Policy agendas in Germany – database and descriptive insights

Author(s):  
Christian Breunig ◽  
Benjamin Guinaudeau ◽  
Tinette Schnatterer
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Martin Weiser

The position of law in North Korean politics and society has been a long concern of scholars as well as politicians and activists. Some argue it would be more important to understand the extra-legal rules that run North Korea like the Ten Principles on the leadership cult as they supersede any formal laws or the constitution.1 But the actual legal developments in North Korea, which eventually also mediate those leading principles and might even limit their reach, has so far been insufficiently explored. It is easy to point to North Korean secrecy as a main reason for this lacuna. But the numerous available materials and references on North Korean legislation available today have, however, not been fully explored yet, which has severely impeded progress in the field. Even publications officially released by North Korea to foreigners offer surprisingly detailed information on legal changes and the evolution of the law-making institutions. This larger picture of legal developments already draws a more detailed picture of the institutional developments in North Korean law and the broad policy fields that had been regulated from early on in contrast to the often-assumed absence of legislation in important fields like copyright, civil law or investment. It also shows that different to a monolithic system, various law-making institutions exist and fulfil discernably different legal responsibilities. Next to this limitation in content, scholars in the field currently also have not used all approaches legal developments in the North Korea could be analysed and interpreted with. Going beyond the reading of legal texts or speculating about known titles of still unavailable legislation, quantitative approaches can be applied ranging from the simple counting of laws to more sophisticated analysis of legislative numbering often provided with legislation. Understanding the various institutions as flexible in their roles and hence adoptable to shifts in leadership and policy agendas can also provide a more realistic picture of legal practices in North Korea.


2020 ◽  
pp. 79-92
Author(s):  
Burhanettin Duran

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the domestic and foreign policy agendas of all countries have been turned upside down. The pandemic has brought new problems and competition areas to states and to the international system. While the pandemic politically calls to mind the post-World War II era, it can also be compared with the 2008 crisis due to its economic effects such as unemployment and the disruption of global supply chains. A debate immediately began for a new international system; however, it seems that the current international system will be affected, but will not experience a radical change. That is, a new international order is not expected, while disorder is most likely in the post-pandemic period. In an atmosphere of global instability where debates on the U.S.-led international system have been worn for a while, in the post-pandemic period states will invest in self-sufficiency and redefine their strategic areas, especially in health security. The decline of U.S. leadership, the challenging policies of China, the effects of Chinese policies on the U.S.-China relations and the EU’s deepening crisis are going to be the main discussion topics that will determine the future of the international system.


The Great Game in West Asia examines the strategic competition between Iran and Turkey for power and influence in the South Caucasus. These neighboring Middle East powers have vied for supremacy throughout the region, while contending with ethnic heterogeneity within their own territories and across their borders. Turkey has long conceived of itself as not just a bridge between Asia and Europe but as a central player in regional and global affairs. Iran’s parallel ambitions for strategic centrality have only been masked by its own inarticulate foreign policy agendas and the repeated missteps of its revolutionary leaders. But both have sought to deepen their regional influence and power, and in the South Caucasus each has achieved a modicum of success. As much of the world’s attention has been diverted to conflicts near and far, a new ‘great game’ has been unravelling between Iran and Turkey in the South Caucasus.


Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 8
Author(s):  
Johannes Thema ◽  
Florin Vondung

Energy poverty is high up on national and European Union policy agendas. A number of possible indicators to measure the issue have been identified in the literature, but comparable data with European coverage is scarce. The EU Commission thus proposes four independent indicators on the “EU Energy Poverty Observatory” based on self-reported items from the pan-European surveys on income and living conditions (SILC) and household budgets (HBS). It is of increasing public interest to analyse social impacts of energy policies, and quantify energy poverty indicators also from modelling. This paper first shortly outlines how the expenditure-based indicators using HBS micro data may be directly linked to existing macroeconomic models through their defining variables (energy expenditure and income). As endogenous modelling based on micro data is difficult, the link may be country-specific elasticities. The main contribution of the paper is a systematic in-depth sensitivity analysis of the two indicators to changes in income and energy expenditure following varying patterns in the underlying distributions of the micro data. The results may be used by future soft links to models. The results display sometimes counterintuitive effects. We find that whether these indicators increase/decrease after a change of income or energy expenditure largely depends on the specific country-wise income and energy expenditure distribution between households on a micro-level. Due to their definition, the examined indicators are especially sensitive, when income changes alter the indicator threshold values, which in these cases are the median values in underlying distributions. We discuss these findings and relate them to several indicator shortcomings and potential remedies through changes in indicator definition.


2012 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 635-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Éric Montpetit ◽  
Martial Foucault

Abstract. Federal systems empower multiple policy actors from different levels of governments. For some scholars, the disagreements arising within such a diverse group of actors create policy stalemates. Others contend instead that new ideas are more likely to arise and diffuse from such a diverse group. This article is a contribution to this scholarly debate, proposing an original contribution on policy agendas. It argues that both perspectives are useful to understanding the dynamic of policy making within federal systems. Looking at change in policy attention in Canadian and British speeches from the throne, the article argues that federalism constrains change immediately following a party turnover in government. In the following years, however, federal arrangements encourage larger changes in policy attention than arrangements where power is centralized.Résumé. Les systèmes fédéraux rassemblent plusieurs acteurs politiques issus de différents niveaux de gouvernement. Pour certains chercheurs, l'existence de potentiels désaccords entre de tels décideurs est susceptible de créer des impasses politiques. D'autres soutiennent au contraire que les nouvelles idées sont plus susceptibles d'émerger et de se diffuser à partir d'un tel groupe diversifié. Cet article s'inscrit dans ce débat sur le fédéralisme et propose une contribution originale en termes de mise à l'agenda des politiques publiques. Il soutient que les deux perspectives sont nécessaires à la compréhension de la dynamique de l'élaboration des politiques au sein des systèmes fédéraux. En mesurant le changement de l'attention politique dans les discours du Trône canadiens et britanniques, l'article affirme que le fédéralisme freine le changement de politique immédiatement après un changement de parti au gouvernement. Au cours d'une législature, toutefois, les institutions fédérales encouragent de plus grands changements dans l'attention des politiques que dans des systèmes unitaires où le pouvoir est centralisé.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document