Literatura académica sobre el tema "Jews in Czech-Slovakia"

Purpose: to analyze a set of documents stored in the funds of the State Archives of Kherson region – cases of repressed refugees from Poland and Czechoslovakia in 1938-1941. Based on historiographical and source studies on this topic, to outline the general grounds for arrest and persecution of refugees by Soviet authorities and to find out why Jews – former citizens of Poland and Czechoslovakia – found themselves in the focus of repression. Research methodology. The main research methods were general and special-historical, as well as methods of archival heuristics and scientific criticism of sources. Scientific novelty. Previously unpublished documents are introduced into scientific circulation: cases of repressed refugees from Poland and Czechoslovakia, analysis of the Soviet government's policy towards Jews who tried to escape from the Nazis in the USSR and the Union Republics in southern Ukraine, including Kherson. The forms of repression applied by the NKVD to refugee Jews are analyzed, and the consequences of such a policy for the German government's policy of genocide in the occupied territories are examined. Conclusions. The study found that the formal reason for the persecution of Jewish refugees was the illegal crossing of the border with the USSR, since the Soviet Union, like many countries in the world, refused to accept Jews fleeing the Nazi persecution. The Soviet government motivated this by the fact that refugee Jews spread mood of defeat and panic, spied for Germany, Britain, and Poland, had anti-Soviet views, and conducted anti-Soviet campaigning. As a result of the arrests and deportations of Jewish refugees, the Jewish population, particularly in southern Ukraine, was unaware of the persecution of Jews in lands occupied by Nazi Germany. In fact, the Jewish refugees sent to the concentration camps, along with the Germans of Ukraine and the Volga region, were the only groups of people thus "evacuated" by the Soviet authorities on ethnic grounds. However, due to the enemy's rapid offensive, refugees who did not fall into the hands of the NKVD shared the tragic fate of Ukrainian Jews during the Holocaust.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to focus on earnings inequality within dual-earner couples in four Central-East European (CEE) countries: the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. It aims to analyse the factors that influence earnings distribution within couples. Design/methodology/approach – The analysis uses OLS regression applied on the Statistics on Income and Living Conditions 2011 survey to reveal the various influence of relevant factors, especially relative education and the presence of children, on relative earnings. Findings – Women, on average, contribute less to a couple’s income than men. While considerably higher in the Czech Republic and Slovakia, such disparity is relatively low in Hungary and Poland. These countries have the highest share of dual-earner couples where the woman outearns her partner. The factor that substantially reduces the within-couple earnings inequality in all the analysed countries is a higher relative education of women. On the contrary, the presence of children, especially those of younger age, increases this disparity in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Originality/value – The research on within-couple earning inequality in CEE countries lags behind the relatively rich evidence from western Europe. This is the first study which systematically describes the situation in CEE countries from a comparative perspective.

Dear Readers, As we begin a new year full of potential and opportunity, we wish each of you much joy and success. As we embark on this journey, we al-so celebrate a significant milestone – the fifteenth anniversary of the European Journal of Geography. Over the past decade and a half, our journal has become a beacon of excellence in the field of geography and the social sciences. This journey has been characterised by unwavering commitment and tireless dedication, a collective endeavour led by the dedicated members of our editorial team and the European Association of Geographers (EUROGEO). Their diligence and passion have been instrumental in making our journal the respected publication it is today. Looking back on our shared history, we are proud to have published over 310 articles dealing with key topics in geography, planning and development. These scholarly contributions have not only explored and analysed important topics, but have also introduced new ideas (Kout-sopoulos, 2022; Manetos et al., 2022), methods (Cramer-Greenbaum, 2023; Krevs et al., 2023; Morawski & Wolff-Seidel, 2023) and data (Hojati & Mokarram, 2016) that will inspire future generations of geographers to transcend conventional disciplinary boundaries. The richness of our content encompasses numerous facets and includes the fields of geography education (Fraile-Jurado & Periáñez-Cuevas, 2023; Humble, 2023; Martínez-Hernández et al., 2023; Mašterová, 2023; Puertas-Aguilar et al., 2023), physical geography (Sánchez-Martínez & Cabrera, 2015), sustainability (Leininger-Frézal et al., 2023; Mally, 2021), tourism (Bandt et al., 2022; Jovanovic et al., 2022), geoin-formatics (Batsaris et al., 2023; Vestena et al., 2023), spatial analysis (Agourogiannis et al., 2021; Bartzokas-Tsiompras & Photis, 2020b; Wieland, 2022), remote sensing (Younes et al., 2023), maps (Nedkov et al., 2018; Papaioannou et al., 2020), geoinformation (Bartha & Kocsis, 2011; Bart-zokas-Tsiompras, 2022), economic (Doukissas et al., 2020; Mikhaylova, 2018), social (Mei & Liempt, 2022; Roșu et al., 2015), political (Kevicky, 2023; Tsitsaraki & Petracou, 2023) and cultural (Gusman & Otero-Varela, 2023) geography, geopolitics (Morgado, 2023) as well as environmental (Burić et al., 2023; Prodanova & Varadzhakova, 2022), urban (Chondrogianni & Stephanedes, 2021; Lagarias et al., 2022) and transport (Garrido, 2013; Kellerman, 2023; Koktavá & Horák, 2023) geography/planning (González, 2017). Each article, a testament to the diversity and depth of knowledge within our community, has played a crucial role in energising discourse in our academic environment. Several EJG articles addressed current global crises and challenges such as climate change, COVID-19, wars and economic recession. They show how important geography is when it comes to finding solutions and new insights to the many problems that threaten our world. This interconnected approach underlines the journal's commitment to engaging with both the specialised academic discourse and the broader global challenges of our time. Authors, editors, board members, reviewers and readers are the lifeblood of this academic platform, and we recognise and appreciate your invaluable role in the success of the European Journal of Geography. Your commitment has fuelled our growth and you are an essential part of our legacy. We take our fifteenth anniversary as an opportunity to invite and encourage you to contribute to the continued success of the journal by submitting new and original geographical research articles. Here's to another year of scholarly work, meaningful collaborations and the continued advancement of geographical knowledge. We would also like to take a moment to recognise the incredible efforts of 95 professors and researchers who served as reviewers for the European Journal of Geography in 2023. Their expertise and dedication have been invaluable in maintaining the quality of our publications. In addition, the journal features 18 distinguished editorial board members from 12 countries, including renowned experts (60% men, 40% women) from various geographical research fields (This year we welcome 10 esteemed new members to our Editorial Board). In particular, we would like to express our sincere thanks to the following editorial board members for their help and support: 1. Alvanides Seraphim, Northumbria University, UK 2. ‪Bednarz W. Sarah, Texas A&M University, USA‬‬ 3. Capello Roberta, Politecnico di Milano, Italy 4. Cretan Remus, West University of Timisoara, Romania 5. De Miguel Gonzalez Rafael, University of Zaragoza, Spain 6. Eeva-Kaisa Prokkola, University of Oulu, Finland 7. Jerry T. Mitchell, University of South Carolina, USA 8. Kavroudakis Dimitris, University of the Aegean, Greece 9. Kiss Éva, CSFK Geographical Institute, Hungary 10. Knecht Petr, Masaryk University, Czech Republic 11. Kounadi Ourania, University of Vienna, Austria 12. Kolvoord Bob, James Madison University, USA 13. Leininger-Frezal Caroline, Université de Paris, France 14. Margaritis Efstathios, University of Southampton, UK 15. Specht Doug, University of Westminster, UK 16. Strobl Josef, University of Salzburg, Austria 17. Theobald Rebecca, University of Colorado Colorado Springs, USA 18. Yilmaz Ari, Bandirma Onyedi Eylul University, Turkey In 2023, we received a total of 116 submissions. Of these, 24 outstanding papers were published online (acceptance rate 21% - 2023), while 92, although commendable, did not make it to publication. Remarkably, these submissions included the contributions of 63 authors from 20 countries. The average review speed of the articles is about 7-9 weeks for the first round and about 4-6 weeks for the second round. The reviewers came from 31 countries, which shows a global co-operation: UK, USA, Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Ireland, Spain, Netherlands, Japan, Hungary, Iceland, Croatia, Czech Republic, Finland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Turkey, Romania and others. Thank you for your continued support and your contributions to this journal. Look forward to an exciting journey of discovery and innova-tion in the pages of the European Journal of Geography. Join us as we continue to shape the ever-evolving canvas of geographical exploration and knowledge. List of Reviewers 2023: 1. Alessandro Del Ponte, University of Alabama, USA 2. Ali Enes Dingil, Czech Technical University in Prague, Czech Repuplic 3. Alvanides Seraphim, Northumbria University, UK 4. András J. Molnár, Christian-Albrecht University of Kiel, Germany 5. Anja du Plessis, University of South Africa, Johannesburg, South Africa 6. Anqi Huang, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, China 7. Apostolia Galani, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece 8. Ari Yilmaz, Bandirma Onyedi Eylül Üniversitesi, Turkey 9. Audur Palsdottir , University of Iceland, Iceland 10. Barbara Szejgiec-Kolenda, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland 11. Beth Schlemper, The University of Toledo, USA 12. Blaž Repe, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia 13. Bob Kolvoord, James Madison University, USA 14. Carina Peter, Philipps-University Marburg, Germany 15. Carlos Lopez Escolano, University of Zaragoza, Spain 16. Caroline Leininger, Université de Paris, France 17. Charalampos Tsavdaroglou, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands 18. Christian Weismayer, Modul University Vienna GmbH, Austria 19. Darra Athanasia, National Technical University of Athens, Greece 20. Denise Blanchard, Texas State University, USA 21. Dimitris Kavroudakis, University of the Aegea, Greece 22. Don MacKeen, City of Glasgow College, UK 23. Doug Specht, University of Westminster, UK 24. Dragan Burić, University of Montenegro, Montenegro 25. Eeva-Kaisa Prokkola , University of Oulu, Finland 26. Efstathios Margaritis, University of Southampton, UK 27. Emmanuel Eze, University of Nigeria, Nigeria 28. Eva Psatha, University of Thessaly, Greece 29. Evangelos Rasvanis, University of Thessaly, Greece 30. Femke van Esch, Utrecht University, The Netherlands 31. František Petrovič, Constantine the Philosopher University, Slovakia 32. George Revill, The Open University, UK 33. Géza Tóth, University of Miskolc, Hungary 34. Grayson R. Morgan, University of South Carolina, USA 35. Hristina Prodanova, National Institute of Geophysics, Geodesy and Geography - Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Bulgaria 36. Huda Jamal Jumaah, Northern Technical University, Iraq 37. İlkay Südas, Ege University, Turkey 38. Ilse van liempt, Utrecht University, The Netherlands 39. Isabel María Gómez-Trigueros, University of Alicante, Spain 40. Italo Sousa de Sena, University College Dublin, Ireland 41. Iva Miranda Pires, NOVA University Lisbon, Portugal 42. Iwona Anna Jażdżewska, University of Lodz, Poland 43. Jaime Diaz Pacheco, Universidad de La Laguna, Spain 44. Jan Christoph Schubert, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany 45. Jens Dangschat , TU Wien, Austria 46. Jernej Zupančič, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia 47. Jerry T. Mitchell, University of South Carolina, USA 48. Joan Rossello, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Spain 49. Joseph J. Kerski, ESRI, USA 50. Karina Standal, CICERO Center for International Climate Research, Oslo, Norway 51. Karl Donert, EUROGEO, Belgium 52. Koshiro Suzuki , University of Toyama, Japan 53. Kristine Juul, University of Roskilde , Denmark 54. Lauren Hammond, University College London, UK 55. Mahmood Shoorcheh, University of Isfahan, Iran 56. Maria Angeles Rodriguez-Domenech, Universidad Castilla La Mancha, Spain 57. María Lois , Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain 58. María-Luisa de Lázaro-Torres , Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Spain 59. Marko Krevs, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia 60. Marta Gallardo, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Spain 61. Md Galal Uddin, University of Galway, Ireland 62. Md. Kausar Alam, Brac University, Bangladesh 63. Michaela Spurná, Masaryk University, Czech Repuplic 64. Miha Pavšek, Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Slovenia 65. Muhammad Haroon Stanikzai , Kandahar University, Afghanistan 66. Neli Heidari, University of Hamburg, Germany 67. Nicholas Wise, Arizona State University, USA 68. Nikola Šimunić, Institute of Social Sciences Ivo Pilar, Croatia 69. Nikolaos Karachalis , University of the Aegean, Greece 70. Nuno Morgado, Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary 71. Pablo Fraile-Jurado, Universidad de Sevilla, Spain 72. Panagiotis G. Tzouras, National Technical University of Athens, Greece 73. Peter T. Dunn, University of Washington, USA 74. Petr Knecht, Masaryk University, Czech Repuplic 75. Polyxeni Kechagia, University of Thessaly, Greece 76. Qi Zhou, China University of Geosciences, China 77. Rafael de Miguel González, University of Zaragoza, Spain 78. Rebecca Theobald, University of Colorado, USA 79. Remus Cretan, West University of Timisoara, Romania 80. Roberto Falanga, University of Lisbon, Institute of Social Sciences, Portugal 81. Saheed Adekunle Raji, University of Lagos, Nigeria 82. Sandra Sprenger, University of Hamburg, Germany 83. Sarah Bednarz, Texas A&M University, USA 84. Sebastien Bourdin, EM Normandie Bussiness School, France 85. Serafin Pazos-Vidal , European Association for Innovation in Local Development, Belgium 86. Susannah Cramer-Greenbaum, University of Warwick, UK, UK 87. Teemu Makkonen, University of Eastern Finland, Finland 88. Teresa Sadoń-Osowiecka, University of Gdansk, Poland 89. Theano S. Terkenli , University of the Aegean, Greece 90. Theodore Metaxas , University of Thessaly, Greece 91. Uwe Krause, Fontys School of the Arts, The Netherlands 92. Valériane Mistiaen , Université libre de Bruxelles, Belgium 93. Vesna Skrbinjek, International School for Social and Business Studies, Slovenia 94. Vincent Nzabarinda, Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China 95. Zsolt Tibor Kosztyán, University of Pannonia, Hungary

PurposeThis article investigates the validity of the different types (conditional, unconditional, deterministic, stochastic) of ß-convergence in per capita GDP for EU-28 and EU-19 between 1990 and 2019.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses nonstationary heterogeneous panel-data methodology.FindingsThe panel data reveal that both conditional and unconditional ß-convergence are valid in EU-28 countries However, only conditional convergence exists in EU-19 countries; group-specific findings show that the income levels of 10-EU countries converge toward the EU-19 average and 11-EU countries converge to the EU-28. The convergence speed to EU average varies between 15 and 18%. The robustness of the augmented mean group (AMG) findings are checked with common correlated effects mean group (CCEMG) and are consistent. Moreover, panel unit root tests are applied to examine the stochastic and deterministic convergence of the average EU per capita income in the two groups of EU economies. The findings show no evidence of deterministic or stochastic convergence in EU countries. Besides, conditional convergence has not been experienced in countries such as Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Malta, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, which are new members of the EU. As a remarkable aspect of the study, the evidence suggests that the Brexit is economically rational for the UK.Originality/valueThe growth and convergence processes of economies differ from each other. Convergence studies in the literature are generally based on the cross-section OLS methodology. In this context, the study is one of the rare studies to examine convergence using heterogeneous panel techniques and allows the convergence of countries to the EU average to be analyzed individually.

I wrote this book because I am a Central European, and in spite of its severe faults I love Central Europe. To be precise, I am a Central European, but not quite. I was born in Prague, by coincidence. I am not quite a Czech, though I do hold a Czech passport (as well as Canadian). My parents survived the Holocaust in Budapest, using false names and forged documents to convince police and collaborators that they were not Jewish. Neither my father nor my mother was quite a Hungarian. He was born in Slovakia, where Jews were not considered quite Slovak. She was a Budapest girl, but her father came from some place in the Habsburg province of Galicia that no one remembers. The family called it Poland, though today it may well be Ukraine. Although my grandfather was not quite Polish, his origins caused problems for my mother’s folks. They suffered discrimination by Hungarians, including Budapest Jews. The ‘modern’ Jews there had contempt for the ‘Eastern Jews’, as they called the Orthodox Jews from the eastern regions of the Habsburg Empire. They would have been surprised to hear, in what I say in this book is postwar terminology, that they themselves were ‘Eastern European’. My father, who had studied medicine in Bratislava before being expelled as a Jew, married my mother when the war was over, and they moved to continue his studies in Prague.