Społeczność międzynarodowa stoi w obliczu rozproszonego i ponadnarodowego zagrożenia epidemiologicznego, którego powaga i rozmiar wymagają obecnie niespotykanego poziomu interwencji. Na przestrzeni wieków ludzkość zmagała się z różnymi epidemia, co zawsze wiązało się z koniecznością kompleksowego działania na płaszczyźnie międzynarodowej. Zdaniem Rady Bezpieczeństwa ONZ epidemia spowodowana wirusem ebola, która wybuchła pod koniec 2013 r., stanowi szczególne zagrożenie dla pokoju i bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego, ponieważ zdobycze w obszarze budowania pokoju i rozwoju krajów najbardziej dotkniętych epidemią mogą zostać zaprzepaszczone. To z kolei podważa stabilność krajów najbardziej nią dotkniętych. Jeśli nie zostanie opanowana, to sytuacja taka może doprowadzić do wybuchu nowych niepokojów i napięć społecznych, pogorszenia klimatu politycznego, stygmatyzacji i wzmocnienia poczucia niepewności. Podjęta w tej sprawie przez Radę Bezpieczeństwa ONZ rezolucja ma wymiar historyczny, gdyż po raz pierwszy problem zdrowia publicznego został zaklasyfikowany jako zagrożenie dla pokoju i bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego. Stało się tak, mimo że mobilizacja międzynarodowa była spóźniona o kilka miesięcy, chociaż konieczność podjęcia działań była wówczas oczywista. ; The international community faces a fragmented and transnational epidemiological threat, the severity and extent of which currently require an unprecedented level of intervention. Over the centuries, mankind has been confronted with a variety of epidemics that have always required a comprehensive action at the international level. According to the UN Security Council, the outbreak of the Ebola virus at the end of 2013 poses a particular threat to international peace and security, as the peace-building and development achievements of the countries most affected by the epidemic are jeopardised and may end in vain or be lost altogether. This in turn undermines the stability of the countries most affected. If the disease is not brought under control, this situation might lead to a new unrest and social tensions, and worsening of the political climate, or stigmatisation and a higher sense of uncertainty in the region. The resolution adopted by the UN Security Council on this matter has a historic dimension, as it has for the first time classified a public health problem as a threat to international peace and security. This happened despite the fact that international mobilisation had been delayed by several months, despite the obvious urgent need for action.
The main objective of this article is to analyze the effects of transformation of the IMF working model, launched in 2006, accelerated since 2010, and identified as the most fundamental governance overhaul in the Fund's 65-year history and the biggest ever shift of influence in favor of emerging market and developing countries to recognize their growing role in the global economy. This article, set within the institutional framework of global governance and critical international political economy, attempts to clarify whether the IMF reform focused on modifying the size of member countries' participation in the share capital of the Fund, resulted in significant increase of voting power of emerging markets and developing states or rather was example of global economic governance dysfunctionality. ; W niniejszym artykule głównym celem będzie analiza efektów przekształceń modelu funkcjonowania MFW, zapoczątkowanych w 2006 r. w Singapurze, realizowanych w głównej mierze od 2010 roku i określanych jako najbardziej fundamentalna reorganizacja zarządzania w 65-letniej historii MFW i największe dotychczasowe przesunięcie wpływów na korzyść rynków wschodzących i państw rozwijających się. Artykuł ten, usytuowany w ramach instytucjonalnego nurtu badań nad globalnym zarządzaniem i wykorzystujący podejście badawcze, które określa się mianem krytycznej międzynarodowej ekonomii politycznej, będzie stanowił próbę odpowiedzi na pytanie czy reforma, polegająca na modyfikacji wielkości partycypacji poszczególnych państw w kapitale zakładowym Funduszu, czyli udziału w tzw. kwocie i wynikających z jej wielkości liczby głosów przypadających na państwa członkowskie, była nią w istocie, czy raczej stanowiła przykład dysfunkcjonalności global economic governance.
W niniejszym artykule głównym celem będzie analiza efektów przekształceń modelu funkcjonowania MFW, zapoczątkowanych w 2006 r. w Singapurze, realizowanych w głównej mierze od 2010 roku i określanych jako najbardziej fundamentalna reorganizacja zarządzania w 65-letniej historii MFW i największe dotychczasowe przesunięcie wpływów na korzyść rynków wschodzących i państw rozwijających się. Artykuł ten, usytuowany w ramach instytucjonalnego nurtu badań nad globalnym zarządzaniem i wykorzystujący podejście badawcze, które określa się mianem krytycznej międzynarodowej ekonomii politycznej, będzie stanowił próbę odpowiedzi na pytanie czy reforma, polegająca na modyfikacji wielkości partycypacji poszczególnych państw w kapitale zakładowym Funduszu, czyli udziału w tzw. kwocie i wynikających z jej wielkości liczby głosów przypadających na państwa członkowskie, była nią w istocie, czy raczej stanowiła przykład dysfunkcjonalności global economic governance. ; The main objective of this article is to analyze the effects of transformation of the IMF working model, launched in 2006, accelerated since 2010, and identified as the most fundamental governance overhaul in the Fund's 65-year history and the biggest ever shift of influence in favor of emerging market and developing countries to recognize their growing role in the global economy. This article, set within the institutional framework of global governance and critical international political economy, attempts to clarify whether the IMF reform focused on modifying the size of member countries' participation in the share capital of the Fund, resulted in significant increase of voting power of emerging markets and developing states or rather was example of global economic governance dysfunctionality.
Publikacja recenzowana / Peer-reviewed publication ; Celem artykułu jest przedstawienie współczesnych dylematów w kwestii zarządzania Internetem jako nowym dobrem wspólnym ludzkości i przykładem tzw. nowych dóbr wspólnych. W ślad za Lawrence'em Lessigiem omówione zostały trzy warstwy Internetu: fizyczna, logiczna i treści. W tym kontekście przedstawiono dokonania Grupy Roboczej ds. Zarządzania Internetem (WGIG) powołanej przez Sekretarza Generalnego ONZ oraz rolę Forum Zarządzania Internetem (IGF). Zaprezentowano rozbieżne preferencje państw w wyborze suwerennego, wielostronnego lub międzyrządowego modelu zarządzania Internetem. W szczególności ukazano przeciwstawne działania USA i Unii Europejskiej oraz Chin i Rosji oraz podkreślanie przez te dwa ostatnie państwa zagadnienia cyberbezpieczeństwa i cybersuwerenności, co prowadzi do ograniczenia wolności słowa w Internecie i treściowej fragmentacji sieci. Autor proponuje wydzielenie kwestii możliwych do regulacji w drodze porozumień międzyrządowych. Zarazem dochodzi do wniosku, iż mechanizmy wielostronnego zarządzania siecią mogą uzyskać legitymację, jeżeli będą bardziej rzetelne i reprezentatywne niż system międzyrządowy. ; The purpose of this article is to present contemporary dilemmas in the management of the Internet as a new common good of mankind and an example of so called "new commons". In the wake of the Lawrence Lessig's writings discussed are the three layers of the Internet: physical, logical and content. In this context, presented are the achievements of the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) initiated by the UN Secretary General and the role of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Presented are divergent preferences of states in choosing a sovereign, multi-stakeholder or multilateral model of Internet governance. In particular, the article demonstrates conflicting actions of the US, European Union and China, Russia and issues of cybersecurity and cyber sovereignty highlighted by the latter two countries, which lead to restrictions on freedom of speech in the Internet and fragmentation of the network in its content layer. The author proposes to separate issues for feasible regulation by multilateral agreements. At the same time he concludes that the mechanisms of multilateral network management can gain legitimacy if they are more reliable and representative than the intergovernmental system.
A paper describes challenges of globalization, Europeanization and new governance towards institution of public administration body (in the fi elds of law and public management). An author mentions basic assumptions of modern public governance and main, significant elements of processes of globalization and Europeanization. It is necessary to consider the legal institution of public administration body (especially in administrative law and science of administration). The paper describes current problems of mentioned topic (such as varied kinds of development and progress – especially connected with information society). The author suggests to appreciate the complex of global values. Finally he describes the aftermentioned phenomenons not only as threats, but also as opportunities. The author recomended to use their to a better development.
Globalization undoubtedly is one of modern processes which lay foundations for most significant changes to contemporary societies. Social, economic and political phenomena, undergoing within nation-states and independently on them, have become a part of the network of global concerns and relations that the states are able to control no more than in a limited sense. In terms of localness the phenomenon is reflected in the processes of metropolization of urban agglomerations which form their own unique systems of governance. In doing so, they become distinctive laboratories of new forms of government and democracy. The increasing inadequacy of the territorial structure of the state and its institutional systems in terms of network systems and multilevel relations that form new and functional living space for contemporary man are responsible for initiating reforms in states. However, the process of those changes does not go automatically, and it most often stands for a confrontation of the global system imperatives with values, norms and institutions deeply rooted in social structure and shaped in the Westphalian era. Therefore, the search for wise answers to global challenges abounds in diverse results, an example of which may be seen in hybrid territorial units in France which are concomitant with the specific forms of governance that are formed within. Despite the fact that the book deals with French status quo in the main, it touches upon universal issues which concern challenges that modern democratic nation-states have to meet. The book addresses all researchers of contemporary times, who make an attempt to come to deeper understanding of the changes that a modern state and democracy have to face in times when the global system is being shaped. Unique is the fact that this book transcends theoretical digressions being at the same time embedded in the context of a particular society. The conclusions are based on an extensive empirical sources that the author of this book collected while conducting his research in France, where he had the honor of running discussions with French eminent scholars, politicians and people engaged in self-government. According to the reviewer of the book, professor Kazimierz Z. Sowa: "The collected research material presents itself as very interesting and valuable one; additionally its research method makes it a sui generis source of information. [.] The results provide us with a solid amount of knowledge about modern France whose problems go beyond the present ones."
In a relatively short time the Internet has become one of the main and the most important media of our times. The increasing number of users, as well as the growth of its role and importance in almost every aspect of social and economic life have led in recent years to the intensification of the discussion on the future of the Internet and the way it should be governed. From the very beginning the Internet developed bottom-up without a decision-making center responsible for its development. There are many organizations in the world operating at local, regional and global levels, that focus on different aspects of its operation and development. This process called "Internet governance" is the process within which governments, information and communication technology (ICT) companies and civil society work together to set standards, values, norms and decisions that shape the way we use the World Wide Web. This article attempts to explain this phenomenon, shows the origins of the dispute between the supporters of the multistakeholder model of the Internet governance. It also presents the proposals of some states to strengthen the role of governments in this process and presents the position of the European Union, which in this discussion may play a key role as a mediator in the debate about the future of the Internet governance. ; Internet w stosunkowo krótkim czasie stał się jednym z głównych i najistotniejszych mediów naszych czasów. Wzrastająca liczba jego użytkowników, jak również wzrost jego roli i znaczenia w niemalże każdym aspekcie życia społeczno-gospodarczego spowodowały w ostatnich latach nasilenie się dyskusji na temat przyszłości internetu i sposobu w jaki powinien być zarządzany. Internet od samego początku rozwijał się oddolnie bez centralnego ośrodka decyzyjnego. Na świecie funkcjonuje wiele organizacji działających na poziomie lokalnym, regionalnym i globalnym, które skupiają się na różnych aspektach jego działania i rozwoju. Proces nazywany "zarządzanie Internetem" (Internet Governance), to proces, w którym rządy, przedsiębiorstwa z branży technologii informacyjnych i komunikacyjnych oraz społeczeństwo obywatelskie wspólnie wypracowują standardy, wartości, normy i decyzje, które kształtują sposób, w jaki użytkowana jest sieć. Niniejszy artykuł podejmuje próbę wyjaśnienia tego zjawiska, przedstawia genezę sporu pomiędzy zwolennikami wielostronnego modelu zarządzania internetem oraz państwami postulującymi wzmocnienie roli rządów w tym procesie oraz prezentuje stanowisko Unii Europejskiej, która może w tej dyskusji odegrać kluczową rolę stając się mediatorem w debacie o przyszłym modelu zarządzania internetem.
The article addresses current trends in the European transformation and compares the structure which is being built to ancient and medieval empires. The imperial order appears to be productive for the EU, due to it easily embraces the heterogeneity existing within the Union, as well as contributes to the strengthening of the EU institutional legitimacy and efficiency in global governance. The ongoing EU transformations, promoted by the German-French lobby and supported by the authorities in Brussels, are indirectly leading to the emergence of an imperial structure, which is secured by a soft power, instead of a rule of sword. Taking all this into account, an attempt is made to define the role of Poland, the largest post-2004 enlargement state, in the new structure. To make this attempt sufficient a brief analysis of current Polish foreign policy and economic growth is provided. ; Artykuł nie zawiera abstraktu w języku polskim
It was in the early 1990s that the World Bank first introduced the term "good governance" in its documents and aid programs. After the reorganization of 1997, a list of six indicators of good governance was compiled. The indicators were subsequently used in the research on the quality of governance in Poland. The results clearly showed that the country scored low in all aspects of good governance, notably in public sector transparency, quality of regulation, law enforcement, as well as efficiency and effectiveness of carrying out public duties by the administration.The pathway to shared prosperity in Poland is built around growth, inclusion and sustainability objectives, but success will ultimately depend on a more strategic, effective, and accountable state. Poland has done remarkably well, boasting strong growth over three decades. Looking forward, this argues that a new level of sophistication is required to meet the challenges such as rapidly aging population and evolving global economy. This includes developing a more strategic, effective, and accountable state and it is administration that can facilitate a strong consensus around consistent policies to foster growth, inclusion and sustainability. Improved consistency, commitment, coordination, and cooperation would strengthen Poland's institutions, making them more strategic, effective and accountable.The paper describes the quality of governance and the effectiveness of public administration. The analysis is based on reports published by different institutions and takes into account measuring the effectiveness and quality of public administration and the efficiency of public institutions. ; Artykuł dotyczy jakości rządzenia i efektywności administracji publicznej. Analizy dokonano przede wszystkim na podstawie dokumentów strategicznych i opublikowanych raportów różnych instytucji, uwzględniając ocenę efektywności i jakości administracji publicznej oraz sprawność instytucji publicznych.Pojęcie dobrego rządzenia wprowadził na początku lat 90. XX w. Bank Światowy. Po jego reorganizacji w 1997 r. opracowano listę sześciu kluczowych wskaźników dobrego rządzenia, które zostały zastosowane do badania jego jakości m.in. w Polsce. Badania dowiodły, że Polska osiąga niskie standardy we wszystkich wymiarach dobrego rządzenia, przede wszystkim w zakresie przejrzystości działania sfery publicznej, jakości regulacji, egzekwowania prawa, efektywności oraz skuteczności realizacji zadań publicznych przez administrację. Mimo tego Polska poradziła sobie zaskakująco dobrze, wypracowując w ciągu 30 lat silny wzrost gospodarczy. W najbliższej przyszłości niezbędne będzie jednak podjęcie zdecydowanych działań, by sprostać takim wyzwaniom, jak starzejące się społeczeństwo czy zmiany na rynkach światowych. Sytuacja wymaga wypracowania strategii opartej na funkcjonowaniu sprawnego państwa i jego efektywnej administracji, by wspierać rozwój gospodarczy i funkcjonowanie instytucji publicznych w Polsce.
Artykuł ma na celu zaprezentowanie zależności pomiędzy akceptacją reguł demokratycznych i subiektywną oceną stopnia ich realizacji w poszczególnych krajach europejskich z wielkością kapitału społecznego pozostającego w dyspozycji obywateli tych państw. Dane wykorzystane do przeprowadzenia analizy porównawczej pochodziły z badań Europejskiego Sondażu Społecznego zrealizowanego w roku 2012. Pozwoliły one skonstruować trojakiego rodzaju klasyfikację: 1) poparcia dla demokracji, 2) oceny demokracji, 3) wielkości kapitału społecznego. Subiektywne opinie na temat ustroju demokratycznego oraz szacowana wielkość kapitału społecznego zostały dodatkowo skonfrontowane z obiektywnymi wskaźnikami makro określającymi funkcjonowanie badanych społeczeństw w wymiarze społeczno-politycznym: jakości rządzenia (Worldwide Governance Index), stabilności demokracji (Democracy Index), konkurencyjności gospodarczej (Global Competitiveness Index), rozwoju społecznego (Human Development Index) oraz kapitału ludzkiego (Human Capital Index). ; The article presents the relationship between the acceptance of democratic rules and subjective assessment of the degree of their implementation in different European countries with the size of social capital at the disposal of the citizens of those countries. The data used for the analysis of comparative studies came from the European Social Survey realized in 2012. Based on the data presented three types of classification: 1) support for democracy, 2) assessment of democracy 3) the amount of social capital. Subjective opinions on the democratic system and the estimated size of social capital are additionally confronted with objective macro indicators determining the functioning of societies in the socio-political dimension: the quality of governance (Worldwide Governance Index), the stability of democracy (Democracy Index), economic compet-itiveness (Global Competitiveness Index), social development (Human development Index) and human capital (Human Capital Index).
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article is to explain why the European Union perceives globalisation as the challenge for its regional development and how this assumption influences on regional development management. THE RESEARCH PROBLEM AND METHODS: The research problem concerns the issue of globalisation as the process which is estimated by the EU as the opportunity and challenge for its regional development at the same time. As a result the EU develops multi-level political system in which, along sovereign states, there are transnational and subnational political actors which have been engaged in regional development management. The research methods used in the study consist of an institutional and legal analysis of the major policy documents, actors and regional development management instruments that they use. THE PROCESS OF ARGUMENTATION: The introduction presents the principal methodological assumptions concerning the analysed research area, the applied conceptual approach and the research methods. The main body of the article discusses why the European Union perceives globalisation as the challenge and opportunity for regions' competitiveness. RESEARCH RESULTS: The analysis shows that the scope of competences of the EU with regard to regional development management was laid out in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; however, the globalisation affects the formulation of strategic directions of EU actions in this area and implementation of relevant interventions of the European Regional Development Fund and European Social Fund. CONCLUSIONS, INNOVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: In accordance to the European Commission globalisation creates conditions and challenges in the scope of regions' economic development. In order to prepare the regions for global competitiveness in the EU, authority is spread among different decision making and implementing levels which have the sources and knowledge required in the process of increasing regions' competitiveness. ; Celem artykułu jest ananliza wpływu procesów globalizacji na zarządzanie rozwojem regionalnym w Unii Europejskiej, w kontekście wzrostu konkurencyjności unijnych regionów w gospodarce globalnej. Problem badawczy odnosi się do określenia zakresu kompetencji odnoszących się do zarządzania rozwojem regionalnym implementowanych na rzecz poprawy ich pozycji konkurencyjnej w gospodarce globalnej. W tym kontekście omówiony został proces umacniania się wielopoziomowego charakteru systemu politycznego UE, w którym obok suwerennych państw, funkcjonują ponadnarodowi i subnarodowi aktorzy polityczni. Wykorzystane metody badawcze obejmują analizę instytucjonalno-prawną, odnoszącą się do głównych aktorów polityki oraz instrumentów zarządzania rozwojem regionalnym przez nich stosowanych, a także ustalenia zawarte w najnowszej literaturze przedmiotu. We wstępie przedstawione zostały jego główne założenia metodologiczne obejmujące analizowany obszar badawczy, wykorzystane podejście koncepcyjne i metody badawcze. W dalszej, zasadniczej części tekstu omówione zostały uwarunkowania kształtowania konkurencyjności regionów w gospodarce globalnej oraz wskazany zakres kompetencji i instrumenty stosowane przez UE na rzecz wzrostu konkurencyjności regionów, z odniesieniem do roli samych regionów w powyższym procesie. Wyniki analizy wskazują, że zakres kompetencji UE w obszarze zarządzania rozwojem regionalnym został określony w Traktacie o Funkcjonowaniu UE, natomiast presja globalnej konkurencyjności ma wpływ na formułowanie strategicznych kierunków działań UE w tym zakresie i podporządkowanie im interwencji Europejski Fundusz Rozowju Regionalnego i Europejski Fundusz Społeczny. Globalizacja kreuje uwarunkowania i wyzwania w zakresie rozwoju gospodarczego regionów. Efektem jej oddziaływania jest redefinicja roli poszczególnych aktorów politycznych w procesach zarządzania rozwojem.
Autorka odnosi się do procesu ewolucji założeń leżących u podstaw doktryny bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego Organizacji Narodów Zjednoczonych. W ostatniej dekadzie aksjonormatywne podstawy tego systemu ulegają głębokiemu przewartościowaniu w celu zwiększenia jego funkcjonalności. Autorka chce rozważyć trzy kwestie poddawane debacie i weryfi kowane na forum Organizacji. Po pierwsze, jest to kwestia identyfi kacji podmiotów tego systemu. Czy system ten winien być tworzony wobec państw, organizacji czy jednostek. Po drugie, debata toczy się w odniesieniu do sposobów kontroli systemu. Czy polega ona na oddziaływaniu jednostronnym autorytetu, czy kolektywnym zarządzaniu wszystkich jego uczestników. Po trzecie, dyskusja dotyczy skuteczności systemu. Czy powinna ona wynikać z powszechnej zgody co do jego założeń, czy też zachodzi poprzez odgórne zobowiązanie pod groźbą pewnych sankcji. Punktem odniesienia dla rozważań jest koncepcja systemu zarządzania globalnego. System ten miałby wykluczać dominację jednego podmiotu społeczności międzynarodowej nad pozostałymi, redukować tendencje niedemokratyczne oraz zapewniać równowagę między interesami a potrzebami ludzkości. Aby taki system mógł funkcjonować w skali globalnej, należy spełnić szereg warunków natury politycznej, gospodarczej i społecznej. Podstawowym warunkiem jego funkcjonowania jest jednak tendencja jego uczestników do dobrowolnego adaptowania prawa międzynarodowego oraz tworzenia międzynarodowych struktur politycznych. To daje autorce okazję do rozważenia jeszcze jednej kwestii. Kwestii dotyczącej charakteru systemu, który z samej swej natury może zakładać uniwersalność, konsensualność lub relatywność swoich konsekwencji. ; Author want to consider evolutionary process of the basis of the United Nations international security system. In the last decade this basis undergo thorough revaluation in order to increase its effectiveness. Author want to consider three questions taking into the debate and revision on the ground of the organization. At fi rst it is the matter of systemic elements identifi cation. If this system should be create regarding to states, organizations or persons. At second debate is about the methods of control due to this system. If this control is the authoritative nature or it is connected with collective management of its members. At third discussion is about effectiveness of the system. If it should be result of common approval due to its assumptions or it fulfi lls through the overriding commitment under menace of some sanctions. Point of reference for the considerations is the conception of the global governance system. It would eliminate the domination of one member of the international community over the others, reduce the undemocratic tendencies and ensure balance between interests and needs of humanity. If we want this system to operate in global scale, we should accomplish many political, economical and social conditions. Although the main term is the tendency of its members to freely implement of international law and create international institutions. It gives the author an occasion to consider one more issue. The thing concerning character of the system, which from its very nature can provide universal, consensual or relative character of its own consequences. ; Автор рассматривает процесс эволюции предпосылок, составляющих основы доктрины международной безопасности Организации Объединенных Наций. В последнем десятилетии аксионормативные основы этой системы были под- вержены глубокому переосмыслению с целью повышения ее функциональнос- ти. Автор указывает три проблемы, рассматриваемые в дебатах на форум ООН. Во-первых – это проблема определения субъектов этой системы. Во-вторых, дебаты касаются способов контроля системы: будет ли он проявляться в од- ностороннем воздействии авторитета, или же будет основан на коллективном управлении всех участников. В-третьих, дискуссия касается эффективности системы: должна ли она вытекать из общего согласия касающихся ее основ, или же происходить за посредничеством идущих сверху обязательств, невы- полнение которых связанно с угрозой наложения санкций. Принятой автором точкой отсчета является концепция системы глобального управления. Эта система предусматривает исключение господства одного субъекта международ- ного сообщества над остальными, редукцию недемократических тенденций и установление равновесия между интересами и потребностями человечества. Чтобы такая система могла функционировать в глобальном масштабе, необхо- димо выполнить ряд условий политического, экономического и общественного характера. Однако, основным условием функционирования системы является тенденция ее участников к добровольной адаптации международного права и создания международных политических структур. В связи с этим автор рас- сматривает еще один вопрос – проблему касающуюся характера системы, сущ- ность которой предусматривает универсальность, консенсуальность и относи- тельность своих последствий.
The Polish presidency in the Council of the EU has been determined by a financial crisis. However the question could be solved only by the Member States which belong to the Eurogroup led by its own President Jean-Claude Juncker and at the highest level by the Heads of States or Governments in the framework of the European Council. In addition a form of an international agreement was chosen as an instrument to introduce new solutions in the economic and monetary policy of the EU. Such a form is not foreseen in the Treaty on the European Union, in particular Article 48 TEU. In a doctrine it is called a "Schengen modus", then a way to reform the Union without a long process of ratification of an amending treaty by all the Member States. At the same time the Schengen modus may lead to a creation of different integration centers. All the above mentioned circumstances on the one hand have reduced a spectrum of the Polish activity and on the other hand indicated on a domination of an intergovernmental method, called by the Chancellor Angela Merkel a "Unions method", in the European governance. In this context provisions of the Article 12.3 of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance which allows the Contracting Parties, other than those whose currency is the euro to participate in discussions of Euro Summit meetings concerning competitiveness for the Contracting Parties, the modification of the global architecture of the euro area and the fundamental rules that will apply to it in the future, as well as, when appropriate and at least once a year, in discussions on specific issues of implementation of the Treaty, may be regarded as a certain success of the Polish presidency.
In 2015 we celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the first free local elections to self-governing bodies. Those elections activated local citizens initiatives and greatly contributed to the transformation in our social awareness, leading to real change in Poland's political regime. The underlying rationale of free local elections, however, was the package of laws adopted on 8 March 1990 which created real self-government, enabled the elections to commune and municipality councils of 27 May 1990 and introduced a new dynamic to the process of the decentralisation of the state.Changes are always the result of dreams and our ability to realise them. It is possible to make them if there exist organisational structures and institutions which allow such changes to be made. The need for political transformation had long been felt and deliberated on by those involved in spatial development or and for whom the state monopoly status quo was unacceptable. To quote the late and much missed Professor Jerzy Regulski, the implementation of self-governance was departure from the monopoly of central government, which in turn meant an actual change in the political regime. The reform of 1990 broke up five monopolies of an authoritarian state which had existed in Poland since the end of the World War II: the political monopoly of one party, of centralised power, of uniform state ownership, of public finances and the state budget, and of the uniform public administration of the state.However, it must always be remembered that the possibility of realising dreams of a change in the nature of the state was shaped in the first triumphant stage of the Solidarity period in 1989, and later became a stable basis for the future in the resolution of the First National Congress of Solidarity Delegates and in the 'Samorządna Rzeczpospolita' (A Self-governing Republic) document. The success of the real change of 1990 was rooted in the long term determination and persistence of those whose personal experiences were involved in the quest for rationality in land management. Both Professor Jerzy Regulski and Professor Michał Kulesza drew their inspiration to change the political regime from the need to ensure that society worked in a way that would allow the local needs and initiatives be articulated, and inhabitants having the ability to take concrete decisions about the surrounding environment. In this way, the existing possibility of active involvement in local initiatives, incapable of being realised in the former political system, would become a reality and the citizens would be able to make collective decisions about their local area. This would also give a chance to oppose formally the investment logic resulting from the central planning of those times.The analytic work aimed at the transformation of the political regime that Professor Regulski started in the 1970s during his employment at the University of Lodz were subsequently continued at the Economic Institute of the Polish Academy of Sciences and led to the formation of a group of individuals for whom self-governance became a core value of the new regime and a way of looking at the modern state. The change that took place in 1990 was the beginning of the building of a de-centralised, modern state, the status of which was subsequently confirmed when Poland adopted the Council of Europe Framework Convention for the European Charter of Local Self-Government. Self-government is never an institution whose constitution is ever finished. This was shown during the reform carried out by Prime Minister Jerzy Buzek's government, which continued the break-up of the monopoly of power and implemented subsidiarity principles at the regional level enabling them to exercise powers locally, in newly created districts (powiat), as well as in the later legislative changes pertaining to the regulations governing the election of mayors (wójt or burmistrz) or the work of the Komisja Wspólna Rządu i Samorządu (Joint Committee of the Government and Self-Government). Today, after 25 years of our experience with self-government, we are much more aware of the changes needed in the self-governing system. They include the strengthening of actual independence of self-government achieved through the ensured free choice of the manner in which self-government bodies will carry out their tasks, guaranteed revenues and the possibility given to commune and municipality authorities of exercising real influence on their size, improved cooperation between communes and municipalities (gmina) and districts (powiat), and, fore and foremost, by ensuring all citizens a chance of co-decision on matters which directly affect them. Changes in the regime of self-governance are a consequence of its assessment by external, independent experts but are also motivated by the natural dynamics of the changes resulting from the very essence of self-governance and its institutions, communes and municipalities (gmina), districts (powiat) and regions (voivodships).In 2010 associations of self-governing units realised the need for change and amendments to the law on self-governance. Thus, they formulated a number of proposals which were included in a document called 'Requests to the President of the Republic of Poland to commence work on the white book of territorial self-government in the year of the 20th anniversary.' This document initiated work on a draft law which in 2013 became the subject of a legislative initiative put forward by President Bronisław Komorowski. The purpose of the new law on the collaboration of self-governing bodies in local and regional development is to strengthen the role of the citizen as well as the community in the work of self-government in Poland. The effort that Professors Jerzy Regulski and Michał Kulesza in their capacity as Advisors to President Komorowski put into the legislative work remains invaluable. It is believed that the involvement of individual citizens constitutes the strength of self-government and is a guarantee of its role at the service and in the interest of communities, individual inhabitants and businesses. Hence the need for enhanced collaboration and the partnership of different bodies of self-government and the increased involvement of citizens. There is draft law that contains regulations supporting these activities.Under the draft law, a local referendum is seen as an important tool to ensure the participation of citizens in decision-making processes, including those concerning local development plans. Local referenda should constitute a mechanism used to solve local issues of material importance to residents. Their result should be binding regardless of the turnout.Self-governance helps to create and strengthen the natural inclination of individuals to act together in areas where because of their social, business or cultural ties, a local community spirit develops. In today's world of global challenges and competition, we are looking for a space for the individual which provides a feeling of security. Another important value of self-governance is the possibility of creating affiliations with a community as well as individual entrepreneurship, social activity and a regard for the collective memory of the symbols of a place. The ability to participate in community life is inseparable from the functioning of democracy at a local level, with the consultation process, election of public officers, or participation in referenda.Self-governance is a special value which gives each of us a chance to exercise a real influence on local matters. It therefore occupies a very special place where politics has a personal dimension. The variety of self-governance means at the same time a variety of development policies since there are different communities, with different emotions, different experiences or ability to participate in democratic management. This variety is a special asset in the process of the stabilisation of the state as a whole. The diversity of opinions and experiences, appointments to public office of citizens not affiliated to or necessarily recommended by any party creates the solid foundations of a democratic state. This feeling of freedom within self-governing communities must be continued and promoted.The authors of many of the texts published in this issue of Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny devoted to self-governance are, at the same time, authors of the transformation of Polish law and Poland's administration in the last 25 years. Contributions submitted by, among others, Prof. dr hab. Irena Lipowicz, Prof. Jerzy Stępień, Prof. dr hab. Jerzy Buzek, Prof. dr hab. Leon Kieres or Prof. dr hab. Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz are the best proof of the capital importance that self-governance plays in a democratic state. I thank Professor Teresa Rabska and the editorial staff of Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny for their active involvement in questions of self-government from the very beginning. This issue is entirely devoted to a range of legal, economic and sociological aspects of new challenges facing self-government and its regime. Once again I thank them for such active involvement and participation in the jubilee celebrations of Self-Government and this special issue of the journal.We need self-governance not only to feel that we can influence decisions being made about local issues but also to be continually able to renew our confidence in institutions at a local level, and through their collaboration at the national level.
In 2003, the Council of Europe, the highest political organ of the European Union, resolved to adopt the European Security Strategy. This document outlined three fundamental objectives for the EU: stability and good governance in the area of the EU's closest neighbors; creating an international order that would be based not only on bilateral relations, but primarily on efficient multilateral relations; and preventing threats, whether new or traditional. The Strategy assumed that the EU would take the responsibility for international security both in the realm of 'peace keeping' (peace and defensive missions) and 'peace-making' (peace and offensive missions). Defining the threats that the European Union needs to defy, the Strategy enumerates local conflicts, terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their potential use against the territory of the EU and its member states, collapsing states, and conflicts breaking out in such states and their neighborhood, as well as organized crime. The assessment of numerous threats to internal and external security, presented in the European Security Strategy, remains up-to-date. There have also emerged new threats for Europe that result from the need to ensure energy security, primarily with respect to the diversification of energy sources. The significance of climate change to international security has increased. The same applies to IT security or piracy. The EU has been rather anxious about the intensification of frozen conflicts, in particular the outbreak of war between Russia and Georgia. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs has indicated that the enlargement process is a significant stabilizing factor in the EU neighborhood. Fundamental importance is also attached to the review of cooperation principles with the USA, the crucial role of the UN in the international system, and cooperation with regional organizations, such as the African Union. There is also the need to develop a strategic partnership with NATO, in particular in terms of operational cooperation. Another key factor in the strengthening of the EU's global position is the development of a civil and military crisis response system.
