Suchergebnisse

This article discusses the recent debate between Jürgen Habermas and Wolfgang Streeck on the relationship between capitalism and democracy in Europe. The article recounts Streeck's analysis of the financial crisis, the transformation of the tax state into the debt state, and the development of the EU towards an international consolidation state, which informs Streeck's call for a retreat from Europe to the nation-state as the last line of defense against neoliberal capitalism. The article proceeds to sketch Habermas's criticism of Streeck's argument, and it illustrates how Habermas' proposal for a reconstitution of the EU as a supranational democracy is motivated by foundational concerns in his critical theory of society. Finally, the article argues that the debate results in an unresolved dilemma: while only a democratized EU can reestablish the supremacy of politics over globalized markets, the EU is more likely to become further entrenched as an international consolidation state.

International hydroacoustic surveys have been conducted in the Baltic Sea since 1978. The starting point was the cooperation between the Institute of Marine Research (IMR) in Lysekil, Sweden, and the Institute fur Hochseefisherei und Fishverarbeitung in Rostock, German Democratic Republic, in October ¨ 1978, which produced the first acoustic estimates of total biomass of herring and sprat in the Baltic main basin (Håkansson et al., 1979). Since then there has been at least one annual hydroacoustic survey for herring and sprat and results have been reported to ICES. The Baltic International Acoustic Survey (BIAS), is mandatory for the countries that have exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the Baltic Sea, and is a part of the Data Collection Framework as stipulated by the European Council and the Commission (Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 and the Commission Data Collection Framework (DCF) web page1 ). The IMR in Lysekil is part of the Department of Aquatic Resources within Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and is responsible for the Swedish part of the EU DCF and surveys in the marine environment. The Institute assesses the status of the marine ecosystems, develops and provides biological advices for the sustainable use of the aquatic resources. The BIAS survey is co-ordinated and managed by the ICES working group WGBIFS. The main objective of BIAS is to assess herring and sprat resources in the Baltic Sea. The survey provides data to the ICES Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS).

International hydroacoustic surveys have been conducted in the Baltic Sea since 1978. The starting point was the cooperation between Institute of Marine Research (IMR) in Lysekil, Sweden and the Institute fur Hochseefisherei und Fishverarbeitung in Rostock, German Democratic Republic in October 1978, ¨ which produced the first acoustic estimates of total biomass of herring and sprat in the Baltic Main basin (H˚akansson et al., 1979). Since then there has been at least one annual hydroacoustic survey for herring and sprat stocks and results have been reported to ICES. The Baltic International Acoustic Survey (BIAS), is mandatory for the countries that have exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the Baltic Sea, and is a part of the Data Collection Framework as stipulated by the European Council and the Commission (Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 and the Commission Data Collection Framework (DCF) web page1 ). IMR in Lysekil is part of the Department of Aquatic Resources within Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and is responsible for the Swedish part of the EU DCF and surveys in the marine environment. The Institute assesses the status of the marine ecosystems, develops and provides biological advices for managers for the sustainable use of aquatic resources. The BIAS survey are co-ordinated and managed by the ICES working group WGBIFS. The main objective of BIAS is to assess herring and sprat resources in the Baltic Sea. The survey will provide data to the ICES Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS).

The IENE 2014 conference puts emphasis on the "greening" of transport infrastructure: both in respect to a wiser use of marginal infrastructure habitats to favour biodiversity and certain ecosys- tem services, and in respect to a more permeable and safer infrastructure that minimises the direct impact on wildlife. Transportation and infrastructure are recognised as signi cant drivers in the global loss of biodiverity. Their impacts on nature are well described and there is ample evidence for the negative effects of traffic and transportation infrastructure on nature. Even though roads and railroads may occupy but a small proportion of an area, they a ect the entire landscape, cause the death of millions of wild animals, and disturb surrounding habitats through pollution, noise and alien species. The overall impact is evident, but there are means to minimise the pressure, to adjust infrastructure facilities and, to some degree, introduce beneficial services for wildlife. Such measures can and should be implemented as a standard in infrastructure development and maintenance. Knowledge about their functionality and e cacy is, however, not always satisfying. Technical innovations and new mitigation concepts need to be tested and evaluated. Their func- tionality and e ectiveness also depends on the interplay between the transport sector and other sectors of society. Communication, knowledge transfer, and public education are just as essential here, as legal frameworks, policy, technical development and environmental science. European policy (e.g., Green Infrastructure) is developing clearly in this direction, recognizing the transport sector and transportation facilities as important players in the endeavour towards a greener and sustainable future. Obviously, this calls for international collaboration in research and practice, for enhanced exchange of knowledge between disciplines, and for the development of harmonised standards and pro- cedures that can be referred to by international actors. IENE provides this interdisciplinary arena through its conferences and workshops. The IENE 2014 international conference emphasises that transport infrastructure can be planned and designed as an ecologically well-adopted, safe and e cient system, while acknowledging that certain impacts can never be avoided. IENE, together with the Swedish Transport Administration, the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, the Danish Road Directorate and numerous other partners, invites scientists, practitioners and planners, governmental agencies and private companies, NGO's and anybody with an interest in the above to the IENE 2014 conference in Sweden. We welcome new partner- and sponsorships and o er a well-approved and international network for communication and presentation.

The Nordic countries have long been renowned for their contribution to international peace and security. This contribution – occasionally viewed by both Nordic and non-Nordic policy-makers and academics as a particular model for facilitating peace and development in international affairs – is based on a combination of active contributions to peaceful conflict resolution, a high level of development aid and a continuous commitment to strengthening international society. However, recently Scandinavians have been making headlines for reasons that seem to contrast with their well-established brand as humane internationalist peacemakers. This article identifies the characteristics of the Nordic model for international peace and security and discusses how and why it has changed.

A special regulatory regime applies to products of recombinant nucleic acid modifications. A ruling from the European Court of Justice has interpreted this regulatory regime in a way that it also applies to emerging mutagenesis techniques. Elsewhere regulatory progress is also ongoing. In 2015, Argentina launched a regulatory framework, followed by Chile in 2017 and recently Brazil and Colombia. In March 2018, the USDA announced that it will not regulate genome-edited plants differently if they could have also been developed through traditional breeding. Canada has an altogether different approach with their Plants with Novel Traits regulations. Australia is currently reviewing its Gene Technology Act. This article illustrates the deviation of the European Union's (EU's) approach from the one of most of the other countries studied here. Whereas the EU does not implement a case-by-case approach, this approach is taken by several other jurisdictions. Also, the EU court ruling adheres to a process-based approach while most other countries have a stronger emphasis on the regulation of the resulting product. It is concluded that, unless a functioning identity preservation system for products of directed mutagenesis can be established, the deviation results in a risk of asynchronous approvals and disruptions in international trade.

Preliminary Material /Jonas Grimheden and Rolf Ring -- Group Accommodation and the Challenges of Education: Multicultural or Intercultural or a Combination of the Two? /Asbjørn Eide -- The Importance of an Education in Human Rights /M. Arthur Diakité -- The Education of Police in Human Rights a Framework for Human Rights Programmes Forpolice /Ralph Crawshaw -- Human Rights Education in China /LI Baodong -- Human Rights Education and Research in China: the Contribution of the Raoul Wallenberg Institute /Sun Shiyan -- Human Rights Education in the Netherlands /Cees Flinterman and Stacey Nitchov -- The Protection of Civilian Educational Institutions During the Active Hostilities of International Armed Conflict in International Humanitarian Law /David a. G. Lewis -- The Self-reflective Human Rights Promoter /Jonas Grimheden -- Hugo Grotius and the Roots of Human Rights Law /Ove Bring -- Human Rights before International Criminal Courts /Vojin Dimitrijevic and Marko Milanovic -- Never Again? Rwanda and the World /Lennart Aspegren -- The Contested Notion of Freedom of Opinion /Herdís Thorgeirsdóttir -- From Protective Passports to Protected Entry Procedures? the Legacy of Raoul Wallenberg in the Contemporary Asylum Debate /Gregor Noll -- Implementing International Human Rights Law on Behalf of Asylum Seekers and Refugees: the Record of the Nordic Countries /Robin Lööf and Brian Gorlick -- The Legal Position of Asylum-seekers in Austria /Lauri Hannikainen -- Refugees in Swedish Private International Law /Michael Bogdan -- Civil Freedoms and Rights in the Swedish Constitution of 1974: the Process and the Rationale /Carl-Gustaf Andrén -- Various Interpretations of Human Rights for Women Challenges at United Nations Conferences /Elisabeth Gerle -- Implementation of International Conventions as a Socio­Legal Enterprise: Examples from the Convention on the Rights of the Child /Håkan Hydén -- List of Contributors /Jonas Grimheden and Rolf Ring.

Iver Neumann has been an inter-disciplinary entrepreneur for political science in Norway. For Neumann, interdisciplinarity has been coupled with an understanding of politics as the search for meaning and identity. These features are well-developed in European political science, particularly within the field of international relations, but they are more rarely encountered in Norway. This brief article provides a sketch of political science as it evolved and matured in its Norwegian incarnation. In situating Iver Neumann within the discipline, I emphasise his international and eclectic orientation. The personal, national and international meet in Neumann's works, as do popular culture and politics.

Grønlands udenrigspolitiske repræsentanter benytter den store internationale interesse for Arktis til at positionere Grønland som en mere selvstændig udenrigspolitisk aktør. Det er muligt, da Danmark er afhængig af Grønland for at opretholde sin status som "arktisk stat", og fordi Grønlands udenrigspolitiske kompetence er åben for fortolkning. Denne artikel analyserer, hvordan repræsentanter for skiftende grønlandske regeringer har udvidet det udenrigspolitiske handlerum ved i diskurs og praksis at styrke Grønlands position i en arktisk kontekst. Det er blandt andet opnået ved 1) højlydt at italesætte utilfredshed i Arktisk Råd, 2) stiltiende symbolske handlinger ved Ilulissat-erklæringens tiårs jubilæum, og 3) ved at mime suverænitet ved Arctic Circle konferencen, der pga. sin mere uformelle struktur er særligt nyttig til at styrke bilaterale internationale relationer. ; Greenland's foreign policy representatives use the great international attention to the Arctic to appear and act as a more sovereign foreign policy actor. This is possible due to Denmark's dependence on Greenland to maintain its "Arctic state" status and because Greenland's foreign policy competence is open to interpretation. The article analyzes how representatives of shifting Greenlandic governments have expanded the foreign policy room for manoeuvre in discourse and praxis to strengthen Greenland's position at Arctic-related events. This has been achieved by, among other things, 1) outspoken discontent in the Arctic Council, 2) tacit gestures at the Ilulissat Declaration's 10-year anniversary, and 3) by mimicking full sovereignty at the Arctic Circle conference serving as a particularly useful platform for enhancing bilateral international relations due to its more informal setup.

Andreas Hvidsten (MF vitenskapelig høyskole) anmelder Concepts of International Relations, for Students and Other Smarties, av Iver B. Neumann (University of Michigan Press, 2019).
Abstract in English:Neumann's WorldAndreas Hvidsten (Norwegian School of Theology, Religion and Society) reviews Concepts of International Relations, for Students and Other Smarties, by Iver B. Neumann (University of Michigan Press, 2019).

Russia's strategy in the Arctic is dominated by two overriding discourses – and foreign policy directions – which at first glance may look like opposites. On the one hand, an IR realism/geopolitical discourse that often has a clear patriotic character, dealing with "capturing", "winning" or "conquering" the Arctic and putting power, including military power, behind the national interests in the area – which is why we, in recent years, have seen an increasing military build-up, also in the Russian Arctic. Opposed to this is an IR liberalism, international law-inspired and modernization-focused discourse, which is characterized by words such as "negotiation", "cooperation" and "joint ventures" and which has as an axiom that the companies and countries operating in the Arctic all benefit the most if they collaborate in peace and friendliness. So far, the IR liberalism discourse has set the trend of the Russian policy carried out in relation to the Arctic. Thus, it has primarily been the Russian Foreign Ministry and, above all, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov that have drawn the overall lines of the Arctic policy, well aided by the Transport Ministry and the Energy Ministry. On the other side are the Russian national Security Council led by Nikolai Patrushev and the Russian Defence Ministry headed by Sergey Shoygu, which both have embedded their visions of Russia and the Arctic in the IR realism/geopolitical discourse. Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, does the same. Nevertheless, he has primarily chosen to let the Foreign Ministry set the line for the Arctic policy carried out, presumably out of a pragmatic acknowledgement of the means that have, so far, served the Russian interests best. Moreover, it is worth noting that both wings, even though they can disagree about the means, in fact are more or less in agreement about the goal of Russia's Arctic policy: namely, to utilize the expected wealth of oil and natural gas resources in the underground to ensure the continuation of the restoration of Russia's position as a Great Power when the capacity of the energy fields in Siberia slowly diminishes – which the Russian Energy Ministry expects to happen sometime between 2015 and 2030. In addition to that, Russia sees – as the polar ice slowly melts – great potential for opening an ice-free northern sea route between Europe and Asia across the Russian Arctic, with the hope that the international shipping industry can see the common sense of saving up to nearly 4,000 nautical miles on a voyage from Ulsan, Korea, to Rotterdam, Holland, so Russia can earn money by servicing the ships and issuing permissions for passage through what Russia regards as Russian territorial water. The question is whether Russia will be able to realize its ambitious goals. First, the Russian state energy companies Gazprom and Rosneft lack the technology, know-how and experience to extract oil and gas under the exceedingly difficult environment in the Arctic, where the most significant deposits are believed to be in very deep water in areas that are very difficult to access due to bad weather conditions. The Western sanctions mean that the Russian energy companies cannot, as planned, obtain this technology and know-how via the already entered-into partnerships with Western energy companies. The sanctions limit loan opportunities in Western banks, which hit the profitability of the most cost-heavy projects in the Arctic. However, what hits hardest are the low oil prices – at present 50 dollars per barrel (Brent). According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the fields in the Arctic are not profitable as long as the oil price is under 120 dollars per barrel. Whether Russia chooses to suspend the projects until the energy prices rise again – and until it has again entered into partnerships that can deliver the desired technology and know-how – or whether the Russian state will continuously pump money into the projects is uncertain. The hard-pressed Russian economy, with the prospects of recession, increasing inflation, increasing flight of capital, rising interest rates and a continuously low oil price, provides a market economic incentive for suspending the projects until further notice. Whether the Kremlin will think in a market economic way or a long-term strategic way is uncertain – but, historically, there has been a penchant for the latter. One of the Kremlin's hopes is that Chinese-Russian cooperation can take over where the Western-Russian cooperation has shut down. Russia has long wanted to diversify its energy markets to reduce its dependence on sales to Europe. At the same time, those in the Kremlin have had a deeply-rooted fear of ending up as a "resource appendix" to the onrushing Chinese economy, which so far has been a strong contributing reason for keeping the Russian-Chinese overtures in check. The question now is whether the Western sanctions can be the catalyst that can make Russia overcome this fear and thus, in the long term, support the efforts to enter into a real, strategic partnership with China. ; Russia's strategy in the Arctic is dominated by two overriding discourses – and foreign policy directions – which at first glance may look like opposites. On the one hand, Russia have an IR realism/geopolitical discourse that often has a clear patriotic character, dealing with "exploring", "winning" or "conquering" the Arctic and putting power, including military power, behind the national interests in the area – which is why we, in recent years, have seen an increasing military build-up, also in the Russian Arctic. Opposed to this is an IR liberalism, international law-inspired and modernization- focused discourse, which is characterized by words such as "negotiation", "cooperation" and "joint ventures" and which has as an axiom that the companies and countries operating in the Arctic all benefit the most if they cooperate peacefully.