A. Surdej, A. Visvizi, ‘Re-thinking Multilateralism in Times of Change: A View from Central Europe’, Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 7-12.
A. Surdej, ‘Evidence, Persuasion and Power: Diplomats in International Organisations’, Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 13-16.
The title of this intervention deliberately relates to the title of the classic book by prof. Giandomenico Majone, Evidence, Arguments and Persuasion in the Policy Process, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.
Barrett, S., Why Cooperate?: The Incentive to Supply Global Public Goods, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
OECD, International Regulatory Co-operation. The Role of International Organisations in Fostering Better Rules of Globalisation, Paris: OECD Publishing, 2016.
Stone, D., Knowledge Actors and Transnational Governance: The Private-Public Policy Nexus in the Global Agora, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, 2013.
P. Puustinen, ‘Finland in the OECD – for Better Policy Making at Home and Globally’, Year-book of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 17-20.
I. Sodin, ‘Slovenia in the OECD: Working Together Multilaterally for Optimal Results’, Year-book of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 21-27.
The word “polycentric” has been regularly used to describe a more diffused multipolar world order. However, the concept of polycentrism has a much richer history in social science and may be applied more broadly as an analytical framework. It could serve to explain one of the biggest gaps in the global governance system, between the demand and supply of global public goods. Global governance scholars traditionally assume that the gap is caused by the lack of delivery and that international governmental organizations (IGO) are the weakest point. In other words, they dream of a global executive power. This paper argues, that in order to better understand the governance of world order, we should stop instead use better analytical tools. The polycentric approach shows that the problem lies not only in supply but equally on the demand side of global governance.
B. E. Nowak, ‘A Polycentric World Order and the Supply and Demand of Global Public Goods’, Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 29-45.
Acharya, A., ‘Norm Subsidiarity and Regional Orders: Sovereignty, Regionalism and Rule Making in the Third World’, International Studies Quarterly, vol. 55, no. 1, 2011, pp. 95-123.
Acharya, A., ‘Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds. A New Agenda for International Studies’, International Studies Quarterly, vol. 58, issue 4, 2014, pp. 647-659.
Acharya, A., ‘Rethinking Global Governance’, in: A. Acharya (ed.), Rethinking Demand and Progress in Global Governance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2016, pp. 1-30.
Aggarwal, V.K., Institutional Designs for a Complex World: Bargaining, Linkages, and Nesting, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998.
Aligica, P.D., Tarko, V., ‘Polycentricity: From Polanyi to Ostrom and Beyond’, Governance, vol. 25, no. 2, 2012, pp. 237-262.
Baldwin, R., The Great Convergence. Information Technology and the New Globalization, Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press, 2016.
Barrett, S., ‘Critical Factors for Providing Transnational Public Goods’, in: Seven Cross-Cutting Issues, Expert Paper Series, Stockholm: Secretariat of the International Task Force on Global Public Goods, 2006, pp. 1-58.
Barrett, S., Why Cooperate? The Incentive to Supply Global Public Goods, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press 2007.
Barnett, M., Duvall, R., ‘Power and Global Governance’, in: Barnett, M., Duvall, R. (eds), Power in Global Governance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 1-32.
Bierman, F., et al., ‘The Fragmentation of Global Governance Architectures: A Framework for Analysis’, Global Environmental Politics, vol. 9, no. 4, 2009, pp. 14-40.
Blanchard, O., Ostry, J.D., Ghosh A.R., ‘International Policy Coordination: The Loch Ness Monster’, IMF Direct, 15.12.2013.
Blomquist, W., Schlager, E., Yan Tang, S., Ostrom, E., ‘Regularities from the Field and Possible Explanations’, in: Ostrom, E., Gardner, R., Walker, J. (eds), Rules, Games, and Common-Pool Resources, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994, pp. 301-319.
Cox, R.W., ‘Universality in International Studies’, in: Brecher, M., Harvey, F. (eds), Critical Perspectives in International Studies, Ann Harbor: University of Michigan Press, 2002.
Dirlik, A., What is in a rim? Critical perspectives on the Pacific Region Idea, Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 1998.
Drezner, D.W., The System Worked. How the World Stopped Another Great Depression, New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
Fehr, E., Leibbrandt, A., ‘Cooperativeness and Impatience in the Tragedy of the Commons’, IZA Discussion Paper no. 3625, University of Zurich, 2008.
Flockhart, T., et al., Liberal Order in a Post-Western World, Washington D.C.: Transatlantic Academy, 2014.
Hale, T., Held, D., Young, K., Gridlock. Why Global Cooperation is Failing When We Need It Most, Cambridge: Polity Press, 2013.
Hess, Ch., Ostrom, E., (eds), Understanding Knowledge as a Commons: From Theory to Practice, Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2007.
International Task Force on Global Public Goods, Meeting Global Challenges. International Cooperation in the National Interest, Stockholm, 2006.
Isailovic, M., Widerberg, O., Pattberg, O.P., ‘Fragmentation of Global Environmental Governance Architectures. A Literature Overview’, Report W13/09, IVM Institute of Environmental Studies, 2013.
Kahler, M., Lake, D.A., ‘Economic Integration and Global Governance: Why so Little Supranationalism?’, in: Mattli, W., Woods, N. (eds), The Politics of Global Regulation, Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press 2009.
Keohane, R.O., Nye, J.S., Power and Interdependence, Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman, 1989.
Keohane, R.O., Victor D.G., ‘The Regime Complex for Climate Change’, The Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements, Discussion Paper 10-33, 2010.
Kupchan, Ch., ‘Regionalism Versus Multilateralism: Analytical Notes’, in: De Melo, J., Panagariya, A. (eds), New dimensions in Regional Integration, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1993, pp. 58-79.
Lagarde, C., ‘A New Multilateralism for the 21st Century’, The 2014 Richard Dimbleby Lecture, Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund, 2014.
Larner, W., Walters, W., ‘The Political Rationality of New Regionalism: Toward Genealogy of the Region’, Theory and Society, vol. 31, no. 3, 2002, pp. 391-432.
Mittelman, J.H., ‘Global Bricolage: emerging market powers and polycentric governance’, Third World Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1, 2014, pp. 23-37.
National Intelligence Council, European Union Institute for Security Studies, Global Governance 2025. At a Critical Juncture, Washington, DC and Paris: 2010.
Ostrom, E., ‘Polycentric Systems as One Approach for Solving Collective-Action Problems’, Paper W08-6, Bloomington: Indiana University 2008.
Ostrom, E., ‘Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems’, Nobel Prize Lecture, 8.12.2009.
Ostrom, V., Ostrom, E., ‘A Behavioral Approach to the Study of Intergovernmental Relations’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 359, 1965, pp. 135-146.
Ostrom, V., Tiebout, Ch., Warren, M.R., ‘The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry’, American Political Science Review, vol. 55, no. 4, 1961, pp. 831-842.
Polanyi, M., The Logic of Liberty, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951.
Raustiala, K., Victor, D.G., ‘The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resource’, International Organisation, vol. 58, 2004, pp. 277-309.
Rosenau, J.N., ‘Governance, Order and Change in World Politics”, in: Rosenau, J.N., Czempiel, E.O. (eds), Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992, pp. 1-30.
Rotfeld, A.D., The International Order. In search for new rules, Poznań: Polskie Bractwo Kawalerów Gutenberga, 2017.
Ruggie, J.G., Constructing the World Polity: Essays on International Institutionalization, New York: Routledge, 1998.
Smith, J., Stokes, J., Strategy and Statecraft: An Agenda for the United States in an Era of Compounding Complexity, Washington, DC: Center for a New American Security, 2014.
Young, O.R., ‘Institutional interplay: the environmental consequences of cross-scale interactions’, in: Ostrom, E. et al. (eds), The Drama of the Commons, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2002, pp. 263-291.
Zartman, W., Touval, S., ‘Introduction: return to the theories of cooperation’, in: Zartman, W., Touval, S. (eds), International Cooperation. The Extents and Limits of Multilateralism, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010, pp. 1-11.
In its activity, the Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB) is particularly obliged to consider the social and environmental impacts of its actions aimed, in principle, at improving the living conditions of communi-ties and supporting their sustainable development, as well as at reducing the social costs of market failure and combating social exclusion. The Bank pro-vides support to projects prioritizing European cohesion in the fields of law, human rights protection, access to education, common cultural heritage and protecting the natural environment. Its activities are directed at the protec-tion and management of global public goods to be widely used by nations, states, civilizations and generations. In view of that, this paper presents the CEB as a multilateral development bank with an exclusively social mandate, and as an organization which does not only uphold and manage global pub-lic goods but also constitutes a global public good itself. The objective of this paper is to examine the functioning of the CEB from the perspective of global public goods. The paper describes the Bank (its origins, objectives, structure, funding, core activity and instruments) with special focus on its current activi-ties, then assesses these activities through the lens of the debate on global public goods. This paper argues, on the one hand, that the CEB as an effective guardian, provider and manager of global public goods generates added val-ue on both the national and international levels by pursuing socially-oriented projects in individual states and supporting multi-country social agendas, es-pecially in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe. On the other hand, it presents the CEB as a global public good in sensu stricto, depicting it as a mar-ket leader and professional expert in the social banking field, and as a body that is not only a flexible lender responding to the needs of borrowers but also a trend setter shaping social capital markets.
M. Proczek, J. Surała, ‘The Council of Europe Development Bank and its Activities in the Context of Global Public Goods’, Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 47-68.
Bussière, E., Willaert, E., The Social Development Bank in Europe 1956-2006, Paris: Blanchard Printing, 2006.
CEB, Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB), https://coebank.org/en/ [2017-07-10].
CEB, The Council of Europe Development Bank’s new Articles of Agreement, Article II a, Paris: the Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB), November 2016.
CEB, Decision concerning the change of the name of the Institution (adopted by the Governing Board unanimously on 28 June 1999 at its 158th meeting (Extract from PV/CD 158 (1999)), Paris: Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB), June 1999.
CEB, Development Plan 2017-2019, Paris: Council of Europe Development Bank, 2017.
CEB, Development Plan 2014-2016, Paris: Council of Europe Development Bank, 2013.
CEB, Strategy 2017-2019, Paris: Council of Europe Development Bank, 2017. CEB, Rules of Procedure of the Governing Board, Paris: Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB), November 2016.
CEB, Rules of Procedure of the Administrative Council, Paris: Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB), November 2016.
CEB, Rules of Procedure of the Auditing Board, Paris: Council of Europe Development Bank, November 2016.
CEB, ‘The U.S.A. announces an additional USD 10 million contribution to the RHP’, News, Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB), 21 July, 2017, https://coebank.org/en/news-and-publications/news/usa-announcesadditional-usd10-million-contribution-to-rhp/ [2017-08-30].
EC, ‘EU focus on global public goods’, European Commission (EC), http://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/wssd/pdf/publicgoods.pdf [2017-08-30].
Kaul, I., Grunberg, I., Stern, M.A. (eds), Global Public Goods. International Cooperation in the 21st Century, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Kleer, J., Globalizacja a państwo narodowe i usługi publiczne [Globalisation versus a national state and public services], Warszawa: PAN, 2006.
Kleer, J., ‘Globalne dobra publiczne – zarys teorii’ [Global public goods – an outline of theory], in: E. Latoszek, M. Proczek, M. Krukowska (eds), Zrównoważony rozwój a globalne dobra publiczne w teorii i praktyce organizacji międzynarodowych [Sustainable growth versus global public goods in theory and practice of international organisations], Warszawa: Dom Wydawniczy Elipsa, 2016, pp. 13-23.
Latoszek, E., ‘Rada Europy i jej znaczenie w dziedzinie ochrony praw człowieka oraz tworzenia prawa europejskiego o charakterze społecznym’ [The Council of Europe and its meaning in the area of human rights defence and EU social law making], in: Latoszek, E., Proczek, M. (eds), Organizacje międzynarodowe we współczesnym świecie [International organisations in the contemporary world], Warszawa: ELIPSA, 2006, pp. 349-396.
Latoszek, E., ‘Organizacja międzynarodowa jako podmiot stosunków międzynarodowych’ [International organisation as an entity in international relations], in: Latoszek, E., Proczek, M. (eds), Organizacje międzynarodowe we współczesnym świecie [International organisations in the contemporary world], Warszawa: ELIPSA, 2006, pp. 27-74.
Solarz, J.K., Zarządzanie ryzykiem systemu finansowego [Financial system risk management], Warszawa: PWN, 2008.
Touffut, J.-P. (ed.), Advancing Public Goods, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2006.
The authors illustrate how multilateral foreign policy can work as a lever for domestic transformation and international organizations can be-come an agent of change, when a government is willing and committed to advance a reform agenda. They examine the impact of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in the structural reforms carried out by Mexico since 2012, by analyzing the Telecommunications and Broadcasting Reform as a case study. They describe how Mexico’s foreign pol-icy towards the OECD has contributed to the transformation of these sectors through evidence-based analysis and tailor-made policy advice. They con-clude by reflecting on the OECD’s role in the future of the reform agenda in the country, and on its increasing contribution to the Latin American region.
M. Aspe Bernal, C. Tena Razo, ‘Multilateralism and Domestic Transformation: The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and Mexico’s Telecommunications Reform’, Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 69-79.
Acharya, A., Multilateralism, Sovereignty and Normative Change in World Politics, Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, IDSS Working Paper Series, no. 78, May 2005, https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/rsis-pubs/WP78.pdf [2017-08-31].
Aspe Bernal, M., ‘Bridging all gaps: The transformation of Mexico’s telecommunication sector’, New Europe, vol. 24, no. 1193, January 2017, https://www.neweurope.eu/article/bridging-gaps-transformation-mexicos-telecommunication-sector/ [2017-08-23].
Gobierno de la República, ‘Reforma en Materia de Telecomunicaciones: Resumen Ejecutivo’ [Reform in Telecommunications: Executive Summary], Gobierno de la República, 24 March 2014, https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/66463/12_Telecomunicaciones.pdf [2017-08-25].
Instituto Federal de Telecomunicaciones, ‘Informes Estadísticos 1er Trimestre 2017’ [IFT, Statistical Reports 1st Quarter 2017], http://www.ift.org.mx/pagina-de-inicio/informes-estadisticos-trimestrales [2017-09-05].
Instituto Federal de Telecomunicaciones, ‘Las Telecomunicaciones: A 3 ½ Años de la Reforma Constitucional en México’ [Telecommunications: 3 ½ Years After the Constitutional Reform in Mexico], IFT, June 2017, http://www.ift.org.mx/sites/default/files/contenidogeneral/estadisticas/a3anosreforma-acc.pdf [2017-08-24].
OECD, ‘Firma del Acuerdo Marco de Cooperación entre el Gobierno de México y la OCDE’ [Signing of the Agreement of Cooperation Between the Government of Mexico and the OECD], Centro de México, 24 January 2014, http://www.oecd.org/centrodemexico/firma-del-acuerdo-marcode-cooperacion-entre-el-gobierno-de-mexico-y-la-ocde.htm [2017-08-24].
OECD, Getting It Right: Strategic Agenda for Reforms in Mexico, Paris: OECD Publishing, 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264190320-en [2017-08-24].
OECD, OECD Review of Telecommunication Policy and Regulation in Mexico, Paris: OECD Publishing, 2012, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264060111-en [2017-08-24].
OECD, OECD Telecommunication and Broadcasting Review of Mexico 2017, Paris: OECD Publishing, 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264278011-en [2017-08-31].
OECD, ‘Presentation of Strategic Orientations of the Secretary-General for 2016 and Beyond’, Secretary-General, 1 June 2016, http://www.oecd.org/about/secretary-general/presentation-of-strategic-orientations-2016-and-beyond.htm [2017-08-25].
Pacto Por México, ‘Discurso del Presidente de la República, Enrique Peña Nieto, durante la firma del Pacto por México’ [Speech of the President of Mexico, Enrique Peña Nieto, during the signature of the Pact for Mexico], ¿Quiénes somos?, 2012, http://pactopormexico.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Discurso-del-Presidente-de-la-Rep%C3%BAblica.pdf [2017-09-03].
Pérez-Jácome, D., Tena Razo, C., ‘México y la OCDE: 20 Años de Política Exterior’ [Mexico and the OECD: 20 Years of Foreign Policy], Foreign Affairs Latinoamérica, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 94-102.
Presidencia de la República, ‘Diversas intervenciones durante el Cuarto Aniversario de la Reforma de Telecomunicaciones’ [Several interventions during the Fourth Annivesary of the Telecommunications Reform], Presidencia de la República, 26 June 2017, https://www.gob.mx/presidencia/prensa/diversas-intervenciones-durante-el-cuarto-aniversario-de-lareforma-de-telecomunicaciones?idiom=es [2017-09-03].
Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, ‘Conferencia de prensa del Canciller Luis Videgaray Caso (…) en el marco de la 47 Asamblea General de la OEA’ [Press Conference of Mexican Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Luis Videgaray Caso, during the General Assembly of OAS], Blog, 19 June 2017, https://www.gob.mx/sre/articulos/conferencia-de-prensa-en-el-marco-de-la-47-asamblea-general-de-la-oea-112425?idiom=es [2017-09-05].
Televisa News, ‘Grandes Transformaciones de México: Los Consensos y las Nuevas Reformas’ [Great Transformations in Mexico: The Consensus and the New Reforms], (video) Grandes Transformaciones de México, 28 August 2017, http://noticieros.televisa.com/videos/gtm-los-consensos-nuevas-reformas/ [2017-08-29].
The aim of this paper is to outline the scope and character of the changes introduced to the Polish legal system with respect to gender equality as a result of the accession of the Republic of Poland to the European Union (EU) in 2004. Analysis concentrates on selected EU and Polish legal acts, as well as doctrine and statistical data. Reference is made to relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the EU and Polish courts. This paper seeks to draw out the fact that, if not for the nature of the EU as supranational organization that results in the legal obligation of its Member States to implement EU anti-discrimination law under the scrutiny of the competent international court (the CJEU), changes to the Polish legal system in the area of gender equality would have taken longer to implement, or may not have been made at all. The paper takes into consideration that the EU plays a key role in promoting gender equality as a public good, including beyond its borders, supporting third countries in achieving tangible gender equality results. In this respect, the EU’s actions help to promote gender equality as “shared global priority.”
A. Szczerba-Zawada, ‘Delivering Public Goods Through Law: the European Union as an Agent of change to Gender Equality Legislation in Poland’, Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 81-101.
2017 Report on equality between women and men in the EU, European Union 2017, pp. 45-47, ec.europa.eu/newsroom/document.cfm?doc_id=43416.
Aalto, P., Public Liability in EU law. Brasserie, Bergaderm and beyond, Oxford and Portland/Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2011.
Act of 26 June 1974 The Labour Code, Journal of Laws from 1974 No. 24 item 141 as amended.
Act of 5 January, 2011, Election Code, Journal of Laws from 2011 No. 21 item 112 as amended.
Act on the Implementation of Certain Provisions of the European Union in the Field of Equal Treatment (Anti-discrimination Act), Journal of Laws from 2010 No. 245 item 1700 as amended.
Bego, I., Gender Equality Policy in the European Union: A Fast Track to Parity for the New Member States, London: Palgrave Macmillan 2015.
Blackden, C. M., ‘Gender Equality and Global Public Goods: Some Reflections on Shared Priorities’, OECD, https://www.oecd.org/dac/gender-development/43882963.pdf [2017-09-14].
Boruta, I., ‘Zakaz dyskryminacji w zatrudnieniu – nowe pojęcie’, Monitor Prawa Pracy, no. 2, 2004, pp. 36-45.
Caruso, D., ‘Limits of the classic method: Positive action in the European Union after the new equality directives’, „Jean Monnet Working Paper”, no. 10, 2002, pp. 1-61.
Central Statistical Office, Labour force survey in Poland, Warsaw 2017.
Chamon, M., ‘Institutional balance and Community method in the implementation of EU legislation following the Lisbon Treaty’, Common Market Law Review 2016, vol. 53, issue 6, pp. 1501–1543.
CJEU judgment of 30 September 2003, C224/01, Köbler, EU:C:2003:513.
CJEU judgment of 15 July 1964, C-6/64, Costa, EU:C:1964:66.
CJEU judgment of 30 April 1996, C-13/94, P v S, EU:C:1996:170.
CJEU judgment of 5 February 1963, C-26/62, van Gend & Loos, EU:C:1963:1.
Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union, Official Journal of the European Union, C 326, 26 October 2012.
Council directive 2004/113/EC of 13 December 2004 implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services, Official Journal of the European Union L 373, 21 December 2004.
Council directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security, Official Journal of the European Communities L 6, 10 January 1979.
Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding, Official Journal of the European Communities, L 348, 28 November 1992.
De Vos, M., ‘Beyond Formal Equality. Positive Action under Directives 2000/43/EC and 2000/78/EC’, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 2007.
Deloitte, Women in the boardroom. A global perspective – 5th edition, 2017, https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/risk/articles/women-in-theboardroom-a-global-perspective.html [2017-09-04].
Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (recast), Official Journal of the European Union, L 204, 26 July 2006.
Directive 2010/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the application of the principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity and repealing Council Directive 86/613/EEC EU, Official Journal of the European Union L 180, 15 July 2010.
Ramos Martín, N. E., ‘Positive Action in EU Gender Equality Law: Promoting Women in Corporate Decision Making Positions’, Spanish Labour Law and Employment Relations Journal, vol. 3, issue 1-2, 2014, pp. 20-33.
European Commission at work, http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringements-proceedings/infringement_decisions/index.cfm?lang_code=EN&r_dossier=&noncom=0&decision_date_from=&decision_date_to=&active_only=0&EM=PL&title=&submit=Search, infringement number 20172119, http://www.sn.pl/sites/orzecznictwo/Orzeczenia3/II%20PK%20333-15-1.pdf [2017-09-04].
European Commission, Europe 2010. A European strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/COMPLET%20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20-%20Europe%202020%20-%20EN%20version.pdf [2017-09-08].
European Commission, Strategic engagement for gender equality 2016-2019, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union (2015), http://ec.europa.eu/anti-trafficking/sites/antitrafficking/files/strategic_engagement_for_gender_equality_en.pdf [2017-09-08].
European Union 2017, ec.europa.eu/newsroom/document.cfm?doc_id=43416 [2017-09-04].
Gender Equality Index 2015 − Measuring gender equality in the European Union 2005-2012, European Institute for Gender Equality, 2015.
Joint Staff Working Document Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment: Transforming the Lives of Girls and Women through EU External Relations 2016-2020, SWD(2015) 182 final.
Kędziora, K., Śmiszek, K. (eds), Ustawa o wdrożeniu niektórych przepisów Unii Europejskiej w zakresie równego traktowania. Komentarz, Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer 2017.
Kurczewska, U., ‘Rola Unii Europejskiej w zarządzaniu globalnymi dobrami publicznymi w ramach polityki zrównoważonego rozwoju’, in: E. Latoszek, M. Proczek, M. Krukwoska (eds), Zrównoważony rozwój a globalne dobra publiczne w teorii i praktyce organizacji międzynarodowych, Warszawa: Szkoła Główna Handlowa, 2016.
Warat, M., ‘Development of Gender Equality Policies in Poland. A review of success and limitations’, Working paper no. 2.2, 2011, pp. 1-135.
Maliszewska-Nienartowicz, J., ‘Geneza i rozwój prawa antydyskryminacyjnego Unii Europejskiej’, in: A. Zawidzka-Łojek, A. Szczerba-Zawada (eds), Prawo antydyskryminacyjne Unii Europejskiej, Warszawa: Instytut Wydawniczy EuroPrawo 2015, pp. 13-40.
McCormick, J., Understanding the European Union. A Concise introduction, London: Pelgrave Macmillan, 2017.
Moravcsik, A., ‘Europe: Quietly Rising Superpower in a Bipolar World’, in: A.S. Alexandroff, A.F. Cooper (eds.), Rising States, Rising Institutions Challenges for Global Governance, Washington: Brookings Institution Press 2010, pp. 151-174.
Mulder, J., EU Non-Discrimination Law in the Courts: Approaches to Sex and Sexualities, Oxfords and Portland/Oregon: Hart Publishing 2017.
Neyer, J., The Justification of Europe. A Political Theory of Supranational Integration, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012, Nugent, N., The Government and Politics of the European Union, London: Pelgrave Macmillan, 2017.
Pachocka, M., Szczerba-Zawada, A., Eerma D., ‘Women on corporate boards in Poland and Estonia in the context of the EU gender equality policy’, in: M. Aluchna, G. Aras (eds), Women on corporate boards. An international perspective, London: Routledge (forthcoming).
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving the gender balance among non-executive directors of companies listed on stock exchanges and related measures.
COM/2012/0614 final – 2012/0299 (COD), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM:2012:0614:FIN [2017-09-08].
Ramos Martín, N. E., ‘Positive Action in EU Gender Equality Law’, University of Amsterdam Working Paper 2013, no. 139, pp. 1-44.
Regulation of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education dated as of 25 October 2015, Journal of Laws from 2015 item 1879.
Szczerba-Zawada, A., ‘Działania pozytywne w prawie Unii Europejskiej – wyjątek od zasady równości czy narzędzie jej urzeczywistniania?’, in: J. Breczko, K. Karaskiewicz, T. Kozłowski, D. Stasi, M. Woch (eds), Prawo naturalne – Prawo pozytywne. Konflikt w interpretacji praw człowieka, Warszawa: EXPOL, 2016, pp. 149-164.
Szczerba-Zawada, A., ‘State responsibility for breach of EU principle of equal treatment’, in: L. Vojáček, P. Salák, J. Valdhans, DNY PRÁVA 2015 – DAYS OF LAW 2015. Část VI. Odpovědnost v právu, Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 2016, pp. 226-239.
Szelewa, D., ‘The policy on gender equality in Poland’, European Parliament, May 2011.
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated versions), Official Journal of the European Union, C 326, 26 October 2012.
The expansion of North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile pro-grams, coupled with belligerent rhetoric, has raised tensions between North Korea and the international community to unprecedented levels. Sanctions are the best tool to respond to North Korea and can be applied to coerce a change in behavior that would bring about the resumption of negotia-tions between stakeholders. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has adopted sanctions resolutions that highlight the shared interest of stability and security, and signal the need to find a political solution. A multilateral response will disrupt North Korea’s ability to use provocations to seek con-cessions. Central European countries’ participation in the United Nations (UN) system and their cooperation to implement sanctions will play a vital role in achieving this goal. Increasing sanctions compliance and applying pressure on the North Korean regime will create space for negotiations between stake-holders and North Korea, which could achieve a peaceful political solution.
T. Cullinan, ‘Multilateral Sanctions on North Korea and the Role of Central Europe’, Year-book of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 103-117.
Bajoria, J., Xu, B., ‘The Six Party Talks on North Korea’s Nuclear Program’, Council on Foreign Relations, 30 September 2013, http://www.cfr.org/proliferation/six-party-talks-north-koreas-nuclear-program/p13593 [2016-07-28].
Batha, E., ‘North Korea Sends “State-Sponsored Slaves” to Europe’, Reuters, 6 July 2016.
Choe, S., ‘North Korea Launches Rocket Seen as Cover for a Missile Test’, The New York Times, 6 February 2016.
Choe, S., ‘China Suspends All Coal Imports From North Korea’, The New York Times, 18 February 2017.
Delury, J., ‘Trump and North Korea’, Foreign Affairs, 13 February 2017, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2017-02-13/trump-and-northkorea[2017-08-17].
Friedman, U., ‘Smart Sanctions: A Short History’, Foreign Policy, 23 April 2012, https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/04/23/smart-sanctions-a-short-history/[2017-08-17].
Grisafi, J., ‘Kim Jong Un’s Uncle Made Ambassador to Czech Republic’, NK News, 4 February 2015.
Halpin, D., ‘North Korea and China: Don’t Bite the Hand That Feeds You’, NK News, 27 February 2017, https://www.nknews.org/2017/02/north-koreaand-china-dont-bite-the-hand-that-feeds-you/ [2017-08-17].
Lankov, A., The Real North Korea: Life and Politics in the Failed Stalinist Utopia, New York: Oxford University Press, 2014
Macdonald, H., ‘Germany Expecting New North Korean Ambassador in Berlin’, NK News, 25 January 2017.
MFA of the People’s Republic of China, ‘Wang Yi Gives Exclusive Interview to Reuters on Syrian Issue and Korean Peninsula Nuclear Issue’, 13 February 2016, http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjb_663304/zzjg_663340/yzs_663350/gjlb_663354/2701_663406/2703_663410/t1340523.shtml [2017-03-30].
Petrushka, J., ‘The View from Jingshan: China Reacts to Kim Jong Nam Death, Missile Test’, NK PRO, 2 March 2017, https://www.nknews.org/pro/theview-from-jingshan-china-reacts-to-kim-jong-nam-death-missile-test/[2017-03-30].
Rinna, A., ‘With China and North Korea Drifting Apart, Will Russia Step in?’, NK News, 20 February 2017, https://www.nknews.org/2017/02/withchina-and-north-korea-drifting-apart-will-russia-step-in/ [2017-08-17].
Sedia, G., ‘The Strange History of North Korean-Polish Relations’, Krakow Post, 17 July 2015, http://www.krakowpost.com/9717/2015/07/the-strangehistory-of-north-korean-polish-relations [2017-08-17].
Song, J., ‘N. Korean Workers in Poland, Mongolia Face “rights Violations”: Panel’, NK News, 24 December 2015.
United Nations, ‘Final Report of the Panel of Experts Submitted pursuant to Resolution 2141 (2014) 1718 Panel of Experts’, United Nations, 23 February 2015.
United Nations, ‘Final Report of the Panel of Experts Submitted pursuant to Resolution 2276 (2016) 1718 Panel of Experts’, United Nations, 27 February 2017.
United Nations, The Charter of the United Nations, Chapter VII, 26 June 1945.
UN Press, ‘Security Council Strengthens Sanctions on Democratic Republic of Korea, Unanimously Adopting Resolution 2321 (2016)’, 30 November 2016.
US Department of State, Bureau of Public Affairs, ‘Resolution 2371 (2017)
Strengthening Sanctions on North Korea’, Fact Sheet, 5 August 2017, https://usun.state.gov/remarks/7924 [2017-08-17].
US Treasury, ‘North Korea Designations’, 16 March 2016, https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/Pages/20160316.aspx [2017-07-10].
Werz, D., Oh, J., Kim, I., ‘DPRK Diplomatic Relations’, The National Committee on North Korea, August 2016.
Woo, J., Go, M., ‘In China’s Shadow, Exposing North Korean Overseas Networks”, Center for Advanced Defense Studies, Asan Institute for Policy Studies, August 2016.
The main aim of this paper is to present how the security interests of Greece have evolved within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in the changing international environment. During the Cold War, at the point when Greece became a member of the Alliance (1952), it perceived the Bal-kan Communist countries as the main threat. NATO was to guarantee secu-rity from a possible attack from the north. The Cyprus Crisis of 1974, however, changed Turkey into the main potential enemy. At that time, the United States (US) and NATO began to act to prevent any possible military conflict between Greece and Turkey. Despite Greece’s changing international environment, the disintegration of the Eastern Bloc has not led to any change in the perception of Turkey as a major threat. Of course, new threats appeared on the Balkan Peninsula, but these were dealt with by NATO, which bolstered the rationale behind Greece’s membership of the Alliance. Further threats to Greek security, stemming from the unstable situation in North Africa and the Middle East, are offset by the involvement of the US and NATO. For Greece, Turkey is still the biggest threat, given its aggressive policy in the Aegean Sea and towards Cyprus.
A. Adamczyk, ‘Greece in NATO: Evolution of Interests in the Context of Changes in the International Environment’, Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 119-140.
Adamczyk, A., Cypr. Dzieje polityczne [Cyprus. Political history], Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Dialog, 2012.
Adams, T.W., Cortrell, A.J., Cyprus between East and West, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1968.
Binder, D., ‘Greece, Turkey and NATO’, Mediterranean Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 2, 2012, pp. 95-106.
Bozikas, G.P., U.S. Security Assistance and Regional Balance of Power: Greece and Turkey, A Case Study, Pennsylvania: U.S. Army War College, 1998, pp. 1-58.
Burns, N., ‘The United States and Greece: A Partnership for the Twenty-First Century’, Mediterranean Quarterly, vol. 10, no. 3, Fall 1999, pp. 12-23.
Chourchulis, D. Kourkouvelas, L., ‘Greek perceptions of NATO Turing the Cold War’, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, vol. 12, no. 4, 2012, pp. 497-514.
Clogg, R., Historia Grecji nowożytnej [History of Modern Greece], Warszawa: Książka i Wiedza, 2006.
Couloumbis, Th., ‘Strategic Consensus in Greek Domestic and Foreign Policy since 1974’, Thesis, vol. 1, no. 4, Winter 1998, pp. 1-7.
Dokos, Th., ‘Greek Defensive Doctrine in the Post-Cold War Era’, in: Coufoudakis, V., Psomiades, H., Gerolymatos A. (eds), Greece and New Balkans.
Challenges and Opportunities, New York: Pella Publishing Company, 1999, pp. 239-264.
Dokos, Th., ‘The Evolving Mediterranean Perspective of Greece in the Transatlantic Context’, in: Southern Europe and the Mediterranean. National Approaches and Transatlantic Perspectives, The German Marshall Fund, Mediterranean Paper Series 2011, pp. 21-36.
Goure, D., Souda Bay: NATO’s Military Gem in the Eastern Mediterranean, Arlington: Lexington Institute, 2016.
Guvenc, S., Ozel, S., ‘NATO and Turkey in the post-Cold War world: between abandonment and entrapment’, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, vol. 12, no. 4, 2012. pp. 533-553.
Hummel, H., A Survey of Involvement of 15 European States in the Iraq War 2003, Parliamentary Control of Security Policy (PAKS), PAKS working paper no. 7, 2007, pp. 1-48, http://paks.uni-duesseldorf.de/Dokumente/paks_working_paper_7_rev.pdf [2017-08-26].
Iatrides, J.O., ‘The United States, Greece and The Balkans’, in: Coufoudakis, V., Psomiades, H., Gerolymatos, A. (eds), Greece and New Balkans. Challenges and Opportunities, New York: Pella Publishing Company, 1999, pp. 265-294.
Jacobs, A., ‘In Troubled Waters. NATO’s New Maritime Activity in The Aegean’, NDC Research Report, Research Division NATO College, 01/16 March 2016, pp. 1-8.
Kassimeris, Ch., Greece and The American Embrace. Greek Foreign Policy Towards Turkey, The US and The Western Allience, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.
Kassimeris, Ch., ‘From Commitment to Independence: Greek Foreign Policy and the Western Allience’, Orbis, vol. 52, issue 3, summer 2008, pp. 494-508.
Leffler, M.P., ‘Strategy, Diplomacy, and the Cold War: The United States, Turkey, and NATO, 1945-1952’, The Journal of American History, vol. 71, no. 4, 1985, pp. 807-825.
Moustakis, F., The Greek-Turkish Relationship and NATO, London and Portland: Franc Cass, 2005.
Papacosma, S.V., ‘NATO, Greece, and the Balkans in the Post-cold War Era’, in: Coufoudakis, V., Psomiades, H., Gerolymatos, A. (eds), Greece and New Balkans. Challenges and Opportunities, New York: Pella Publishing Company, 1999, pp. 47-70.
Rizas, S., ‘Atlanticism and Europeanism in Greek foreign and security policy in the 1970s’, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, vol. 8, no. 1, 2008, pp. 51-66.
Sotirovic, V.B., ‘Turkey, Greece, Italy and Security in the Mediterranean Sea Area’, Journal of Global Peace and Conflict, vol. 2, no. 1, 2014, pp. 53-83.
Stergiou, A., ‘Review Essay. Greece during the Cold War’, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, vol. 8, no. 1, 2008, pp. 67-73.
Stępniewski, T., Geopolityka Morza Czarnego w pozimnowojennym świecie [Geopolitics of the Black Sea in the Post-Cold War World], Lublin and Warszawa: IEŚW, 2011.
Visvizi, A., Greece, The Greeks, and the Crisis: Reaching Beyond “That’s how it goes”, Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, September 2016, https://www.carnegiecouncil.org/publications/articles_papers_reports/787 [2017-08-27].
Zahariadis, N., ‘Nationalism and Small State Foreign Policy: The Greek Response to the Macedonian Issue’, Political Science Quarterly, vol. 109, no. 4, 1994, pp. 647-668.
Zięba, R., ‘Bezpieczeństwo państw zrzeszonych w NATO i Unii Europejskiej’ [Security of NATO and EU Member States], in: Zięba, R. (ed.), Bezpieczeństwo międzynarodowe po zimnej wojnie [International Security after the Cold War], Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Akademickie i Profesjonalne, 2008, pp. 265-266.
The paper discusses the actual development of innovation in Poland as financed by the European Union (EU) according to the targets of the Europe 2020 Strategy. It reviews the systemic model of introducing innovation in Poland, the complexity of defining innovation and evaluates Poland’s innovation performance, in particular at the voivodeship level, compared to other member states.
A. Kłos, ‘Implementing Innovation in Poland with EU Funds: Progress or Hindrance’, Year-book of the Institute of East-Central Europe, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2017, pp. 141-160.
Bukowski, M., Szpor, A., Śniegocki, A. (eds), Potencjał i bariery polskiej innowacyjności [Potential and Barriers to Polish Innovation], Warszawa: Instytut Badań Strukturalnych, 2012.
European Commission, Regional Innovation Scoreboard 2016, Internal Market Industry, Entrepreneurship and SME, European Commission 2016.
European Commission, Regional Innovation Scoreboard 2017, Internal Market Industry, Entrepreneurship and SME, European Union 2017.
Instytut Wiedzy i Innowacji [Institute of Knowledge and Innovation], Pozycja innowacyjna Mazowsza na tle innych regionów kraju i Europy – raport okresowy za 2014 rok [Innovation Performance of Mazowsze Compared to Other Regions of the Country and Europe – Periodic Report for 2014], Warszawa: Instytut Wiedzy i Innowacji, 2015.
OECD, Oslo Manual. Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data, 3rd Edition, OECD/Eurostat, Paris 2005.
Porter, M.E., The Competitive Advantage of Nations, London: The Macmillan Press Ltd, 1990.
Schumpeter, J.A., Teoria rozwoju gospodarczego [The Theory of Economic Development], Warsaw: PWN, 1960.
Stawasz, E., Innowacje a mała firma [Innovation Versus Small Enterprise], Łódź: Wyd. Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 1999.
Śledzik, K., Teoria innowacyjności Josepha A. Schumpetera a trolle patentowe [Joseph A. Schumpeter’s Innovation Theory Versus Patent Trolls], Wydział Zarządzania Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego [Faculty of Management, University of Gdańsk], http://jmf.wzr.pl/pim/2013_4_4_21.pdf [2017-07-20].
Zadura-Lichota, P. (ed.), Innowacyjna przedsiębiorczość w Polsce. Odkryty i ukryty potencjał polskiej innowacyjności [Innovative Entrepreneurship in Poland. Overt and Covert Potential of Polish Innovativeness], Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Instytutu Technologii Eksploatacji, 2015.
