Suchergebnisse

THIS ARTICLE EXAMINES THE CONCEPTS OF DEMOCRACY AND LEGITIMACY IN THE CONTEXT OF POST-SOVIET CENTRAL ASIA. ITS FIRST ARGUMENT IS THAT DEMOCRATIZATION PROJECTS HAVE SURVIVED HARD TIMES IN FIVE CENTRAL ASIA COUNTRIES DESPITE THE FAILURE OF THE INSTITUTIONAL EXPRESSION OF DEMOCRACY TO INCORPORATE THE VALUES AND STRUCTURES OF THESE SOCIETIES. THE SECOND ARGUMENT IS THAT THE CURRENT SOURCES OF LEGITIMACY STEM FROM THE FACT THAT THE REGIMES MANAGED TO COPE WITH THE INITIAL CHALLENGES OF POST-COMMUNIST TRANSITION WITH RELATIVE SUCCESS AND LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW STATES.

Although postcommunist countries share a common past, the variability of outcomes in both democracy and economic reform is very large in the region. Only a few countries have become Western-type democracies in Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltic. By contrast, the norm is clearly not democracy for other Soviet successor states. In this article, the author attributes this variation to differences in the infrastructural capacity of the state. Using both quantitative and qualitative analyses within 26 postcommunist countries, the author argues that for democracy to flourish, the state must first possess the necessary means to maintain law and order and to protect the rights of citizens, in other words, to ensure the maintenance and delivery of essential public goods. The results show that the links between a strong state that has been able to apply a definitive set of rules and democratic institutions are clear. (author's abstract)

Although postcommunist countries share a common past, the variability of outcomes in both democracy and economic reform is very large in the region. Only a few countries have become Western-type democracies in Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltic. By contrast, the norm is clearly not democracy for other Soviet successor states. In this article, the author attributes this variation to differences in the infrastructural capacity of the state. Using both quantitative and qualitative analyses within 26 postcommunist countries, the author argues that for democracy to flourish, the state must first possess the necessary means to maintain law and order and to protect the rights of citizens, in other words, to ensure the maintenance and delivery of essential public goods. The results show that the links between a strong state that has been able to apply a definitive set of rules and democratic institutions are clear.

The Construction and Demolition Wastes (C&DW) are estimated at one third of total wastes generated in the European Union and represent the main flux in volume. Inert materials (e.g. concrete, bricks, tiles and ceramics) constitute the largest fraction of construction and demolition wastes. These wastes can be recovered as secondary raw materials after a recycling process resulting in the production of recycled sands and aggregates. The market for recycled sands and aggregates is however complex and sensitive. It can be affected by many parameters and may be very variable from one region to another, even in the same country. A quantitative analysis of market is carried out in five North West European countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. For achieving this analysis, attention is paid to the following data/parameters: generation of inert construction and demolition wastes, production of recycled sands and aggregates and production of natural sands and aggregates. Since the market of recycled products is also governed by transportation costs (mainly transported by road), the study has also compiled data on the density of recycling plants for construction and demolition wastes, the density of pits and quarries extracting natural materials, the density of inert landfills and taxes applied for C&DW landfilling. National/regional legislation and requirements are also included in the analysis. Based on the compiled data and objective reasons, it is observed that the market of recycled sands and aggregates is more developed and more suitable in the Netherlands and in Flanders (North of Belgium) than is the other investigated countries/regions. ; Peer reviewed

Since the 1970s, two major trends have emerged among developing countries: the rise of new democracies and the rush to free trade. For some, the confluence of these events suggests that a free-market economy complements a fledgling democracy. Others argue that the two are inherently incompatible and that exposure to economic globalization actually jeopardizes new democracies. Which view is correct? Bumba Mukherjee argues that the reality of how democracy and trade policy unravel in developing countries is more nuanced than either account. Mukherjee offers the first comprehensive cross-national framework for identifying the specific economic conditions that influence trade policy in developing countries. Laying out the causes of variation in trade policy in four developing or recently developed countries--Brazil, India, Indonesia, and South Africa--he argues persuasively that changing political interactions among parties, party leaders, and the labor market are often key to trade policy outcome. For instance, if workers are in a position to benefit from opening up to trade, party leaders in turn support trade reforms by decreasing tariffs and other trade barriers. At a time when discussions about the stability of new democracies are at the forefront, Democracy and Trade Policy in Developing Countries provides invaluable insight into the conditions needed for a democracy to survive in the developing world in the context of globalization.