Joint effect of 2008 economic crises and continous world-wide present deficite of political legitimacy have in 2011 given birth to global resistance, but also facilitated development of its new strategies and tactics. Aldough we are still by large able to understand these contemporary models of collective action with help of New Social Movement Theory, today they objectivelly grasp a wider field of meaning, mainly for reason of their demands for radical transformation of both economic and political system. Contemporary social movements are still struggling for re-interpretation of meaning, and identity issues, but not any more for any particular goal. Instead, they seek systemic change. This extremelly important shift of strategic orientation, which makes new movements a bit old – that is classical, remains in our oppinion, undervalued both in academic, and general public for the reasons that we will try to comprehend, in this writing. ; Sadejstvo udara ekonomske krize iz 2008. i kontinuiranog deficita političkog legitimiteta dovode 2011. do pojave globalnog otpora, ali i do razvoja njegovih kvalitativno novih strategija i taktika. Iako je savremene modele kolektivne akcije dobrim delom i dalje moguće razumeti uz pomoć teorije novih društvenih pokreta, oni danas objektivno zahvataju jedno šire polje, najpre zbog zahteva za radikalnom promenom u ukupnom ekonomskom i političkom sistemu. Savremeni društveni pokreti i dalje se bore za reinterpretaciju značenja i priznanje sopstvenog identiteta, ali ne više za bilo koje pojedinačno pitanje, već za sveobuhvatnu promenu sistema. Ta izuzetno važna promena strateške orijentacije, koja nove pokrete čini pomalo starim – upravo klasičnim, ostaje, čini nam se, nedovoljno primećena iz razloga koje ćemo pokušati da rasvetlimo.
Pitanje mogućnosti formiranja ekološkog pokreta u Srbiji u kontekstu postsocijalistiĉke transformacije društva i procesa evrointegracija, predstavlja predmet bavljenja ove doktorske disertacije. Rad se sastoji iz tri veće celine i poglavlja u kome su izneta zakljuĉna razmatranja. U prvom delu rada, razvijeni su uporedno-istorijski, kontekstualni, konceptualni i metodološki okvir istraţivanja, kao polazne osnove za dalje analize. Kako bi mogle biti obuhvaćene sve relevantne dimenzije kompleksnog fenomena ekološkog pokreta i sloţena mreţa ĉinilaca koji utiĉu na njegov nastanak i razvoj, u istraţivanju su kombinovano korišćene razliĉite metodološke tehnike: anketno ispitivanje stavova i praksi na reprezentativnom uzorku graĊana Srbije (N=1952) i predstavnika lokalnih samouprava (N=232), polustrukturisani intervjui sa predstavnicima nevladinih organizacija (N=44), kao i dve studije sluĉaja zajednica sa izraţenim ekološkim problemima - Panĉeva i Bora. Drugi deo rada je posvećen opisu i analizi pojedinaĉnih elemenata ekološkog pokreta: ekoloških aktivista, ekoloških grupa / organizacija, ekoloških mreţa, kolektivnog identiteta i ekoloških konflikata. Na osnovu detaljne analize karakteristika osnovnih elemenata pokreta, u zakljuĉnom poglavlju drugog dela rada daje se odgovor na pitanje: da li u Srbiji postoji ekološki pokret? Osnovni istraţivaĉki nalaz je da u Srbiji nije došlo do formiranja klasiĉnog participativnog tipa ekološkog pokreta, kakav je prisutan u zemljama Zapada. TakoĊe, nema ni naznaka znaĉajnijeg prisustva elemenata transakcionog ekološkog aktivizma (pokreta), ĉiji je prisustvo zabeleţeno u zemljama Centralne Evrope. Umesto toga, svedoci smo razvoja specifiĉnog modela ekološkog kolektivnog delanja koji smo nazvali "ekološkim trećim sektorom". Naime, za razliku od participativnog i transakcionog delanja, koji imaju naglašeno politiĉku dimenziju, aktivnosti organizacija u okviru trećeg sektora su preteţno "apolitiĉne" po karakteru, usmerene na pruţanje usluga u oblastima iz kojih se, u sklopu neoliberalnih reformi, drţava povukla. Pored nerazvijenosti konfliktne (politiĉke) dimenzije, ekološki treći sektor odlikuje i atomizovano delanje profesionalnih ekoloških organizacija, koje samo izuzetno (pod spoljnim pritiscima ili podsticajima) uspostavljaju fiziĉke veze (mreţe) meĊu sobom, dok se na planu kolektivnog identiteta razvija samo kognitivna dimenzija (formalno prihvatanje odreĊenih ekoloških vrednosti i naĉela koja ĉine sastavni deo ekološkog diskursa dominantnog na Zapadu). GraĊani, po pravilu, nisu ukljuĉeni u rad ovih organizacija, izuzev kao korisnici usluga. U trećem delu rada se razmatraju razlozi usled kojih ne dolazi do razvoja participativnog i/ili transakcionog ekološkog pokreta (aktivizma). Za potrebe objašnjenja nastanka specifiĉne hibridne forme ekološkog trećeg sektora, kreiran je sintetiĉki eksplanatorni model koji kombinuje elemente razvijene u okviru razliĉitih teorijskih pristupa fenomenu društvenih pokreta. Eksplanatorna shema je formulisana na sledeći naĉin: za pokretanje kolektivnog delanja i nastanak ekološkog pokreta neophodno da prethodno budu ispunjeni sledeći uslovi: potrebno je da postoji izvesno socijalno-konstruisano nezadovoljstvo (problem) kod većeg broja pojedinaca / profesionalnih zastupniĉkih organizacija (socijalno-konstruktivistiĉka reinterpretacija klasiĉnih pristupa); zatim, grupa pojedinaca koja oseća dati problem / zalaţe se za njegovo rešavanje, mora posedovati odreĊene resurse za pokretanje i odrţavanje 5 kolektivne akcije (pristup teorije mobilizacije resursa); šire okruţenje treba da bude relativno povoljno kako bi nagovestilo mogućnost pozitivnog ishoda aktivnosti koja se ţeli realizovati (pristup strukture politiĉkih mogućnosti), a vrednosni okvir na takav naĉin podešen da usmerava na delanje predstavnike profesionalnih ekoloških organizacija i / ili neposredno ugroţenu populaciju (nezadovoljne) i (eventualno) širi krug podrţavalaca (pristup Novih društvenih pokreta). Na proces formiranja ekološkog pokreta, kroz ĉetiri neposredna faktora (socijalna-konstrukcija ekoloških rizika, dostupnost i karakteristike resursa, struktura politiĉkih mogućnosti, vrednosni sistem),indirektno deluju širi društveni procesi - postsocijalistiĉka transformacija i evropeizacija srpskog društva, kao i ĉinioci duţeg trajanja ((pred)socijalistiĉko nasleĊe). Testiranje postavljenih eksplikativnih hipoteza je pokazalo da ni jedan od uslova neophodnih za formiranje ekološkog pokreta, nije delimiĉno ili u potpunosti zadovoljen. Postojeći ekološki problemi su dominantno odreĊeni u kategorijama niskog rizika i male vaţnosti u odnosu na druga društvena pitanja, usled ĉega je i njihov podsticajni kapacitet za kolektivnu (re)akciju bitno sniţen. Pored toga, vladajuće shvatanje prema kome u ekološkoj modernizaciji leţi rešenje za gotovo sve ekološke probleme, pokazuje se kao ĉinilac koji nepovoljno utiĉe na graĊanski aktivizam, jer upućuje na pasivno išĉekivanje uvoĊenja obećanih mehanizama odrţivog razvoja. Većini graĊana na raspolaganju stoji vrlo ograniĉena koliĉina resursa, usled ĉega, u velikom broju sluĉajeva, oni odustaju od uĉešća u ekološkim akcijama. Ekološke organizacije, takoĊe, imaju poteškoća da obezbede neophodne resurse za rad, a dodatni problem predstavlja i naĉin njihove mobilizacije, usled kojeg gube samostalnost postajući zavisne od stranih izvora finansiranja. Kao posledica, ekološko delanje je atomizovano, a rivalitet i konflikti unutar ekološkog civilnog sektora, naglašeni; ekološke mreţe se teško formiraju i odrţavaju, kolektivni identitet je slab (nad njim prevagu odnose partikularni interesi), a kritiĉko delovanje ekoloških organizacija, nerazvijeno. Struktura politiĉkih mogućnosti se, uprkos postojanju relativno povoljnog zakonskog okvira, pokazuje zatvorenom prema uĉešću graĊana u donošenju odluka. GraĊani percipiraju predstavnike vlasti kao neprijemĉive za njihove potrebe, što se nepovoljno odraţava na njihovu spremnost da se organizuju i pokušaju da nametnu svoje zahteve. S druge strane, ekološke organizacije su iskljuĉene iz procesa odluĉivanja i svedene na ulogu asistenata u podizanju kapaciteta drţave za sprovoĊenje programa u oblasti zaštite ţivotne sredine. Konfliktno delanje organizacija je ograniĉeno, s jedne strane, time što ne dobijaju podršku moćnih aktera (meĊunarodne ekološke organizacije, strani donatori), a sa druge, finansijskim uslovljavanjem od strane drţavnih struktura. Karakteristike kulturološkog konteksta se, takoĊe, pokazuju nepovoljnim za razvoj ekološkog pokreta u Srbiji. Dominacija materijalistiĉkog sistema vrednosti i s njim povezano visoko vrednovanje ekonomskog razvoja, koje u senci ostavlja ekološke probleme, negativno utiĉe na ekološko aktiviranje graĊana. Ipak, uprkos preteţno materijalistiĉkoj vrednosnoj orijentaciji, graĊanima su vrlo bliske vrednosti Nove ekološke paradigme. MeĊutim, od naĉelnog prihvatanja vrednosti karakteristiĉnih za ovu paradigmu do aktivnog delanja, u kontekstu materijalne oskudice, put je dug i vrlo neizvestan. Zakljuĉno poglavlje je posvećeno rezimiranju i diskusiji empirijskih nalaza, kao i razmatranju širih implikacija nerazvijenosti ekološkog pokreta na zaštitu ţivotne sredine u Srbiji. ; he environmental movement in Serbia, in the context of post-socialist transformation and the EU integration process. The paper consists of three major parts and the concluding chapter. In the first part a comparative - historical, contextual, conceptual and methodological framework of the research is developed, as a starting point for the further analyses. In order to capture all relevant dimensions of the complex phenomenon of environmental movement and the composite set of factors that influence its emergence and development, the study is using a combination of different methodological techniques: a survey of attitudes and practices based on a representative sample of Serbian citizens (N = 1952) and local government representatives (N = 232), in parallel with the semi-structured interviews with representatives of non-governmental organizations (N = 44), and the two case studies of communities with serious environmental problems – the municipalities of Pancevo and Bor. The second part contains the description and analysis of individual elements of the environmental movement: environmental activists, environmental groups / organizations, environmental networks, collective identity and environmental conflicts. Based on a detailed analysis of the characteristics of the key elements of environmental movement, the concluding chapter of this part of the paper offers an answer to the question - is there an environmental movement in Serbia? The main research finding is that participatory type of environmental movement that is typical for the Western countries has not been formed in Serbia. There are even no indications of the existence of significant elements of transactional environmental activism (movement), that is present in the countries of Central Europe. Instead, we are witnessing the development of a distinct model of collective environmental action that we have named "the third environmental sector". Different from the participative and transactional activism which have an emphasized political dimension, the nature of the activities of the third sector organizations is mostly "non-political", aimed at providing services in those areas that the state has withdrew from, in the context of neo-liberal reforms. In addition to the underdeveloped conflict/political dimension, the environmental third sector is characterized by atomized actions of professional environmental organizations, which establish physical connections (networks) among themselves only as an exception (under external pressures or incentives), while at the level of collective identity only the cognitive dimension is being developed (the formal acceptance of the environmental values and principles which form an integral part of the environmental discourse dominant in the West). Citizens, as a rule, are not included in the work of these organizations, except as users of services. In the third part, the reasons for the absence of the participatory and / or transactional environmental movement (activism) are discussed. In order to explain the emergence of the specific hybrid form of the environmental third sector, a synthetic explanatory model was established, combining elements developed within different social movement theories. The explanatory scheme has been formulated as follows: for the launch of collective action and the emergence of the environmental movement certain conditions are necessary to be met - a certain level of socially-constructed 8 dissatisfaction (problem) needs to be generated in large numbers of individuals / professional advocacy organizations (social constructivist reinterpretation of classical approaches); then, a group of individuals who perceive the problem / advocates for its solution must possess appropriate resources to initiate and sustain a collective action (the Resource Mobilization Theory approach); the wider context should be relatively favorable as to suggest the possibility of a positive outcome of the action (the Political Opportunities Structure approach); the value framework should be set up in such a way to initiate the action of professional environmental organizations and / or the directly affected population, and possibly also of a wider circle of supporters (the New Social Movements approach). Through the four direct factors (social – construction of environmental risks, the availability and characteristics of resources, the structure of political opportunities, the value system), the process of development of the environmental movement is indirectly affected by wider-scale social processes – the post-socialist transformation and Europeanization of Serbian society, as well as by the factors of longer duration ((pre-) socialist heritage).The testing of the set of explicative hypotheses showed that the necessary pre-conditions for the formation of the environmental movement in Serbia have neither been fully, nor even partially met. In comparison with other issues, the existing environmental problems are dominantly defined in the terms of low-risk and low-importance, due to which their capacities to induce collective (re)action are significantly reduced. In addition, the prevailing concept of environmental modernization, presented as a solution to almost all environmental problems, proves to be a factor that adversely affects civic activism, as it leads to passive anticipation of the promised introduction of mechanisms for sustainable development. Since the majority of citizens have access only to very limited resources, they, in many cases, tend to give up their participation in environmental actions. Environmental organizations also face difficulties in obtaining necessary resources for their operation. An additional problem lies in the way resources are being mobilized: becoming increasingly dependent on foreign funding, organizations tend to lose their autonomy. As a result, the environmental action is atomized and rivalries and conflicts within the environmental civil society accentuated; environmental networks are difficult to establish and maintain and the collective identity is weak (due to domination of particular interests); the conflictual dimension of environmental organizations remains undeveloped. Despite the relatively favorable legal framework, the structure of political opportunities seems closed to the participation of citizens in the decision-making process. Citizens perceive government representatives as unresponsive to their needs, which negatively affects their readiness to act in an organized way and to attempt to impose their demands. On the other hand, environmental organizations are excluded from the decision-making process and reduced to the assisting role in the capacity building of the state bodies for the implementation of programs in the field of environmental protection. Conflicting action of such organizations is limited, on the one hand by the lack of support from powerful actors (international environmental organizations, international donors), and on the other - by the financial preconditions imposed by the state authorities. The characteristics of the cultural context also appear to be unfavorable for the development of the environmental movement in Serbia. The dominance of the materialistic value system and the related high priority attributed to the economic 9 growth, leaves the environmental problems on the margins, thus negatively affecting the environmental activation of citizens. However, despite the predominantly materialistic value orientation, the values of the New environmental paradigm are very familiar to the citizens. Still, in the context of material insecurity, the road from the general acceptance of such values to active action towards reaching them, is long and very uncertain. The concluding chapter is devoted to summarizing and discussing the empirical findings, as well as to considerations of implications of the under-developed environmental movement to the overall state of environmental protection in Serbia.
Social reforms had an important position in the process of transition changes in Serbia in the previous decade. Their strategic framework and aims have been defined in the first years after the 'democratic changes' of 2000 and their realization followed by a series of problems. The transition from the 'socialist welfare state' to the concept of 'active social policy' has been in compliance with the accepted model of (liberal) reforms and changes in the institutional sphere. Analysis of effects and achievements have pointed to an inadeaqucy of the accepted model and deficiencies in the practice. From the point of view of the current situation and expected changes in the future, there is an obvious need for a comprehensive evaluation of cause of (un)success of social reforms. The reason for that lies in the elimination of insufficiencies and creation of a basis for the construction of a system in compliance with the national objectives, the European standards and global challenges.
A decade ago, Serbia has carried out the reform of judicial control of public administration - by establishing the new Administrative Court. The expected results, however, have not been achieved and the problems that caused the reform have not been resolved. Therefore, a decade later, a new reform is in sight. The planned changes include establishing more administrative courts and introducing a two-instance administrative dispute. The aim of this paper is to discuss these changes, but in a slightly different way. Instead of their uncritical acceptance and justification by European legal standards, they are analysed having in mind the legal nature of the administrative dispute. Successful administrative dispute reform cannot be achieved if European legal standards are blindly accepted and copied literally from classical court proceedings. Only the legal nature of the administrative dispute and the features that make it special and different from the usual court disputes can lead us to a successful implementation of the changes.
The Lisbon Treaty has brought significant changes into the architecture of the European Union. The most important novelty, however, is the establishment of a full unity of the Union structure achieved by creating new and strengthening the existing elements. The new elements of this unity are the disappearance of the European Community, the 'independence' of the European Atomic Energy Community, constituting the European Union as a single entity and the introduction of EU values. At the same time, the Lisbon Treaty has strengthened the existing elements of the common institutional mechanisms, rules on amending the founding treaties and EU membership. However, constituting the Union as a single entity which has replaced and succeeded the European Communities has not abolished the EU elements of diversity. In the areas that differed, even before the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, from the community pillar, there remain significant differences in the nature and the scope of competences of the Union institutions. This mainly regards the common foreign and security policy, which now includes the defense policy, where the existing model of inter-state cooperation has been only slightly interfered with. In contrast, in the field of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, which has become part of a larger Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, the inter-state model of cooperation has been abandoned in some of its most important elements. However, the implementation of some of the important elements of the supranational model has been postponed.
The European Union is the most complex and by any aspect the most unique example of a regionaleconomic integration. Its origin, evolution and survival are based on a common legislative andinstitutional framework. The so-called common policies implemented in a number of economicand non-economic areas are particularly distinctive. Most of them are implemented on two levels:national and communal. The only common policy that is fully implemented at the European Unionlevel is the Community Agrarian Policy (CAP), whereas the agriculture has the highest expenditurein the communal budget. The function of CAP is primarily economic as its goals are strictly relatedto economic issues: price stability of agricultural products, productivity growth, higher wages forthe farmers, etc. The CAP strengthens the Union's social cohesion, which is of utmost importancein times of constant crises, BREXIT and other extreme instabilities. For this reason, the CAP hasbeen in the processes of continuous reforms (MacShary, Mansholt and those of recent times) fordecades, in order to increase its efficiency and justify enormous financial investments. The CAPresults depend on the achievement of preset objectives and the exchange of agricultural productsand food that the European Union generates globally. It has been demonstrated that the CAP is asignificant common policy, both in achieving economic goals and in the sphere of strengtheningcommunal cohesion.
