Suchergebnisse

Classical criminology was mostly developed in the field of local penal law. Thus, protective and repressive measures taking part in these judicial systems are often limited to local aims. In this criminology, the State is protective, the care for victims is institutionalized. Moreover, the relation between criminology and penal qualification of the act against the victim as a crime is essential to access the status of victim. This entails an epistemological presupposition in victimology, science considered as a specialized field of criminology. Indeed, this presupposition makes the victim of serious violations of penal Law the prototype of victims of serious offenses. Furthermore, crime is not only a matter of individuals but also of structural possibilities, as is the case in criminal organizations. In the subject matter of organized criminality, the sides taking in concern in classical criminology are mostly related to economical delinquency. State or governmental army criminality is rarely explored by researchers. Previously, these topics seemed to be unreachable, but the nature of the recent armed conflicts, and the present evolution of International penal Law, entailed to the visibility of massive atrocities during wars. Today, criminology must face new fields of involvement, larger than these investigated in classical criminology. Presently, an international criminology is emerging, which is different and liberated from classical criminology. In this international criminology, a special kind of criminality is studied, due to its massiveness, its extent and is systematic nature. In addition, a strong war victimology is emerging as well, victimology tends thus to be an autonomous discipline. The challenge is now to turn crisis criminology and victimology into a strong scientific discipline.

IN HIS CRITIQUE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, WRITTEN IN 1939, E. H. CARR POINTED OUT THAT 'THE SCIENCE OF ECONOMICS PRESUPPOSES A GIVEN POLITICAL ORDER', BUT SUCH WAS THE DOMINATING INFLUENCE OF THE 'LIBERAL' SEPARATION OF POLITICS AND ECONOMICS WITH COLD WAR 'REALISM' (AND THE ASSOCIATED SEPARATION OF 'POLITICS' AND 'INTERNATIONAL POLITICS') THAT IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE LATE 1960S AND EARLY 1970S, WHEN THE 'GIVEN' INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ORDER OF THE 'BRETTON WOODS SYSTEM' WAS CRUMBLING. THAT INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS BEGAN TO CONSIDER THE FULL IMPLICATIONS OF THE LINKS BETWEEN ECONOMICS AND POLITICS AT THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL. THIS PAPER IS CONCERNED WITH THE EMERGENCE, DEVELOPMENT AND DEFINITION OF THE FIELD OF 'INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY' (IPE) FROM WITHIN A LARGELY 'LIBERAL' BASED ANGLO-SAXON TRADITION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS.

Der Autor wirft in seinem Beitrag einen Blick auf die Konzeption des internationalen Rechts bei Claude Lefort. Leforts Theorie des internationalen Rechts wendet sich sowohl gegen realistische oder staatszentrierte Ansätze in den Internationalen Beziehungen und in der politischen Theorie allgemein, wie dagegen, das Völkerrecht normativistisch oder "formalistisch" zu überhöhen oder zu verabsolutieren. Gegen beide Arten von Ansätzen wird der enge Konnex zwischen Staatenwelt und Völkerrecht unterstrichen und der politische Wert des Völkerrechts genau in dieser Konstellation gesehen, dass sie wechselseitig aufeinander verweisen. Der Beitrag zeichnet dies mit Blick auf staatszentrierte Theorien (2-4) und völkerrechtsverabsolutierende Modelle (5) nach, um abschließend kurz zu diskutieren, was für eine solche Betrachtung des Völkerrechts spricht. (ICA2)

Although multipolar, Global International Society has unipolar
(imperial) trends too. Even if it is dominated by several stakeholders, current international system is a strong "state system". Yet only a small number of states have structural power being able to influence the nature of international system.
Multidimensional system of power determines hierarchy and balance of power in Global International Society. International agendas are interdependent – military, economic and environmental agendas provide the premises to promote unipolar trends.

AbstractThis paper examines inter‐country inequality in indicators of human well‐being. It is primarily concerned with inequality in two gender‐related, composite indicators of development levels proposed: the Gender‐related Development Index (GDI) and the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM). A number of inequality indices are calculated using data for the period 1992 to 1998. A special interest of the paper is whether the GDI and GEM tell different stories with respect to inequality than the Human Development Index (HDI) and PPP GDP per capita. Results indicate that the answer to this question with respect to PPP GDP per capita is a qualified yes, being dependent on how this variable is measured. Other results indicate that the GEM and GDI exhibit slightly higher inequality than the HDI. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The overall topic of this thesis is the English School understanding of international order, which I approach specifically by analysing the English School idea of international institutions and their change. The purpose is to develop the theory in a meta-theoretically conscious and coherent way. The three essays in this volume are independent in relation to each other, yet in some ways cumulative. Essays I and II aim to address primarily the question of how to conceptualise the current international order of multilateralism and international organisations. Essay I uses the empirical issue of UN reform to formulate one English School conceptualisation of international order, building specifically on the School's central theme of international institutions. Essay II theoretically develops the tools of the English School for capturing how international institutions, according to English School theory the fundaments of international order, might change. Essay III approaches the meta-theoretical question of how change itself is understood in the English School, and how different theoretical readings of what we might mean by change give rise to different approaches to the normative question of what might be improvement in the international order. I argue that an internally coherent understanding of change in international society should emphasise change in institutions, made intelligible by ex-post narratives which contribute to establishing the discursive connection between practices and their normative legitimation, and guided by a sustained normative debate on the nature of improvement. This understanding of change signifies a much-needed addition to the English School toolbox, and brings a promise of a meta-theoretical grounding of the theory. In addition, it opens for similar theoretical inquiries into other IR theories.