Suchergebnisse

Mitte 2011 hat das International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) den Rechnungslegungsstandard zur Bilanzierung von Leistungen an Arbeitnehmer (IAS 19) in einer überarbeiteten Version publiziert. Die neuen Vorschriften sind für Bilanzperioden, welche am oder nach dem 01. Januar 2013 beginnen, verpflichtend anzuwenden. Durch die neuen Regelungen, welche in erster Linie die Bilanzierung von Vorsorgeverpflichtungen betreffen, wurden einige Wahlrechte im Standard abgeschafft und die Berechnung des Vorsorgeaufwandes leicht verändert. Die Konsequenzen aus diesen Veränderungen für die Jahresrechnungen von Schweizer Unternehmen sind stellenweise zwar durchaus wesentlich, lassen sich aber aus heutiger Sicht bereits vorausplanen und abschätzen. Anders sieht es hingegen mit einer zusätzlichen Neuerung aus: Die Vorschriften verlangen erstmalig, dass ein sogenanntes Risk-Sharing bei der Ermittlung der Vorsorgeverpflichtung berücksichtigt wird. Mit dem Begriff Risk-Sharing ist dabei die Eigenschaft eines Vorsorgeplanes gemeint, die Chancen und Risiken im Zusammenhang mit der beruflichen Vorsorge dem angeschlossenen Arbeitgeber nicht alleine zuzurechnen. Da diese Anforderung in der Schweiz regelmässig erfüllt ist und die Risikoteilung bisher unberücksichtigt blieb, haben die neuen Vorschriften an dieser Stelle eine Veränderung der Bilanzierungspraxis zur Folge. Unmittelbar aus den neuen Bestimmungen in IAS 19 lässt sich jedoch nur ableiten, wie und wo ein Risk-Sharing Effekt zu erfassen und auszuweisen ist, nicht aber, in welcher Art und Weise dessen Höhe bestimmt werden soll. Aus diesem Grund entwickelt die vorliegende Dissertation fünf unterschiedliche Methoden zur bilanziellen Abbildung von Risk-Sharing in der Schweiz und evaluiert diese. Zusammenfassend zeigt sich dabei, dass es aus Sicht einer tatsachengetreuen Darstellung im Sinne der internationalen Rechnungslegung unzulässig ist, die Unterdeckung einer ...

"This book focuses on the ECOWAS Commission, both as an autonomous actor, as well as a policy-making nexus for its member states in Africa, and external actors. Drawing from a variety of never-before analyzed sources, unpublished internal documents and over 120 interviews with staff from the ECOWAS Commission, its member states, and external actors supporting the organization, this book presents a comprehensive portrait of ECOWAS's institutional capabilities, challenges, and reforms. It utilizes a policy studies approach focusing on the areas of political affairs, peace, and regional security, as well as trade and customs to illustrate concrete cases of policy making by the Commission, its member states, and external actors. In doing so, the book provides practice-oriented insights into the policy-making agency within the organization, arguing for the significance of the ECOWAS Commission as an actor. This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of West Africa and its international relations, comparative regionalism, international organization studies, development studies, policy-making, peace and conflict studies, governance and more broadly to African politics and international relations"--

Chapter 1: Introduction -- Chapter 2: In Control? – ASEAN Member States, the Secretariat, and Dialogue Partners -- Chapter 3: The Involved Networker – Agency by the ASEAN Secretariat in the ASEAN Economic Community -- Chapter 4: Policy-Making Institutional Support – Agency by ASEAN's Dialogue Partners in the ASEAN Economic Community -- Chapter 5: The Involved Networker – Agency by the ASEAN Secretariat in the ASEAN Political-Security Community -- Chapter 6: Policy-Making Institutional Support – Agency by ASEAN's Dialogue Partners in the ASEAN Political-Security Community -- Chapter 7: Conclusion.

This book provides practice-oriented insights into the agency of two previously underestimated actors in Southeast Asian regionalism: the ASEAN Secretariat and ASEAN's dialog partners. In doing so, it offers an inside view of the policymaking processes in the ASEAN Political-Security and the ASEAN Economic Community, analyzing the interplay and agency by both actors in agenda setting, formulation, decision-making, implementation, and monitoring. Drawing on a trove of novel data, including never-before analyzed sources and numerous interviews with ASEAN insiders, the book showcases a number of concrete cases of policymaking, including competition and counterterrorism policies. The chapters focusing on the ASEAN Secretariat address aspects related to institutional autonomy, capacity, and reforms within the bureaucracy. In the chapters on ASEAN's dialog partners, the book provides insights into the bilateral management of institutional support programs, as well as the impacts of support on ASEAN's policymaking processes. Lukas Maximilian Müller is Caritas Germany's advisor to the Lake Chad region. Previously, he was a researcher at the Department of Political Science at the University of Freiburg, where he also received his PhD. In addition, he was a post-doctoral researcher at the University of Erfurt as well as an advisor on sustainable development for the Asia-Europe Foundation in Singapore. During his PhD, he was a visiting fellow with the Centre for Strategic and International Studies Indonesia in 2018 as well as with the Habibie Center in 2019. He has published widely on ASEAN, for instance in the Pacific Review, the Contemporary Journal of East Asia Studies, and the European Journal of East Asian Studies.

"This book focuses on the ECOWAS Commission, both as an autonomous actor, as well as a policy-making nexus for its member states in Africa, and external actors. Drawing from a variety of never-before analyzed sources, unpublished internal documents and over 120 interviews with staff from the ECOWAS Commission, its member states, and external actors supporting the organization, this book presents a comprehensive portrait of ECOWAS's institutional capabilities, challenges, and reforms. It utilizes a policy studies approach focusing on the areas of political affairs, peace, and regional security, as well as trade and customs to illustrate concrete cases of policy making by the Commission, its member states, and external actors. In doing so, the book provides practice-oriented insights into the policy-making agency within the organization, arguing for the significance of the ECOWAS Commission as an actor. This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of West Africa and its international relations, comparative regionalism, international organization studies, development studies, policy-making, peace and conflict studies, governance and more broadly to African politics and international relations"--

Abstract
Security cooperation with other regional organisations (ros) has long been a facet of EU foreign policy. The EU's relationships with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (asean) and the Economic Community of West African States (ecowas) illustrate the variety of the EU's engagement. In West Africa, the EU is a pre-eminent actor, occasionally dictating an agenda and marginalising ecowas. In Southeast Asia, the EU remains subordinate, facing an uphill battle for relevance in the security sphere and a closer relationship to asean. Prevailing explanations focus on the EU's internal characteristics or bilateral cooperation dynamics, but fail to fully explain this discrepancy. Based on new interview information, this article argues that the organisational environment also affects the EU's security cooperation with asean and ecowas. The presence of competitive environments limits the EU's role in security cooperation and relegates it to a subordinate role. In the absence of competition, the EU is allowed to become pre-eminent.

Im maßstabsetzenden "ersten Rundfunkurteil" hat das Bundesverfassungsgericht der damaligen Bundesregierung 1961 die Errichtung eines "Deutschland-Fernsehens" verboten. Ein Fernsehsender darf sich nicht in der Hand des Staates befinden, sondern muss in sich plural organisiert sein – der Grundstein der Rundfunkordnung der Bundesrepublik bis heute. Diese Entscheidung hat nun dank Jan Böhmermann ungeahnte Aktualität gewonnen, der in seiner Sendung fragt, wie es mit den engen Bindungen des Rundfunks zusammenpasst, dass die Regierung auf ihren Onlinekanälen unkontrolliert Sendungen verbreitet, die jedenfalls stark an das erinnern, was gemeinhin als Rundfunk verstanden wird.

This paper is concerned with the determining factors of the interregional relationship between the European Union (EU) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), specifically its institutional proliferation on the three institutional levels of EU-to-ASEAN relations (bi-regionalism), relations inside ASEM (trans-regionalism) as well as relations between the EU and individual ASEAN member states (region-to-state). Commonly, interregional relations are seen as depending on the actorness of the regional organisations involved. This paper proposes an alternative approach, focusing on structural interdependence and agency on the part of both regional actors as the two main determinants of the institutional proliferation. The analysis suggests that levels of political and economic interdependence are low at the bi-regional level and higher at both the trans-regional and region-to-state level, leading to a proliferation of institutional structures at these levels. Additionally, the analysis reveals three unique strategies by ASEAN and the EU contributing to the design of their interregional relationship. For ASEAN, these strategies consist of (1) omni-enmeshment, (2) vertical and horizontal hedging, and (3) the rule of relative institutionalisation. For the EU, these strategies consist of (1) a pragmatic approach towards ASEAN, (2) a widening of interest towards East Asia, and (3) capacity-building bi-regionalism.