Does ASEM work? CEPS Policy Brief No. 321, 14 October 2014

This CEPS Policy Brief is based on a larger study for the EEAS and European Commission, written by the same authors in the run-up of the Milan ASEM summit of 16-17 October 2014. The main idea of the study is to assess whether ASEM works and how, by verifying the factual evidence in detail. After all, ASEM has no institutions, no budget and no treaty, whilst dialogues and a loose improvement over time in Asia-Europe relations refer to process much more than genuine ‘results’. The stocktaking covers all ASEM activities since the 2006 Helsinki summit. Summit and foreign ministers’ declarations and ASEM calendar of activities (and interviews) are used to trace ASEM activities in the three ASEM pillars (political, economic, and peoples-to-peoples/cultural). All the ‘regular’ ASEM meetings at ministerial and other levels (many of which are only known to relatively few) have been mapped. Also the ASEM working methods, based on the 2000 AECF framework and many subsequent initiatives, have been scrutinised, including whether they are actually implemented or not or partially. Such methods refer to how to work together in areas of cooperation (beyond the typical ASEM dialogue), organisation, coordination and ASEM visibility. The main conclusion is that ASEM works reasonably well, once one accepts the ASEM of today, although some inefficiencies still characterise the ‘system’. There is a host of secondary conclusions on the three pillars, the foreign ministers, the strong government-to-government nature of ASEM and the working methods. We recommend that today’s ASEM needs no reform and that not having ASEM would entail political and diplomatic costs. We emphasise that ASEM is well placed to stimulate exchange of information between the mega-FTAs such as TPP, RCEP and TTIP. However, the ASEM of tomorrow might be different, given the great changes in geo-political and economic conditions since ASEM began in the mid-1990s. Moreover, the size of ASEM has become such that classical ways of operating with (after Milano) 53 countries (including the EU and ASEAN) cannot possibly be effective all the time. We suggest that, in the run-up to the 20th ASEM birthday (2016), EU and Asian independent think-tanks get together to write an ‘options report’ reconsidering options for a new ASEM, as the basis for a profound and wide debate how to get more value-added out of ASEM.

Involving Central Asia in Afghanistan’s future – what can Europe do? EUCAM Policy Brief No. 20, August 2011

The EU argues in its Central Asia policy that it wants to take greater account of Afghanistan. But what does this mean in practice? There is a case for engaging the Central Asian states beyond agreements over supply and material transport routes to Afghanistan. Central Asian states themselves have the most to gain from a stabilised Afghanistan. Cultural ties and the increasing economic linkages between Central Asia and Afghanistan need to be taken into consideration so that Central Asian states can be assisted in playing a positive role in Afghanistan together with Western actors.

The role of cultural attributes in inequality. ACES Working Paper No. 1, 2008

This paper used cross country data in order to identify the variables that determine the inequality and poverty within countries. The main result is that culture differences have a significant role in the explanation of inequality and poverty differences between countries. Other interesting results are that globalization above a certain level contributes to inequality and poverty, and that inequality and poverty have an inverse U relation in relation to literacy.

Society's level of literacy: A cross cultural study. ACES Working Papers No. 4, 2008

In this study, the relationship between the country's level of literacy and its national culture will be explored. Cultural differences effect the way that people think and react. Culture is "the value shared amongst distinctive social groups and classes" (Soley and Pandya 2003, 206). House, et al. (2004, 57) define culture as "shared motives, values, beliefs, identities, and interpretations or meanings of significant events that result from common experiences of members of collectives and are transmitted across age generations." Dutch anthropologist Geert Hofstede (1991) considers culture to be "the collective programming of the mind. Culture is a stem of collectively held values" (Hofstede 1981, p. 240).

Changing cultural clusters: A research note. ACES Working Papers, August 2009

The purpose of this research note is to investigate the changing cultural clusters that emerged between the studies of Hofstede (1970s) and GLOBE (1990s) using similar measures and overlapping countries. Our study analyzes the world's cultural clusters using two seminal and comparable cultural classifications: Hofstede and GLOBE. Four common cultural dimensions are empirically examined: individualism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity. We use two leading methods from cluster analysis and display data in both dandrograms and pie chart forms showing the grouping of countries. Our results suggest diverging cultural typologies that transcend geography, language, and religion. Countries are engaged in selective cultural borrowing that leads to new and changing global cultural structures.

Language, Identity, Politics-the Myth of Two Ukraines. Bertelsmann Policy Brief, April 2014

The narrative of two Ukraines – the existence of two separate cultural-political communities within one Ukrainian state – has accompanied the relatively short history of inde-pendent Ukraine from the very be-ginning. Articulated by Mykola Ryabchuk more than twenty years ago1 and seemingly logical and reasonable, it has become the fa-vourite narrative of many Ukrainian and international commentators and analysts. One of these Ukraines is pro-European, shares liberal democracy values, wants to join the European Union, “return to Europe” and, what is very im-portant, speaks Ukrainian. The symbolic centre of this Ukraine is Lviv. The other is nostalgic about the Soviet Union, has close rela-tions with contemporary Russia, is hostile towards the West and does not share “western” values. The language of this other Ukraine is Russian and its “capital” is Do-netsk. Taking on board this narra-tive simply means equating one’s region of residence, political views, and preferred language.