratic elections to confirm their long-term dominance, veiling them in a veneer of legitimacy. This rise of electoral authoritarianism – and in turn illiberal democracy – is not only linked to the political actions of certain parties and elites, but also results from the political, social and economic changes that the countries under investigation have faced in recent years. What is more, the so-called transformative power of eu integration has failed to hinder or deter the rise of these new authoritarian regimes. The paper will progress in three main steps: In the first part, a theoretical framework will be introduced, by focusing on theories of democratization and authoritarian back-sliding. In the second part, the four countries under investigation will be discussed in more detail, to highlight why there has been an increase in authoritarian practices across these four countries. This section will also discuss how these authoritarian tendencies play out in practice and how they have been undermining the consolidation of liberal democracy. Finally, in the conclusion it will be discussed what the European Union (eu) and other actors could do in order to support those forces that focus on democratic governance in these countries, and make the accession process truly transformative.

While the war launched by the Russian Federation against Ukraine in February 2022 was predicted by many analysts, few predicted the foreseeable problems associated with the settlement of Ukrainian migrant flows fleeing the war, both within Ukraine and beyond its borders to the European Union. Both scenarios have been met with unique challenges affecting the settlement of internal and external Ukrainian refugees, as well as counterintuitive patterns of success and failure that point to strategies of long-term cohesive integration. The aim of this study is to identify new qualitative aspects and specific features of the integration processes of Ukrainian migrants, which are characteristic of the social situation in the European Union that has developed after the aggression of the Russian Federation. Particular attention is paid to the new components of social relations, the accumulation of knowledge, which will make it possible to respond to new conflict factors, to develop inclusiveness and tolerance in accordance with the qualitative specificities of refugees arriving in the EU countries as a result of the war. Methodology. The system analysis of the institutional and legal framework of the adaptation process of Ukrainian refugees in the EU is based on the generalisation of the available official documents, published analytical materials and other types of public information related to the policies of European countries in the area of migration, and the activities of certain communities (organisations) of Ukrainians in the EU. The study of behavioural patterns of Ukrainian IDPs and refugees is based on the methods of direct observation of the author and generalisation of case studies. The method of classification of groups of migrants from Ukraine was used, taking into account their actual status and the purpose of moving to the EU. Due to the author's current extensive humanitarian and journalistic activities in the EU and Ukraine, the method of anonymous structured interviews with Ukrainian refugees was widely used. Results. Describing the current state of the institutional processes of adaptation of Ukrainians in various European countries, the author concludes that in the initial stages the already existing local Ukrainian communities played a significant role in the process of resettlement and adaptation of the refugees, while much depended on the displaced persons' own social and institutional contacts. In the later stages, the central and local authorities of the host countries and international humanitarian organisations played a predominant role. Depending on their status in the host country, migrants can be divided into the following groups: migrants who are permanent residents of a particular EU community and have the possibility of returning to their home country; migrants who are permanent residents of a particular EU community and do not have the possibility of returning to their home country; migrants who have been granted collective protection status in the EU but can return or have returned to permanent residence in Ukraine. The integration of those groups of migrants from Ukraine who plan to stay permanently in European countries should take into account their language, age, educational, labour and social characteristics.

The authors of the monograph focused on the scientific analysis of an actual scientific and applied topic, which concerns the problem of adaptation of the European Union to the new conditions that have emerged since the UK left the EU. It is symbolic that this process coincided with the crisis of the globalization process due to the pandemic and its challenges to international security. The modern European Union is both an international and a state-like entity, which combines the features of at least three state unions: an international intergovernmental organization, a confederation and a federation. This not only determines the complexity of the subject of study, but also its inconsistency. In conditions of radical social change, it is always difficult to track and adequately analyze them. This titanic task is further complicated by the presence of an in-house methodological crisis in the family of social sciences. Therefore, given all these objective difficulties, we can only welcome attempts to find a new theoretical and methodological synthesis, which should help society to understand the essence of historical time and act in it as rationally and efficiently as possible. The pages of the monograph raise questions about the heuristic potential of the study of the problem of European historical experience; in addition, significant attention is paid to the coverage of a systematic approach to the social vector of European policy. It also addresses the issue of solving key social problems that stand in the way of qualitative deepening of European integration while maintaining the basic guidelines of social market economy. Among these issues, the authors highlight and analyze the most important aspects, which relate primarily to overcoming poverty and combating unemployment. The monograph outlines the range of methodological problems of transformational historical period, involved in its study synthesizing approach, which consists in the use of historical, socio-philosophical, economic, political science, legal approaches. This approach allows to restore the synthesis of scientific knowledge, which is often disrupted not only by the tendency to specialized fragmentation of complex objects of study, but also allows to take into account the specifics of the transitional historical period. In a geographical sense, not all European regions are equally developed, due to their different economic specialization, which has developed as a result of the historical division of labor. Eventually, there is a tendency to shifting responsibility for solving the problems of poor regions to themselves. The same German experience with the unification of East and West of the country has shown that even huge investments in infrastructure development, introduction of new technologies, efforts to increase productivity – all this together do not solve quickly enough the problem of social convergence. The leveling of the social space of richer and poorer federal states is rather slow. Last but not least, these problems became a good reason for the Great Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union. The issue of the monograph is of practical importance for the foreign policy of Ukraine. After all, the European Union is an important neighbor, trade and political partner of Ukraine and accession to it is actually declared as a prototype of a strategic national idea. The European project is essentially postmodern, as it seeks to overcome the modernism with which nationalism is associated and to reach a level of tolerant agreement of different national interests. The intensification of the globalization process has prompted integration structures to perform functions that limit national sovereignty. Historiographical discourse of common foreign and defense policy of European Union proves that this strategic course of European integration depends on the ability of elites and peoples of Europe to find a common European identity and organize around it the process of determining the place and role of the European Union in the modern system of international relations. This process in the distant historical perspective remains an open possibility with an unguaranteed positive or negative result. Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union, which was unexpected for many researchers of European integration, matured gradually. The authors of the peer-reviewed monograph list the main trends that influenced this decision. First of all, we are talking about the unregulated EU development strategy, the fate of the common European currency, the imperfection of the system of decision-making in the field of common foreign and security policy, which led to an ineffective EU response to Russian and Chinese autocratic challenges. Despite the objective problems associated with mutual adaptation of old and new EU member states, the European integration project continues to be seen as the key to addressing the challenges of modern life and finding answers to the challenges of globalization. In particular, in the final sixth chapter, the author focuses on the theoretical, methodological and practical analysis of the problem of democracy. The authors of the monograph are looking for an answer to the question of what the European Union will be like after the exit of Great Britain. No less important is the question of whether Britain will become a “global” Britain after leaving the European Union. Of course, Britain is concerned about turning the EU into a superpower that has not only its own flag, anthem, currency, but also the germ of a common European army and tries to pursue a common foreign and defense policy. London advocates stronger resistance from China and ousting Russia from Europe. Changing regional influences in the EU may create a new structure of conflict of interest not only for individual countries but also for various regional groups. The issue of a clear division of powers between supranational and national authorities at all levels seems ripe. More adequate to this trend will be not so much a more centralized federalist Europe as a decentralized confederative one. By the way, the model of the latter looks more open for further expansion. This work is imbued with the spirit of realistic Europeanism. Therefore, not least because of this, the peer-reviewed monograph will become a notable phenomenon in domestic European studies.

The newly independent states (South Caucasian countries being no exception), the products of the Soviet Union’s traumatic disintegration, needed independent foreign policies. Throughout the three decades of their independence they formulated their priorities and defined approaches and principles under strong pressure of certain factors. This process has been unfolding amid the complicated social and political processes and geopolitical transformations in the region shaken by the post-Soviet ethnic conflicts. As could be expected, the newly independent South Caucasian states opted for different routes in their economic and statehood development, while their ruling elites took into account the external and internal contexts when shaping their foreign policies. Different approaches and different foreign policy priorities opened the doors to non-regional geopolitical actors: the United States, the European Union, Iran and Turkey have joined Russia, whose presence is rooted in its past. Recently, China, Israel and Japan have become interested in the region. Thus, today the regional countries are orientated to the interests of non-regional states. This has not benefited the situation in the region or cooperation among the regional states. Foreign policy of the South Caucasian countries is inseparable from the regional security problems, which means that it should become an object of meticulous studies. In the latter half of 2020, the war in Nagorno-Karabakh changed the region’s geopolitical setting and shattered its stability. The article sums up the results of the policies pursued by the South Caucasian countries and identifies the challenges and possible developments in the region after the Karabakh war of 2020.

Since the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, declared the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak a global pandemic, many countries around the world have experienced contractual inequality in their dealings with global vaccine developers, such as delayed deliveries, limitations of liability for claims, disclaimers of warranties, and excessive confidentiality when negotiating purchase contracts. In 2021, the EU Commission filed a lawsuit in Brussels against AstraZeneca for not keeping to its purchase agreement for the supply of COVID-19 vaccines. This study reviews the best-efforts clauses in the vaccine contracts signed by the EU and AstraZeneca focusing on the legal effects and duties of such clauses. The concept of the best-efforts clause is analyzed from a legal perspective, including its function and theoretical background in comparative law. This study methodically reviews the best-efforts clause within the COVID-19 vaccine advance purchase contract between the EU and AstraZeneca in September 2020, and analyzes the European Union’s civil suit against AstraZeneca, filed in Belgium, for the delay in delivery of vaccines to the European Union. Consequently, this paper intends to present practical implications for the legal effects and duties of best-efforts clauses in the vaccine purchase agreements in the European Union v. AstraZeneca case.

‘By studying political parties we imply that the party is a meaningful unit of analysis. Yet we go above the party as a unit, for we also study the party system. By the same token we can go below the party as a unit and study, thereby, the party subunits.’1 This statement by Giovanni Sartori, while published in 1976, might well have been a beacon for budding stasiologists of the early 1960s — certainly for those with a particular interest in Latin America. Following upon such Western European—orientated classics as the works of Maurice Duverger, Sigmund Neumann and Alfred Diamant,2 there seemed genuine intellectual impetus to produce significant scholarship on the parties of what were then customarily termed either the developing or the ‘non—western’ polities. For Latin America, the time appeared ripe for conceptual progress. To be sure, there was justification in remarking that the study of parties in the region was relatively new, while ‘methodo—logical accomplishments have been primitive’.3 Yet this condition was presumably transitory.In the years to follow there were more serious exploratory efforts, and in time a modest number of case—studies began appearing.4 When the cyclical alternation of democratic and dictatorial regimes began to swing toward the latter by the early 1970s, however, scholarly interest dropped off. More generally, stasiological research went into decline.5 For students of Latin America, only the recent trend toward democratisation has stimulated a revival of interest in parties, campaigns and elections.6 Thus Lorenzo Meyer, for instance, described parties as institutions necessary ‘to channel the energies of social movements, labour unions, and other antiauthoritarian forces present at the beginning of the re—emergence of civil society’.7