Turkey first applied for EU membership in 1987 and started negotiations for full membership in October 2005 after lengthy and challenging negotiations between EU member states. This master's thesis attempts to examine the relationship between the negotiations for EU membership that are going on between Turkey and the EU Commission and the public discussion on the subject. The research material consists of selected posts on the Financial Times discussion forum and the Acquis communautaire and Copenhagen criteria. By comparing the research material this thesis attempts to investigate if the public deliberation and official negotiations focus on the same issues and requirements for membership. The theoretical background for this analysis is deliberative democracy, according to which public debate should be a prerequisite for agenda setting and decision making. The findings of the thesis reveal that the public discussion does touch on the acquis communautaire and Copenhagen criteria to some degree, but the public is also concerned with non-acquis issues such as the culture and history. A unique feature of the accession negotiations is also the amount of commentary from heads of state regarding the negotiations, which was also noted in the research material. In the light of deliberative democratic theory it can be noted that the public may take part in the discussion over Turkey's membership, but it has little or no chances of setting the agenda for the negotiations.
This work, prepared and published during the author's stay at the RSCAS, EUI, is a "compilation thesis" (in Finnish "artikkeliväitöskirja"), Department of Political Sciences, University of Helsinki, and contains the major part of the author's PhD thesis (forthcoming print monograph, 2012). ; The future is uncertain, and the financial system of the European Union has to take into account this uncertainty. This book looks at the different means it has at its disposal to do so, and analyses how these means have evolved since the creation of the general budget of the European Communities in 1968. The analysis is extended to a broader study of the development of the European Union through several case studies: negotiations on the Financial Regulation of 25 June 2002,on its first modifi cation, adopted on 13 December 2006, and on the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA) of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound fi nancial management and on the Multiannual Financial Framework for 2007-2013. The question of the uncertainty of the future is addressed using the so-called "Theory of Budgetary Flexibility". This theory, developed originally to analyse national budgetary systems, establishes an essential distinction between External Flexibility and Internal Flexibility, on the one hand, and Annual Flexibility and Multiannual Flexibility on the other hand. It is particularly useful here as it enables us to examine under a common framework processes that are often considered separate (and treated in the literature as such), and to draw conclusions at systems' level. The book is divided into three Parts: - Part One (Chapters 1 to 3), which forms the theoretical part of this book, includes an analysis of the specificities and of the functioning of the budgetary and financial systems of the European Union, while presenting an "état des lieux" of studies carried out in these fields; - Part Two (Chapters 4 to 13) deals with changes that have been made to various forms of flexibility since 1968. Special attention is paid not only to the consequences these changes have had for the various actors involved – namely the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and Member States – but also for the financial system of the European Union as a whole; - Part Three (Chapters 14 to 18) addresses the question of how the changes examined in Part Two affect the general development of the European Union.
Euroopan komissio luotiin jotta se voisi ajaa yhteisöjen intressiä. Sen vuoksi siitä päätettiin tehdä itsenäinen. Mutta koska Euroopan Unionin vaikutus jäsenmaissaan on hyvin vahvaa, myös talouden kannalta, haluavat jäsenmaat vaikuttaa komissioon mahdollisimman paljon. Tämän vuoksi komission itsenäisyys vaarantuu. Perustamissopimukset koettavat hoitaa ongelman luomalla komissiolle joita-kin suojamekanismeja. Mutta ovatko ne riittäviä? Vaikuttaa siltä, että komissioon pystytään vaikuttamaan liikaa sen jokapäiväisessä työssä. Tämä vaikuttaminen alkaa jo komission nimittämisvaiheessa ja jatkuu koko ajan komission pohtiessa uuden lainsäädännön tarvetta ja komission valmistellessa uutta lainsäädäntöä. Komission lakiehdotelman sisältöön vaikuttavat usein paljonkin muut instituutiot, jäsenvaltiot sekä intressiryhmät. Tämä johtaa siihen, että komissio ei täysin pysty toteuttamaan yhteisöjen in-tressiä. Monin eri tavoin komission päätöksiin voivat vaikuttaa yksittäisten tai use-ampien jäsenmaiden edut, vaikka tarkoitus olisi ajaa yhteisöjen etua. The European Commission was created so that it could work to fulfil the Community Interest. Therefore it was decided to be an independent institution. But because the European Union affects its Member States very deeply, not least in budgetary ways, the Member States seem to want to influence the Commission as much as possible. Therefore the independence of the Commission is at stake. The Treaties try to deal with the problem by setting some protective mecha-nisms on the Commission. But is it enough? It seems that the Commission gets in-fluenced too much in its everyday work. This influencing starts already at the nomi-nation of the Commissioners, continues all the while when the Commission is decid-ing if new Community legislation is needed and while it drafts new legislation. The substance of the drafts are often influenced very much by the other institutions, Member States and interest groups. What this means is that the Commission can't fulfil its task at seeking the best of the Communities. In many different ways the decisions of the Commission may further the good of one or some interested parties instead of the Community In-terest.
Traduction japonaise, original anglais disponible en ligne sur HAL-SHS. Remerciements à Matoba Hiroshi pour sa traduction. ; International audience ; This paper responds to two different contexts. The first one was the coming UK referendum and, whatever the result, the challenge for the EU to reinvent itself or dissolve if it continues failing European populations. The second context was a deep questioning in Japan, but also in South Korea, about the future of East Asia and of ASEAN: is a convergence possible beyond economic interactions? How to breach cultural divides? How to overcome the search for hegemony, deep historical hatred, in order to reach and establish a common ground? The paper analyzes the presupposition of the European construction from the beginning: a union can be negotiated and instituted by the construction of a joint or common economic sphere. This construction has always denied or even repressed the fact that the autonomization of the economic sphere is complex historical process different for each nation in Europe or in the rest of the world. So the economic sphere has different relations to politics, society, knowledge production and education, even religion, in each nation. The same can be said of the conception and practice of public opinion, the structure and role of the state, etc. A union based on the presupposition of a common economic sphere becomes unsustainable in time of crisis. No solution can be hoped from the minds of politicians and bureaucrats: they don't act at the level where solutions can be found. "Culture", like "market", does not touch the problems at stake. The only real solution is to produce and share knowledge on the differentiation in each case of politics, civil society, the economy, research and education, even religion in order to map the differences and the family ressemblance between the different national trajectories. This joint knowledge is the only common ground of a coherent and creative union in Europe. It is also true in other parts of the world where ...
Traduction japonaise, original anglais disponible en ligne sur HAL-SHS. Remerciements à Matoba Hiroshi pour sa traduction. ; International audience ; This paper responds to two different contexts. The first one was the coming UK referendum and, whatever the result, the challenge for the EU to reinvent itself or dissolve if it continues failing European populations. The second context was a deep questioning in Japan, but also in South Korea, about the future of East Asia and of ASEAN: is a convergence possible beyond economic interactions? How to breach cultural divides? How to overcome the search for hegemony, deep historical hatred, in order to reach and establish a common ground? The paper analyzes the presupposition of the European construction from the beginning: a union can be negotiated and instituted by the construction of a joint or common economic sphere. This construction has always denied or even repressed the fact that the autonomization of the economic sphere is complex historical process different for each nation in Europe or in the rest of the world. So the economic sphere has different relations to politics, society, knowledge production and education, even religion, in each nation. The same can be said of the conception and practice of public opinion, the structure and role of the state, etc. A union based on the presupposition of a common economic sphere becomes unsustainable in time of crisis. No solution can be hoped from the minds of politicians and bureaucrats: they don't act at the level where solutions can be found. "Culture", like "market", does not touch the problems at stake. The only real solution is to produce and share knowledge on the differentiation in each case of politics, civil society, the economy, research and education, even religion in order to map the differences and the family ressemblance between the different national trajectories. This joint knowledge is the only common ground of a coherent and creative union in Europe. It is also true in other parts of the world where ...
Traduction japonaise, original anglais disponible en ligne sur HAL-SHS. Remerciements à Matoba Hiroshi pour sa traduction. ; International audience ; This paper responds to two different contexts. The first one was the coming UK referendum and, whatever the result, the challenge for the EU to reinvent itself or dissolve if it continues failing European populations. The second context was a deep questioning in Japan, but also in South Korea, about the future of East Asia and of ASEAN: is a convergence possible beyond economic interactions? How to breach cultural divides? How to overcome the search for hegemony, deep historical hatred, in order to reach and establish a common ground? The paper analyzes the presupposition of the European construction from the beginning: a union can be negotiated and instituted by the construction of a joint or common economic sphere. This construction has always denied or even repressed the fact that the autonomization of the economic sphere is complex historical process different for each nation in Europe or in the rest of the world. So the economic sphere has different relations to politics, society, knowledge production and education, even religion, in each nation. The same can be said of the conception and practice of public opinion, the structure and role of the state, etc. A union based on the presupposition of a common economic sphere becomes unsustainable in time of crisis. No solution can be hoped from the minds of politicians and bureaucrats: they don't act at the level where solutions can be found. "Culture", like "market", does not touch the problems at stake. The only real solution is to produce and share knowledge on the differentiation in each case of politics, civil society, the economy, research and education, even religion in order to map the differences and the family ressemblance between the different national trajectories. This joint knowledge is the only common ground of a coherent and creative union in Europe. It is also true in other parts of the world where ...
Ex ante assessment of regulatory impact upon businesses: A neo-institutional study on the context, international influences, and Finnish experiences Regulatory impact assessment (RIA) has an established place in the European Union and its member states. This article considers evolving Finnish ex ante RIA concerning certain regulatory costs to firms. Drawing upon a neo-institutional theoretical framework and proposing three generally oriented hypotheses we received the following results. (1) The rationality of theevolving Finnish ex ante RIA of selected administrativeregulatory costs to firms gives rise issuesgiven the low implementation rate of thegeneral natonal RIA guidelines. (2) Reference to the ex ante RIA of regulatory costs to firmsin other countries has served the legitimation of preferred procedures in Finland rather than offerssolid evidence on the rationality of the foreign procedures. (3) Without a stronger contextualization of the evolving Finnish ex ante RIAmof regulatory costs to firms its procedures risk adverse effects because of their confined scope, the uneven quality of their input data, and their weak connections to the general national ex ante RIA. These results suggest the redesign of the Finnish RIA to take better into account the institutional, political, historical and cultural characteristicsof governance in this country. Keywords: regulatory impact assessment, public policy evaluation, public policymaking, lawmaking, legal policy, deregulation ; Peer reviewed
As of 2021, Europe is entering a new period in two respects. One is that the COVID-19 virus effect that has continued since 2020 has be controlled due to the vaccine program, and the world after COVID-19 has become visible. The other is that the rift between the United States and Europe, which emerged during the four-year U.S. Trump administration, is showing signs of healing with the birth of the U.S. Biden administration, and is able to produce a unity that regards China as a common enemy. Otherwise, there are still many unstable factors in the situation surrounding Europe. Regional powers such as Russia and Turkey, which had been the target of democratization support from Europe, have become more authoritarian, and instead, have intervened in Europe in various ways, threatening European values such as democracy and human rights. However, Europe's greatest threat is within not without. The possibility that the right wing will take power in major European countries cannot be ruled out, in which case the existence of the G7 and EU itself will be threatened. It is also a concern that the nature of European populism has changed from the former "politics to gain popularity" to a politics that controls and manipulates citizens.
Tutkimuksessa tarkastellaan erästä Euroopan integraation vähemmän tutkittua ulottuvuutta: integraation vaikutuksia jälkikommunistisen yhteiskunnan kansalaisjärjestöihin. Liettualainen ympäristöjärjestösektori ja Ignalinan ydinvoimalan tapaus tarjoavat rajallisen, mutta samalla hyvin konkreettisen näkökulman kysymyksen tarkastelemiseksi. Tutkimus nojaa vuosina 2001-2003 kerätyn haastatteluaineiston laadulliseen analyysiin. Ignalinan ydinvoimalan tapauksen perusteella voidaan tulkita liettualaisten ympäristöjärjestöjen kohtaamia muutospaineita neuvostoajan lopulta aina Liettuan EU-jäsenyyteen saakka. Ignalinan ydinvoimalan ympärille keskittynyt liikehdintä oli yksi keskeisimmistä neuvostovallan vastaisen protestin välineistä 1980-luvun lopun Liettuassa. Ignalinan ydinvoimalasta muodostui tuolloin neuvostovallan poliittinen symboli; protestointi ydinvoimalaa vastaan oli samalla vastalause Moskovan sanelupolitiikalle ja vallitsevalle yhteiskunnalliselle järjestykselle. Ignalinan poliittinen symboliasema kuitenkin muuttui radikaalisti Liettuan itsenäisyysjulistuksen myötä: voimalasta muodostui niin taloudellisesti kuin poliittisestikin tärkeä kansallisen suvereniteetin osa. 1990-luvun lopulla ydinvoimalan poliittisen symboliaseman muutos sai yhä vahvemman ilmentymän EU:n esittäessä Ignalinan molempien reaktoreiden alasajoa ennen niiden lasketun käyttöiän umpeutumista. Eräät liettualaiset ympäristöjärjestöt toimivat aktiivisesti osana laajempia eurooppalaisia kansalaisjärjestöverkostoja vaatien itäisen Keski-Euroopan neuvostomallisten ydinvoimaloiden välitöntä sulkemista. Siten Ignalinan tapaus aiheuttaa monissa tapauksissa järjestöidentiteetin epävarmuutta: Yhtäältä ympäristöjärjestöidentiteetti vaatii kriittistä suhtautumista ydinvoimaan, erityisesti neuvostomallisiin RBMK-reaktoreihin. Toisaalta taas Ignalinan ydinvoimala koetaan Liettuan taloudellisen ja poliittisen omavaraisuuden takaajaksi. Ignalinan tapauksen ympärille rakentuva identiteettipoliittinen asetelma voidaan yksinkertaistaa tilanteeksi, jossa ympäristöjärjestöt hapuilevat kahden yhteensopimattoman toimintamallin välillä: järjestöt toivovat voivansa toteuttaa rooliaan ympäristöjärjestöinä, usein laajempien eurooppalaisten ympäristöjärjestöverkostojen mallin mukaisesti, mutta samalla kansallisen suvereniteettipolitiikan tuottamat mallit ovat vahvasti läsnä järjestöjen määrittäessä perusluonnettaan. Ignalinan tapauksen pohjalta tutkimuksessa tarkastellaan myös laajempia Euroopan integraatioon ja jälkikommunistiseen kansalaisjärjestötoimintaan liittyviä kehityskulkuja. Tutkimus tuo esiin, että Euroopan integraatio on luonut monitasoisen institutionaalisen järjestyksen, joka määrittää oman vaikutuspiirinsä säännöt. Euroopan integraatio on samalla ilmiö, joka toteutuu myös hyvin arkipäiväisissä asioissa se on läsnä monissa mikrotason käytännöissä vaikuttaen siis myös ympäristöjärjestöjen toimintaan. Samalla voidaan havaita, että politiikan muodot ja tyylit eivät synny tyhjiössä tai pelkästään rationaalisten valintojen tuloksena; historia, sen tuottamat tulkinnat sekä rutiineihin perustuvat säännönmukaisuudet ovat läsnä poliittisessa elämässä, niin kansalaisjärjestötoiminnassa kuin muussakin yhteiskunnallisessa aktivismissa, samoin kuin hallinnollisissa käytännöissä. ; The colourful, sometimes even dramatic, history of Lithuanian environmental non-governmental organisations (NGOs) makes them an interesting subject of political science research. During the past fifteen years the role of the Lithuanian environmental movement has changed quite radically. The environmental movement had a central political role at the time of the Lithuanian independence activism in the late 1980s, but the movement later lost its mobilising potential and was marginalised by the beginning of the 1990s. Since then the environmental NGOs have been strongly affected by the process of European integration. Environmental NGOs have served both as agents and indicators of the institutional change taking place in Lithuania. The dynamics of this change can be analysed through the case of Ignalina in the course of the past couple of decades the nuclear power plant of Ignalina in the north-east corner of Lithuania has been a reference point for a number of political discussions and processes. During the Lithuanian independence movement the nuclear power plant became a symbol of Soviet rule. As Ignalina was strongly associated with the hegemony of Moscow over Lithuania the plant occupied a central role in the fight towards national sovereignty. Independence activism took the form of environmental protests, especially in the early stages of the Lithuanian reform movement, and a large number of environmental organisations were established all over Lithuania. The political context provided an opportunity to address sensitive political questions through environmental activism. For instance, in September 1988 thousands of protesters formed a human chain the ring of life around the two units of Ignalina as a manifestation of Lithuanian national sovereignty and identity. The symbolic position of Ignalina changed radically after Lithuania s independence declaration in March 1990. As Moscow imposed an energy embargo on Lithuania it soon became clear that the country was dependent on its own sources of energy, of which the nuclear power plant of Ignalina was the most important one. Although Ignalina had only recently served as the symbol of Soviet oppression, the plant suddenly proved indispensable in the reconstruction of the nation and its material well-being. In 1995 the Lithuanian government tabled a EU membership application. Towards the end of the decade Ignalina was brought on the political agenda of the EU it soon became evident to Lithuanians that the closure of the nuclear power plant would be considered a de facto prerequisite for EU membership. As a result, the question of Ignalina was highly politicised the setting gave Ignalina a positions as the symbol of national sovereignty. There had been a radical shift in the political symbolism surrounding the plant. Meanwhile, the environmental NGOs faced a dilemma: Some of the environmental activists were closely linked to European anti-nuclear NGO networks and were strongly in favour of the decommissioning of Ignalina. However, many of the environmental NGOs also carried with them a long tradition of ethno-cultural thinking thus connecting the organisations closely to the notion of Lithuanian national sovereignty. Against this background it proved difficult for many organisations to define their role in view with the question of Ignalina what would be appropriate political action? As a result, there remained a great deal of indecisiveness and confusion among the environmental NGOs as to the decommissioning plans of Ignalina, and more generally as to the role of the environmental organisations in the Lithuanian society. The case of Ignalina provides a framework within which it is possible to analyse certain dimensions of national sovereignty in an integrating, post-Cold War Europe. The integration of Central and Eastern Europe into the EU has produced a situation in which many of the expectations attached to national sovereignty are being challenged. The research also brings forward a topic that has received only limited attention in the past, namely the effects of European integration on non-governmental organisations in Central and Eastern Europe. By focusing on a specific sector of Lithuanian NGO activity it is possible to analyse the dynamics of europeanisation on a very concrete level. The case of Ignalina suggests that the activists of Lithuanian environmental NGOs are forced to ponder the raison d être of their organisations in the face of different, often conflicting institutional pressures. The expectations drawn from fresh national sovereignty are not always compatible with the models of action produced by the European integration process. The case evidences a conflict between post-Communist nation-building and the institutional limitations brought about by EU membership. Simply put, the idea of national sovereignty on the one hand and European integration on the other offer environmental NGOs distinctive, often conflicting, models of appropriate political action. The models of action created by the institutional framework of the EU are not easily compatible with the norms typical of a newly independent state. This identity political conflict is especially pronounced whenever national and European norms are placed in direct opposition with each other. However, it should be noted that the national and European levels of politics cannot be completely distinguished from each other. It is interesting to notice how models of action drawn from the EU system often form the very basis of national or local political action. Therefore it can be stated that the separation between European and national models of appropriate action is not always feasible. It is possible to approach most political questions, including the encounter of Lithuanian environmental NGOs and the EU, from an institutional perspective. The theoretical framework of the study is based on new institutionalism , and the notion of logic of appropriateness is central to the study political institutions are analysed as collections of norms that define the rules of appropriate political action in different situations. In essence, politics is about appropriate action. The research seeks to explain the logic of appropriateness being followed by Lithuanian environmental NGOs. The research problem is approached through a set of questions: (1) How does the colourful history of the Lithuanian environmental movement affect the political characteristics of today s environmental NGOs? (2) What does the specific case of Ignalina tell us about the institutional contexts in which the Lithuanian environmental NGOs operate? (3) How to define the relationship between Lithuanian environmental NGOs and the politics of national sovereignty? (4) What is the relevance of the institutional framework of the EU to Lithuanian environmental NGOs? The study suggests that the rules of appropriateness change depending on the political context. At the same time, the conflicts produced by differing, overlapping institutional environments are reflected in the inner dynamics of political actors, resulting to indecisiveness and confusion. Since political action is first and foremost directed by the logic of appropriateness, the interpretations of political contexts are of central relevance. Therefore it is possible that a single object, such as a nuclear power plant, can be given a variety of interpretations in the realm of identity politics. The case of Ignalina evidences that symbolism and interpretation form the core of political life.
The conflict over Kashmir has been a core issue between India and Pakistan since their independence. It is not only just a territorial conflict but also the core issue of the region, which has been changing along with the regional and international environment. In particular, after the 1990's, the people of Kashmir committed to armed resistance, which has become the focus of the risk to regional and international security because both India and Pakistan are nuclear powers. Resolution of this problem is quite difficult because it would require committing to the ideas of national integration of both countries. Specifically, for India, it is secularism; for Pakistan, it is the two-nation theory. However, the people of Kashmir want to choose their own destiny—integration with neither India nor Pakistan. India promised Kashmir a degree of freedom and democracy under article 370 of the Indian Constitution; however, for the time being, these right have been curtailed. To resolve this issue, two main plans have been presented by both countries; a referendum and the partition of Kashmir along the Line of Control. But, these ideas disregard the right of self-determination or the nationalist sentiment of the people of Kashmir. Recently a new idea emerged based on the notion of shared sovereignty. The history of discord between India and Pakistan has caused critical anxiety for regional peace and stability. However, there will is hope that a constructive solution to this problem can be found in the future through continuity of dialogue and negotiation between the two countries. We as an international society surrounding these nations, we should maintain a supportive stance for continued cordial dialogue.
Tutkimuksen tehtävänä oli selvittää, voivatko valtionhallinnon alueille tuomat uudet instituutiot tukea omaehtoista alueellista kehittämistä ja, jos voivat, niin miten. Instituutioilla tutkimuksessa tarkoitettiin alueellista kehittämistoimintaa ohjaavia, tietoisesti luotuja sääntöjä ja menettelyjä tai käytännön toiminnan myötä kehittyneitä toimintamalleja. Omaehtoisella kehittämisellä taas tarkoitetaan sellaista alueellista kehittämistä, joka lähtee liikkeelle tietyllä alueella asuvista ihmisistä ja siellä toimivista organisaatioista sekä perustuu ennen kaikkea alueen omiin tarpeisiin ja voimavaroihin. Esimerkkeinä valtionhallinnon luomista uusista alueellisen kehittämisen instituutioista oli toimintaryhmätyö Suomesta sekä alueellinen kehittämissuunnittelu ja aluemanagement Saksan Baijerista. Toimintaryhmätyö on paikallisten kehittäjäryhmien ja näiden yhteistyökumppaneiden tekemää alueellista kehittämistyötä. Baijerin aluemanagement tarkoittaa puolestaan erilaisten toimijoiden yhteistyöhön perustuvan alueellisen kehittämisprosessin johtamista. Tutkimuksessa analysoitiin kahden suomalaisen ja kahden baijerilaisen esimerkkialueen kehittämisprosesseja noin neljän vuoden ajanjaksolla. Tärkeimmät metodit tutkimusaineiston keruussa olivat osallistuva havainnointi ja kehittämisprosessien toimijoille tehdyt puolistrukturoidut haastattelut. Tutkimus osoitti, että valtionhallinto voi uusien instituutioiden avulla tukea omaehtoista alueellista kehittämistä. Uusiin instituutioihin tulee tällöin sisältyä osallistavia suunnittelumetodeja ja hanketoiminnan koulutusta, malleja, kannustimia ja ongelmanratkaisuvälineitä paikallisille kumppanuuksille, joustavia rahoitusvälineitä, tukijaviranomaisten kumppanuutta sekä tukea verkostoitumiselle. Uusilla instituutioilla on kuitenkin myös piirteitä, jotka haittaavat omaehtosta kehittämistä. Tällaisia ovat normatiivinen säätely, tiettyjen toimijoiden aseman korostuminen, asiantuntijavetoinen tai liian kiireinen suunnittelu sekä kiinnittyminen sektorihallintoon. Uusien instituutioiden mahdollisuudet vakiintua alueille riippuvat puolestaan siitä, miten ne tehdään tunnetuksi, olemassa olevista instituutioista, uudelta instituutiolta odotettujen julkisten hyötyjen ja paikallisten intressien yhteensopivuudesta sekä toiminnan laajenemisesta ja kehittymisestä alueella. Tutkimusasetelma on ajankohtainen eurooppalaisessa alueellisessa kehittämisessä ja maaseutupolitiikassa, joissa uusia instituutioita parhaillaan luodaan ja kokeillaan. Aiempiin tutkimuksiin verrattuna tutkimus tuo uutta erityisesti analysoimalla rinnakkain kahden, lähtökohdiltaan suuresti toisistaan poikkeavan maan hyvin erilaisia instituutioita. Tutkimuksen tuloksia voidaan hyödyntää alueellisen kehittämispolitiikan suunnista ja toimenpiteistä päätettäessä. Tuloksia voivat hyödyntää myös erilaiset paikalliset yhteisöt tai kunnat halutessaan viedä eteenpäin omaehtoista kehittämistä alueellaan. Aiheellisia jatkotutkimuksen kohteita ovat uusien instituutioiden sekä omaehtoista kehittämistä tukevat että haittaavat elmentit. ; New Institutions Supporting Endogenous Development The recent changes in regional development in Europe were the starting point of the study. The European Union and the national governments of many European countries have reacted to new challenges of regional development by creating and launching special institutions to support endogenous regional and local development. Both Finland and the German state of Bavaria have responded in this way. An example in Finland is the activity of the local action groups consistent with the model of the EU LEADER programme, which has been extended through the national rural development programme for local endogenous development (POMO programme). In Bavaria, the Ministry of State Development and Environmental Affairs has created and launched institutions of regional development planning and regional management. The objective of the study was to determine whether these new institutions launched from outside are able to support endogenous development processes in the regions, and if they are, how do they do it. Answers were sought by analysing how the various elements of the new institutions influence the process of endogenous development in its different stages. Also, the influence of the launching practice was analysed. Four qualitative case studies were carried out: two in Finland and two in Bavaria. In Finland the case studies were carried out in two regions where the POMO programme was being implemented. In Bavaria two relatively rural regions were chosen where a sub-regional plan was made and was being implemented through regional management. The conditions for establishment of the new institutions in the regions are discussed in the study. The theoretical framework of the study is built around the terms regional development, endogenous development and institutions. Institutions are here understood as formal and informal systems of rules that guide the assignment of meanings and so the action. The institutions of regional development supply the framework for the regional and local development. The conclusion that can be drawn from the recent discussion of regional development thinking and practices in Europe is that new models of thinking and acting supporting endogenous development have emerged. Such models include strategic thinking and programming, networking and partnership, and communicative planning. These models have been incorporated in the new institutions of regional development created and launched by central authorities. Finland and Bavaria have different institutional backgrounds for the new institutions and these backgrounds have influenced the aims and forms of the new institutions. The institution of the activity of the local action group in Finland supports endogenous development on the basis of local partnerships. The institutions of regional development planning and regional management in Bavaria are intended to support endogenous development based above all on a partnership of municipalities. The influence of the new institutions on regional development processes depends on the characteristics of the elements of the new institution, how the institution was launched and on pre-existing institutions in the region. The rational incentives offered by the new institutions, together with the values and the beliefs taken for granted of the pre-existing institutions, are playing a central role. There are also other factors peculiar to the region and the actors that influence the development process. The main question of the study - whether the new institutions can support endogenous development processes - can be answered in the affirmative. The supporting characteristics of the new institutions are participatory planning methods and training for project management, models, incentives and ways of problem solving for local partnerships, flexible funding instruments, partnership with supporting authorities and support to networking. However, the new institutions also have characteristics unfavourable to endogenous development. These include normative rules, emphasis on the position of certain actors, expert planning or too hasty planning and attachment to sectorial government structures. The possibilities of the new institutions to root themselves in the region depend on the mode of launching, on the pre-existing institutions, on the compatibility of expected public benefits with the interests of local actors and on the expansion of the activity and development of the practices in the region.
This paper is an analysis of the foreign Aid Policies of two OECD Development Assistance Committee member countries – Finland and Ireland. The analysis reveals that both Finland and Ireland share high principles on their relations with the developing world, although their current policy outlooks appear to differ significantly. Despite Finland's good economic performance and prosperity largely generated by the global demand and market access, the government has so far failed to include the increasing of ODA on its priority agenda. In addition to the declining commitment, the selection criteria for Finnish aid recipients appears to be partially commercially motivated. Ireland on the other hand has a solid record of targeting the poorest of the poor with its development assistance and has recently increased development country focus in national policies. The challenge for Ireland is the effective utilisation of these funds and even more importantly keeping the government's public, international commitment to the 0,7 percent recommendation level despite the possible future slowdown of the economy.
Raportissa tarkastellaan sotilaallisen t&k-panostuksen ja kilpailukyvyn välisiä yhteyksiä. Aineistona käytetään brittiläisen International Institute for Strategic Studies -laitoksen (IISS) "The Military Balance" -raportin tietoja länsimaiden sotilaallisen t&kpanostuksen kehityksestä. Julkisen vallan sotilaallisia t&k-panostuksia verrataan maiden julkisiin siviilipuolen t&k-menoihin, sotilaallisiin hankintamenoihin, sekä suhteessa maiden BKT:hen ja puolustusbudjetteihin. Raportissa on mukana myös tiivis katsaus sotilaallisen t&k-panostuksen ja tuottavuuden välistä yhteyttä kuvaavista kansainvälisistä tutkimuksista. Raportin tulosten mukaan sotilaallisella t&k-panostuksella ja kilpailukyvyllä ei ole suoraa yhteyttä. ; This study discusses the relationship between military R&D and competitiveness. The study is based mainly on a British International Institute for Strategic Studies -institutes publication "The Military Balance", and furthermore its information about the development of Western countrye´s military R&D-stakes for the years 1994 -2001. Government military R&D is compared for government R&D, defence expenditure and also to the countries gross domestic product and defence budgets. The study also includes tight review about the previous international studies, which are focused to study the relationship between military R&D and productiveness. The study concludes, that there are no direct connection between military R&D and competitiveness.