AbstractDigitalization, genome editing and synthetic biology are presently leading to fundamental changes in the field of biotechnology. At the same time, international regulatory institutions have largely failed to adapt to those changes. This text evaluates the role of interests, knowledge and institutional factors for explaining nonadaptation, or 'institutional drift'. Focusing on the domains of biosafety, biosecurity and genetic resources, the analysis highlights the explanatory power of knowledge and, to a lesser extent, interests, with institutional factors playing only a minor role. With global governance having to cope with profound changes in various technological fields, the text thus shows the broader importance of understanding the conditions under which international institutions do, or do not, adapt.
Negotiation is a central activity in international affairs, but it tends to be studied indirectly through particular cases. Considering it as a subject in itself brings out some important principles. The general literature on negotiation falls into five categories: advice from practitioners, studies of particular cases or contexts, statistical tests of data, psychological theories with experiments, and game theory models. Each approach complements the others, but there has been too little interaction among them. Game models, in particular, are important for the international context, which involves more planning and more experienced actors. They resist the generalizations to which other approaches are prone, often showing that whether a move is well-advised or mistaken depends on some easy-to-overlook detail.
This article begins by discussing why there was a period of relative peace in the conflictprone international system following the Second World War. It then asks why events have proceeded so disastrously in Yugoslavia since the end of the Cold War. It is argued that Sir Geoffrey Vickers's views on conflict processes and their management, in particular his stress on the stabilizing forces of trust and bonds of membership, can help us understand what has gone wrong in Yugoslavia. The final section returns to the question of the state of the international system in the current transitional period, and it is suggested that the building of a sense of solidarity vital for coping with our massive global problems could be enhanced by a wider understanding of Vickers's views.
Understanding the world and Humanity changes due the Globalization phenomenon allows to identify the special conditions created that promote the implementation and the dissemination of the International Organized Criminality, in short time, affecting the International Community in all dimensions. As one of the most serious threats to the Rule of Law, violating the national legal systems and the International Law, being especially dangerous to the states and human lives in a global context. The International, regional and (most of) national juridical and judicial systems recognize the International Organized Criminality as a emergent problem that needs to be in the top of the political agenda and of the action by the Institutions aiming to prevent and fight their evolution, their dangerous damages and consequences to all their target – human and institutional. Although all difficult but effective legal, political, economic, and social work in this fight, mainly by the United Nations in cooperation with International Organizations and States, the Council of Europe (CoE) assumed their responsibility to protect their State Members, their citizens, and the rest of the world by inherence. There is an enormous political and legal work, with a straight position based on their main structure document, the European Convention on Human Rights, but with the specialized work teams, understanded as need in each case. Consequently, the CoE has a continuous production of legislation and management of procedures and activities, as well as International political and governance diplomatic relations in networks, in compliance with the International Law facing the challenge that context obliges permanently. Since 1959, with the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, the strategic action promoted is the multidimensional International Cooperation between all "actors" in the International Community, preventing the violation of the International Law, generated conditions to apply the International Penal Law and developing policymaking articulated with the real contexts and needs. Within International Community, the Cooperation is the best key to join procedures to transcend the difficulties and constraints to achieve to the prevention and fight against the International Organized Criminality. This scientific research is being developed based on juridical, criminal, and political methodology, mainly qualitative, but presenting statistic data to demonstrate the results discussed. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
The emergence of new states and independence movements after the Cold War has intensified the long-standing disagreement among international lawyers over the right of self-determination, especially the right of secession. Knop shifts the discussion from the articulation of the right to its interpretation. She argues that the practice of interpretation involves and illuminates a problem of diversity raised by the exclusion of many of the groups that self-determination most affects. Distinguishing different types of exclusion and the relationships between them reveals the deep structures, biases and stakes in the decisions and scholarship on self-determination. Knop's analysis also reveals that the leading cases have grappled with these embedded inequalities. Challenges by colonies, ethnic nations, indigenous peoples, women and others to the gender and cultural biases of international law emerge as integral to the interpretation of self-determination historically, as do attempts by judges and other institutional interpreters to meet these challenges
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
A protracted conventional knowledge within mainstream International Relations (IR) has been that African agents (states, organizations, and diplomats) are consumers of international norms and practices designed in the affluent countries of the Global North. Papers in this special issue present a challenge to this view; they discuss the active role and the influence of African actors in international politics and renew a call for the development of IR theories, concepts, and methods that reflect Global Southern and African experiences, ideas, institutions, actors and processes.
