Suchergebnisse

Європейський бізнес передбачає дослідження конкретних проблем міжнародного бізнесу на основі загальнонаукових та емпіричних методичних наукових прийомів, що дає розуміння особливостей організації та інструментів регулювання торгівлі та бізнесу в країнах Європи; вивчення та осмислення економічного потенціалу країн ЄС та України з метою виявлення об'єктивних і суб'єктивних умов організації спільних з європейським капіталом підприємств, багатонаціональних корпорацій. Сутністю європейського бізнесу є підприємництво, що здійснюється у міжнародній сфері. Студенти вчаться обґрунтовувати головні напрями забезпечення економічних, політичних, соціальних стосунків України, корпорацій, фінансових установ, бізнес-структур до інтеграції в європейську економіку, аналізувати інформацію про передумови інтеграційних процесів в Європі, інституційного оформлення економічних відносин України та ЄС, механізмів управління сучасною Європою та ін. European business involves studying specific problems of international business on the basis of general scientific and empirical methodological scientific techniques, which gives an understanding of the organization's specifics and instruments for regulating trade and business in European countries; study and comprehension of the economic potential of the EU and Ukraine in order to identify objective and subjective conditions for the organization of joint enterprises with European capital, multinational corporations. The essence of European business is entrepreneurship, which is carried out in the international sphere. Students learn to substantiate the main directions of ensuring economic, political, social relations of Ukraine, corporations, financial institutions, business structures before their integration into the European economy, to analyze information about the preconditions of integration processes in Europe, institutional formulation of economic relations between Ukraine and the EU, mechanisms of management of modern Europe and other

This article studies the political behavior of the first Peruvian parliamentary parties between the constitutional government of General Juan Antonio Pezet and the Dictatorship of General Mariano Ignacio Prado. I argue that the revolutionary option in 1865 and 1867 was conditioned by the way the government conducted its diplomatic conflict with Spain, in the first case, and by how the dictatorship made use of the political gains of the naval conflict of May 2 1866, in the second. That is to say, unlike other countries involved in the Spanish diplomatic question, international war conditioned the Peruvian political system. In particular, international war becomes an explanatory factor for the main parliamentary parties' coup intentions, having felt circumstantially excluded by the executive office. ; Este artículo estudia el comportamiento político de los primeros partidos parlamentarios del Perú entre el gobierno constitucional del general Juan Antonio Pezet y la dictadura del general Mariano Ignacio Prado. Se argumenta que la opción por la revolución en 1865 y 1867 estuvo condicionada por la forma en que el gobierno condujo el conflicto diplomático con España, en el primer caso, y en cómo la dictadura procesó los réditos políticos de la jornada naval del 2 de mayo de 1866, en el segundo caso. Es decir, a diferencia de otros países implicados en la cuestión española, la guerra internacional condicionó el sistema político peruano y es un factor explicativo de la actuación golpista de sus principales partidos parlamentarios al sentirse estos coyunturalmente excluidos por el poder ejecutivo.

Die amerikanisch-russischen Beziehungen haben nach wie vor zentrale Bedeutung für die europäische Sicherheitsordnung. Sie sind durch drei Spezifika geprägt: erstens durch eine Nukleargegnerschaft, die in der »strategischen Interdependenz« wechselseitiger Vernichtungsfähigkeit wurzelt; zweitens durch eine vergleichsweise geringe wirtschaftliche Verflechtung und drittens durch geopolitische Konkurrenz im postsowjetischen Raum. Die Besonderheiten der amerikanisch-russischen Beziehungen prägen auch den innenpolitisch-institutionellen Kontext von Washingtons Russland-Politik. Starke gesellschaftliche und wirtschaftliche Interessen an einer stabilen kooperativen Beziehung haben sich nicht herausbilden können. Vor allem im US-Kongress und dort insbesondere unter den Republikanern ist der Diskurs bedrohungsorientiert geblieben. Mittlerweile gilt ein wiedererstarkendes Russland zumindest aus Sicht der Militärplaner im Pentagon als potentieller Gegner in einer Zeit neu aufbrechender Großmachtkonflikte. Auf die russische Annexion der Krim und die anhaltende Ukraine-Krise hat die Obama-Administration auf eine Weise reagiert, die bei aller Entschiedenheit die Zusammenarbeit mit Moskau in globalen Fragen nicht gefährden sollte. Russland – Ähnliches gilt für China – beansprucht eine geopolitisch begründete Einflusssphäre. Dies läuft der liberalen Ordnungsvorstellung zuwider, die in den USA dominierend ist. Doch Washington wird mehr und mehr vor der Herausforderung stehen, entweder Einflusssphären zu akzeptieren – im Interesse globaler Kooperation und zur Vermeidung von Kriegsrisiken – oder aber Machtrivalitäten mit hohem Eskalationspotential voranzutreiben. (Autorenreferat)

'Nach der Beendigung der außenpolitischen Isolation Libyens im Jahr 2004 hoffte der Westen auf eine mittelfristige innenpolitische Öffnung des Landes. Das repressive Qaddafi-Regime hat sich jedoch als stabil und reformresistent erwiesen. Die außenpolitische Wende senkte die Gefahr eines von außen induzierten Regimewechsels und ermöglichte Qaddafi, die durch die Sanktionen angeschlagenen Verteilungskapazitäten des Rentiersystems wieder auszubauen. Allerdings wurden die politischen und soziökonomischen Strukturprobleme des Landes damit nicht gelöst, sondern lediglich aufgeschoben. Die Studie behandelt die multiplen Herausforderungen, mit denen das libysche Regime heute konfrontiert ist, und fragt nach den Lösungsansätzen und -kapazitäten. Dabei wird die Reformfähigkeit des Regimes analysiert, um auszuloten, mit welchem Libyen Europa mittelfristig rechnen muss. Libyens Probleme sind ohne grundlegende Reform der ineffektiven politischen Strukturen kaum zu lösen. Solange Qaddafi regiert, dürfte dies jedoch nicht geschehen, da das bestehende institutionelle und institutionalisierte Chaos seinem Machterhalt dient. Überdies behindern Machtkämpfe innerhalb der Elite eine kohärente Politik. Zu rechnen ist kurz- und mittelfristig mit einer Verstärkung dieser Kämpfe und mit erratischen Politikschritten, nicht aber mit einer größeren Destabilisierung - solange die Erdöleinnahmen nicht einbrechen. Mit Blick auf langfristige Reformen sollten europäische Entscheidungsträger möglichst viele Kommunikationskanäle in die libysche Verwaltung und das universitäre Milieu öffnen, um einer großen Zahl von Libyern Einblick in das Funktionieren eines demokratischen Staates zu geben sowie Vertrauen und eine gemeinsame Kommunikationsgrundlage zu schaffen - woran es aufgrund der jahrelangen Isolation und Indoktrination fehlt.' (Autorenreferat)

Following the 2007-2008 food crisis, improvements of world food governance was at the centre of international discussions, leaning towards a new Global Partnership for Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition. In this process, the issue of the management of various streams of knowledge appeared a central element to allow for better policy coordination, and led to the creation of the High Level Panel of Experts on food security and nutrition (HLPE). Here we describe the genesis and unveil the rationale underneath the creation of this expert process aiming at a better shared understanding of food insecurity of its causes and of potential remedies, and at helping policy-makers to look forward to emerging issues. Drawing lessons from other international expert processes at the interface between expertise and decision-making, we describe the internal rules of the expertise process, as well as the "boundary rules" that frame relations and exchanges between the expert body and decision makers, and show how critical the "fine-tuning" of those rules is not only for the expert process, but also, for the political negotiation platform itself. ; Suite à la crise alimentaire de 2007-2008, la réforme de la gouvernance alimentaire mondiale a été au centre des discussions internationales, orientées vers la création d'un partenariat mondial pour l'agriculture, la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition. Dans ces débats, la question de la confrontation des courants de connaissances a été identifiée comme élément déterminant pour permettre une meilleure coordination des politiques. Ceci a conduit à la création du Groupe d'experts de haut niveau sur la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition (HLPE). Nous décrivons ici la genèse et les sous-jacents de ce panel d'experts qui vise à une compréhension partagée de l'insécurité alimentaire, de ses causes et des remèdes possibles, et qui ambitionne d'aider les décideurs à anticiper les questions émergeantes. En tirant les leçons d'autres processus internationaux d'expertise à l'interface entre science et décision (GIEC, IAASTD), nous décrivons les règles internes du HLPE, ainsi que ses règles qui définissent son interface avec les organes de décision. Nous soulignons l'importance que revêtent ces règles, jusque dans leur détail, tant pour le processus d'expertise lui-même, que pour le bon fonctionnement de la plate-forme de négociation politique.

Following the 2007-2008 food crisis, improvements of world food governance was at the centre of international discussions, leaning towards a new Global Partnership for Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition. In this process, the issue of the management of various streams of knowledge appeared a central element to allow for better policy coordination, and led to the creation of the High Level Panel of Experts on food security and nutrition (HLPE). Here we describe the genesis and unveil the rationale underneath the creation of this expert process aiming at a better shared understanding of food insecurity of its causes and of potential remedies, and at helping policy-makers to look forward to emerging issues. Drawing lessons from other international expert processes at the interface between expertise and decision-making, we describe the internal rules of the expertise process, as well as the "boundary rules" that frame relations and exchanges between the expert body and decision makers, and show how critical the "fine-tuning" of those rules is not only for the expert process, but also, for the political negotiation platform itself. ; Suite à la crise alimentaire de 2007-2008, la réforme de la gouvernance alimentaire mondiale a été au centre des discussions internationales, orientées vers la création d'un partenariat mondial pour l'agriculture, la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition. Dans ces débats, la question de la confrontation des courants de connaissances a été identifiée comme élément déterminant pour permettre une meilleure coordination des politiques. Ceci a conduit à la création du Groupe d'experts de haut niveau sur la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition (HLPE). Nous décrivons ici la genèse et les sous-jacents de ce panel d'experts qui vise à une compréhension partagée de l'insécurité alimentaire, de ses causes et des remèdes possibles, et qui ambitionne d'aider les décideurs à anticiper les questions émergeantes. En tirant les leçons d'autres processus internationaux d'expertise à l'interface entre science et décision (GIEC, IAASTD), nous décrivons les règles internes du HLPE, ainsi que ses règles qui définissent son interface avec les organes de décision. Nous soulignons l'importance que revêtent ces règles, jusque dans leur détail, tant pour le processus d'expertise lui-même, que pour le bon fonctionnement de la plate-forme de négociation politique.

Following the 2007-2008 food crisis, improvements of world food governance was at the centre of international discussions, leaning towards a new Global Partnership for Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition. In this process, the issue of the management of various streams of knowledge appeared a central element to allow for better policy coordination, and led to the creation of the High Level Panel of Experts on food security and nutrition (HLPE). Here we describe the genesis and unveil the rationale underneath the creation of this expert process aiming at a better shared understanding of food insecurity of its causes and of potential remedies, and at helping policy-makers to look forward to emerging issues. Drawing lessons from other international expert processes at the interface between expertise and decision-making, we describe the internal rules of the expertise process, as well as the "boundary rules" that frame relations and exchanges between the expert body and decision makers, and show how critical the "fine-tuning" of those rules is not only for the expert process, but also, for the political negotiation platform itself. ; Suite à la crise alimentaire de 2007-2008, la réforme de la gouvernance alimentaire mondiale a été au centre des discussions internationales, orientées vers la création d'un partenariat mondial pour l'agriculture, la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition. Dans ces débats, la question de la confrontation des courants de connaissances a été identifiée comme élément déterminant pour permettre une meilleure coordination des politiques. Ceci a conduit à la création du Groupe d'experts de haut niveau sur la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition (HLPE). Nous décrivons ici la genèse et les sous-jacents de ce panel d'experts qui vise à une compréhension partagée de l'insécurité alimentaire, de ses causes et des remèdes possibles, et qui ambitionne d'aider les décideurs à anticiper les questions émergeantes. En tirant les leçons d'autres processus internationaux d'expertise à l'interface entre science et décision (GIEC, IAASTD), nous décrivons les règles internes du HLPE, ainsi que ses règles qui définissent son interface avec les organes de décision. Nous soulignons l'importance que revêtent ces règles, jusque dans leur détail, tant pour le processus d'expertise lui-même, que pour le bon fonctionnement de la plate-forme de négociation politique.

These RHEA-2014 proceedings, therefore, put together all of the papers presented and discussed at the conference. ; The availability of new technology — global positioning systems (GPS), geographic information systems (GIS), sensors, the automation of agricultural machinery, and high resolution image sensing — has made possible the precise management of agricultural farms. Consequently, the concept of Precision Agriculture has developed as a management strategy that uses information technology to collect and process data from multiple sources to facilitate decisions associated with crop production. The Seventh Framework Programme project RHEA "Robot Fleets for Highly Effective Agricultural and Forestry Management" (FP7-NMP N. 245986) has focused its activity on the design, development, and testing of a new generation of automatic and robotic systems for both chemical and physical –mechanical and thermal– effective weed management for agriculture and forestry, covering a large variety of European products, including agriculture wide row crops, close row crops and woody perennials. RHEA has aimed at diminishing the use of agricultural and forestry chemical inputs by improving crop quality and health and safety for humans and by reducing production costs by means of a sustainable crop management using a fleet of heterogeneous robots –ground and aerial– equipped with advanced perception systems, enhanced end-effectors and improved decision control algorithms. As a part of the project activities, the RHEA consortium has organized two international conferences to disseminate the project results as well as to obtain inputs from other interested researchers, engineers, students and practitioners. The First International Conference on Robotics and associated High-technologies and Equipment for Agriculture (RHEA-2012) was held in Pisa, Italy on September 19-21, 2012 and was devoted to the applications of automated systems and robotics for crop protection in sustainable precision agriculture. Now, we introduce the Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Robotics and associated High-technologies and Equipment for Agriculture and forestry (RHEA-2014), to be held in Madrid, Spain, on May 22-23, 2014, and are dedicated to new trends in mobile robotics, perception and actuation for both agriculture and forestry. This conference takes place after the final demonstration of the RHEA project devoted to present the experimental RHEA project results to the Precision Agriculture community. Therefore, the conference brings the attendees the opportunity to discuss the RHEA project outcomes and to compare them with results achieved recently by other colleagues. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 245986 ; Peer reviewed

The author of this thesis raised question if the insolvency of a State is the legitimate basis for suspension or repudiation on international financial obligations. Since there is no uniform way to deal with the issue, the attention is given to different practices and guidelines of court's reasoning. In order to answer the legal question, prove or neglect the hypothesis and fulfill goals descriptive, analytical and comparative methods are used. The paper consists of four major parts and proceeds in the following order. Part one provides general understanding of State as subject of international law, gives basic legal characteristics of Sovereign debt, introduces the legal definition of insolvent State and explores responsibility of the State in case of unilateral suspension or repudiation on external public debt. The second part explores the existing judicial regulation, defines the absence of international law containing a uniform or a codified insolvency law of states and outlines the main principles applicable to the dispute resolution between insolvent Sovereign State and its creditors. This section also analyzes the frequent practice of solvency crises resolutions and sifts through main judicial problems. It is concluded that current Sovereign crisis resolution violates the main fundamental principle of the rule of law: that one must not be judge in one's own cause. Author emphasizes that diversity among creditors creates uncertainty among all participants as to how the restructuring process will unfold and causes litigation problems. Absence of the order of priorities in creditor claims empowers insolvent Sovereign to choose the order of repayment among its creditors based not on justice but rather on its political imperatives or financing needs. Part three is dedicated to the analysis of circumstances precluding wrongfulness in case of unilaterally breaking the debt contract by refusing to pay or suspension of payments due to states inability to pay caused by state of insolvency. It is concluded in the paper that a Sovereign State has a right to repudiate or restructure if treaty provides such a possibility, or when debt contract was illegitimate, or creditor gave its consent to non-fulfillment of obligation. Finally author draws the conclusion that insolvency can be legitimate basis to repudiate or suspend fulfillment of State obligation, but only under limited circumstances - when the fulfillment of financial obligation infringes the basic needs of the people of insolvent debtor state and violates their human rights. The last part represents proposals for Sovereign crises resolution. Author analyses the benefits as well as limitations the foremost suggestions for Sovereign insolvency regulation, and makes the comparison of them.

The author of this thesis raised question if the insolvency of a State is the legitimate basis for suspension or repudiation on international financial obligations. Since there is no uniform way to deal with the issue, the attention is given to different practices and guidelines of court's reasoning. In order to answer the legal question, prove or neglect the hypothesis and fulfill goals descriptive, analytical and comparative methods are used. The paper consists of four major parts and proceeds in the following order. Part one provides general understanding of State as subject of international law, gives basic legal characteristics of Sovereign debt, introduces the legal definition of insolvent State and explores responsibility of the State in case of unilateral suspension or repudiation on external public debt. The second part explores the existing judicial regulation, defines the absence of international law containing a uniform or a codified insolvency law of states and outlines the main principles applicable to the dispute resolution between insolvent Sovereign State and its creditors. This section also analyzes the frequent practice of solvency crises resolutions and sifts through main judicial problems. It is concluded that current Sovereign crisis resolution violates the main fundamental principle of the rule of law: that one must not be judge in one's own cause. Author emphasizes that diversity among creditors creates uncertainty among all participants as to how the restructuring process will unfold and causes litigation problems. Absence of the order of priorities in creditor claims empowers insolvent Sovereign to choose the order of repayment among its creditors based not on justice but rather on its political imperatives or financing needs. Part three is dedicated to the analysis of circumstances precluding wrongfulness in case of unilaterally breaking the debt contract by refusing to pay or suspension of payments due to states inability to pay caused by state of insolvency. It is concluded in the paper that a Sovereign State has a right to repudiate or restructure if treaty provides such a possibility, or when debt contract was illegitimate, or creditor gave its consent to non-fulfillment of obligation. Finally author draws the conclusion that insolvency can be legitimate basis to repudiate or suspend fulfillment of State obligation, but only under limited circumstances - when the fulfillment of financial obligation infringes the basic needs of the people of insolvent debtor state and violates their human rights. The last part represents proposals for Sovereign crises resolution. Author analyses the benefits as well as limitations the foremost suggestions for Sovereign insolvency regulation, and makes the comparison of them.

The author of this thesis raised question if the insolvency of a State is the legitimate basis for suspension or repudiation on international financial obligations. Since there is no uniform way to deal with the issue, the attention is given to different practices and guidelines of court's reasoning. In order to answer the legal question, prove or neglect the hypothesis and fulfill goals descriptive, analytical and comparative methods are used. The paper consists of four major parts and proceeds in the following order. Part one provides general understanding of State as subject of international law, gives basic legal characteristics of Sovereign debt, introduces the legal definition of insolvent State and explores responsibility of the State in case of unilateral suspension or repudiation on external public debt. The second part explores the existing judicial regulation, defines the absence of international law containing a uniform or a codified insolvency law of states and outlines the main principles applicable to the dispute resolution between insolvent Sovereign State and its creditors. This section also analyzes the frequent practice of solvency crises resolutions and sifts through main judicial problems. It is concluded that current Sovereign crisis resolution violates the main fundamental principle of the rule of law: that one must not be judge in one's own cause. Author emphasizes that diversity among creditors creates uncertainty among all participants as to how the restructuring process will unfold and causes litigation problems. Absence of the order of priorities in creditor claims empowers insolvent Sovereign to choose the order of repayment among its creditors based not on justice but rather on its political imperatives or financing needs. Part three is dedicated to the analysis of circumstances precluding wrongfulness in case of unilaterally breaking the debt contract by refusing to pay or suspension of payments due to states inability to pay caused by state of insolvency. It is concluded in the paper that a Sovereign State has a right to repudiate or restructure if treaty provides such a possibility, or when debt contract was illegitimate, or creditor gave its consent to non-fulfillment of obligation. Finally author draws the conclusion that insolvency can be legitimate basis to repudiate or suspend fulfillment of State obligation, but only under limited circumstances - when the fulfillment of financial obligation infringes the basic needs of the people of insolvent debtor state and violates their human rights. The last part represents proposals for Sovereign crises resolution. Author analyses the benefits as well as limitations the foremost suggestions for Sovereign insolvency regulation, and makes the comparison of them.

Following a proposal submitted by the Argentine Socialist Party, the Amsterdam (1904) and Stuttgart (1907) congresses of the Second International discussed the question of international migrations. The Argentine draft resolution sparked an international debate that went far beyond the local concerns that had originated the initial proposal. The 'migration question' proved to be a core concern that threaded together very important political problems for the International, for which socialist parties of different countries had divergent solutions, because the situations and contexts they faced at the local level were very different. As was the case with debates on militarism and colonialism, the migration question showed that, behind the principled positions and a practice of internationalist sociability, the Second International showed tensions that divided national parties. Drawing upon extensive secondary bibliography, socialist newspapers from different countries and archival materials of the Second International, this article presents some first conclusions on this important aspect of the international history of socialism, little explored in Spanish. It does so by reviewing the debates of the Amsterdam and, above all, the Stuttgart congresses, but also contextualizing them with the situation and the approaches of different national parties.