Suchergebnisse

Rapid climate change in the Arctic triggers the remobilization of chemical pollution, increasing its exposure and potential impacts in the region. While scientific knowledge on multiple stressors, including the interlinkages between climate change and hazardous chemicals, is increasing, it has proven challenging to translate this knowledge into policy. This study analyzes the process of translating Arctic scientific knowledge on multiple stressors into global policy by focusing on the development of a guidance document under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). Through document analysis and key informant interviews, we focus particularly on the role of the Arctic Council working group AMAP in synthesizing, translating and communicating science on multiple stressors to policy makers. We draw on the theoretical framework of formalization (how and by whom knowledge is summarized for policy) and separation (the relative distance between science and policy) to analyze the science-to-policy interface. Our analysis of the phases leading up to the guidance document show that AMAP has dynamically moved between different degrees of separation and formalization. Orchestrating the interplay between scientists and policy makers, the working group has put multiple stressors on the political agenda internationally. AMAP has thereby contributed to turn Arctic science into global policy through the guidance document. We conclude by illustrating several constraints in terms of the implementation of actual policy, which we argue is due to an increasing degree of formalization in the last phase and a general unreadiness of contemporary governance systems to address multiple stressors.

Congratulates the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) on its 50th anniversary for all it has done within foreign policy research throughout the years. The closest relative to NUPI in Norway is the Fridtjof Nansen Institute (FNI), which focuses on environmental and energy politics, whereas the first mentioned is a clear leader in general political research. L. Pitkaniemi

The Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) can be seen as the most central agent in the Norwegian foreign policy scene and is known for its many good seminars and talented researchers. A researcher from the Institute for Labour and Social Research (Fafo) congratulates NUPI for its achievements and hopes for a continuing good relationship between the institutes. L. Pitkaniemi

In a critical review of the work of E. H. Carr on international politics, Carr's stature as an early critic of Western-Soviet relations is discussed. Carr, best known for his works What Is History? (1962) & The Twenty Years' Crisis (1939), had good timing: eg, his analysis of the failure of policy toward the Central Powers & the USSR appeared on the eve of WWII. Carr was a pioneering figure in that he served both as influential historian & influential policymaker in the British Foreign Office during this period, & his assessment of realism & utopianism, while critiqued in the intervening years, is part of a body of work that still holds value today, particularly for students of international politics. 9 References. A. Siegel

Provides a portrait of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) that turned 50 years in 2009. Even if the institute started from a relatively restricted research perspective on the East-West relations, it has grown to include a large variety of areas from development to security policy. The institute has a legal status, official control, organizational essence and its main task is to enlighten international relation. Despite its institutional status, the research conducted by NUPI is distinguished from both academic basic research and user-oriented consulting solutions. What really distinguishes NUPI, however, is its status as the only research institute that focuses on foreign policy and international relations that are of Norwegian interest and produced in the Norwegian language. L. Pitkaniemi

This thesis studies three major reforms in the public sector of Norway. The sectors studied are the police, higher education, and primary schools. The main motive for studying these reforms are of a theoretical nature, the reason to study them is to produce general knowledge about reforms. The study aims to answer two main questions. One is about the possibilities and limitations contained in using reforms to change organizations. The second is about how organizations can promote the ideals of representative democracy. In its efforts to attain answers to these questions the thesis blends empirically-oriented research with aspects of organization theory and political theory. The thesis is divided into four different parts. First, there is a descriptive presentation of the three reforms. Secondly, there is a discussion of various theories of reforms and organizations. The primary aim of this analysis is to illuminate and explain the empirical data, but this discussion should also provide its own answers to the main questions asked in the thesis. Thirdly, these theories are applied to analyze data from the three reforms. And finally, the study concludes with a summary of what general insights about the reforms we are left with after studying the Quality Reform, The Police Reform 2000, and the Knowledge Reform. The study shows that reforms have both policy and content aspects, and that it is important to distinguish between the two in order to analyse and understand them. The policy aspect is that reforms are a strategy for change - they are tools for implementing change in organizations. The content aspect is that reforms have a specific content - they have certain objectives that they want to realize. The study concludes that in order to understand this complex and fascinating phenomenon, we need to understand reforms both as instrumental tools, institutional adaptations and symbols.

A long time researcher of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) discusses the rich history of the institute including changes in its tasks, working methods, publications and leadership. While the model for NUPI has been around since the establishment of the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) in 1920, it took almost four decades before the Norwegian equivalent was finally founded in 1959. In the early years NUPI focused on studying East-West relations, security policy and the UN, but towards the late 20th century this focus shifted towards the research of European policy, developmental policy and international economics. L. Pitkaniemi