EU Policy on Climate Change Mitigation since Copenhagen and the Economic Crisis. CEPS Working Document No. 380, 5 March 2013

The EU has long assumed leadership in advancing domestic and international climate change policy. While pushing its partners in international negotiations, it has led the way in implementing a host of domestic measures, including a unilateral and legally binding target, an ambitious policy on renewable energy and a strategy for low-carbon technology deployment. The centrepiece of EU policy, however, has been the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), a cap-and-trade programme launched in 2005. The ETS has been seen as a tool to ensure least-cost abatement, drive EU decarbonisation and develop a global carbon market. After an initial review and revision of the ETS, to come into force in 2013, there was a belief that the new ETS was ‘future-proof’, meaning able to cope with the temporary lack of a global agreement on climate change and individual countries’ emission ceilings. This confidence has been shattered by the simultaneous ‘failure’ of Copenhagen to deliver a clear prospect of a global (top-down) agreement and the economic crisis. The lack of prospects for national caps at the international level has led to a situation whereby many member states hesitate to pursue ambitious climate change policies. In the midst of this, the EU is assessing its options anew. A number of promising areas for international cooperation exist, all centred on the need to ‘raise the ambition level’ of GHG emission reductions, notably in aviation and maritime, short-lived climate pollutions, deforestation, industrial competitiveness and green growth. Public policy issues in the field of technology and its transfer will require more work to identify real areas for cooperation.

Recalibrating CSDP-NATO relations: the real pivot. Security Policy Brief No. 47, June 2013

In an age of major power shifts, which we know from history always to be particularly dangerous, different scenarios are possible; the only promising one is that of more and well-structured international cooperation. Yet, critical voices point at a drifting apart of longstanding allies. Recalibrating CSDPNATO relations has become more important than ever.

La contribution des dynamiques internationales formelles au renforcement de la cybersécurité canadienne

La cybersécurité représente un enjeu important pour les services en charge de la sécurité canadienne à l’ère de l’expansion des Menaces Persistantes Avancées (MSP ou cybercrimes de type 1). Ces crimes se déroulent essentiellement dans le cyberespace, ce qui implique l’adoption de mesures spécifiques adéquates à l’environnement numérique, notamment à l’épreuve de son ubiquité. Le gouvernement canadien a pour sa part publié certaines mesures de défense passive et active dont la plus connue est la stratégie canadienne de cybersécurité. Puisque le cyberespace n’est pas limité territorialement, l’autorité canadienne a conclu plusieurs partenariats internationaux d’où ressortent des mesures bilatérales et multilatérales de protection et de renforcement de la cybersécurité. Toutefois, ces diverses mesures nationales et internationales ne tracent pas de cadre légal précisant la nature et le régime juridique des MSP; précisions sans lesquelles l’adoption de règles au plan national serait improductive. Considérant que l’espace numérique est international, il appelle la mise en place de mesures applicables à l’échelle universelle. Or, au plan international, il n’existe aucun texte à valeur légale spécifique à l’espèce. Ainsi, à la question de savoir, quels textes légaux pourraient s’appliquer, il s’est avéré que le jus ad bellum et la Convention européenne contre le cybercrime (Convention de Budapest) apportaient d’incontournables éléments de réponse. D’une part, le jus ad bellum permet de définir la catégorie d’acte dans laquelle peuvent être rangées les MSP, et d’autre part, la Convention de Budapest permet de définir les infractions informatiques commises par les différents acteurs en cause, les procédures d’investigation appropriées et les mécanismes utiles à la coopération internationale. Bien que les éléments ressortis de ces ententes internationales soient utiles à l’adoption d’un corps de règles internationales uniformes, les intérêts étatiques divergents constituent des obstacles de taille.

The EU’s comprehensive approach towards security: the Lisbon Treaty and “smart power”. EU Centre Singpore Policy Brief No. 6, May 2013

The European Union (EU) has increasingly become a comprehensive security actor. With the development of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), including the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) as a reaction to the failure of the EU to act during the wars in Yugoslavia/Western Balkans in the 1990s, the EU has a wide range of instruments for crisis prevention, crisis management as well as post-crisis intervention at its disposal. Observers typically agree that “hard power” is no longer sufficient to address the complex security challenges of today’s world while the EU, often criticised for only utilising “soft power”, is now able to exercise “smart power”. Through a comprehensive approach, facilitated by the Lisbon Treaty, the EU can now use the various instruments at its disposal, such as diplomacy, development aid, humanitarian assistance, trade, sanctions, international cooperation and crisis management capabilities in a joined-up manner. This mix of tools and instruments is helping the EU to achieve the aim set out in its European Security Strategy: “a secure Europe in a better world”.

Restoring Order in Global Health Governance: Do Metagovernance Norms Affect Interorganizational Convergence? CES Open Forum Series #23, 2014-2015

This paper theorizes about the convergence of international organizations in global health governance, a field of international cooperation that is commonly portrayed as particularly hit by institutional fragmentation. Unlike existing theories on interorganizationalism that have mainly looked to intra- and extraorganizational factors in order to explain why international organizations cooperate with each other in the first place, the paper is interested in the link between causes and systemic effects of interorganizational convergence. The paper begins by defining interorganizational convergence. It then proceeds to discuss why conventional theories on interorganizational- ism fail to explain the aggregate effects of convergence between IOs in global (health) governance which tend to worsen rather than cushion fragmentation — so-called "hypercollective action" (Severino & Ray 2010). In order to remedy this explanatory blind-spot the paper formulates an alternative sociological institutionalist theory on interorganizational convergence that makes two core theoretical propositions: first that emerging norms of metagovernance are a powerful driver behind interorganizational convergence in global health governance, and secondly that IOs are engaged in a fierce meaning-struggle over these norms which results in hypercollective action. In its empirical part, the paper’s core theoretical propositions are corroborated by analyzing discourses and practices of interorganizational convergence in global health. The empirical analysis allows drawing two far-reaching conclusions. On the one hand, interorganizational harmonization has emerged as a largely undisputed norm in global health which has been translated into ever more institutionalized forms of interorganizational cooperation. On the other, discourses and practices of interorganizational harmonization exhibit conflicts over the ordering principles according to which the policies and actions of international organizations with overlapping mandates and missions should be harmonized. In combination, these two empirical findings explain why interorganizational convergence has so far failed to strengthen the global health architecture.

The Principle of Common Concern and Climate Change

Effective policies combating global warming and incentivising reduction of greenhouse gases face fundamental collective action problems. States defending short term interests avoid international commitments and seek to benefit from measures combating global warming taken elsewhere. The paper explores the potential of Common Concern as an emerging principle of international law, in particular international environmental law, in addressing collective action problems and the global commons. It expounds the contours of the principle, its relationship to common heritage of mankind, to shared and differentiated responsibility and to public goods. It explores its potential to provide the foundations not only for international cooperation, but also to justify, and delimitate at the same time, unilateral action at home and deploying extraterritorial effects in addressing the challenges of global warming and climate change mitigation. As unilateral measures mainly translate into measures of trade policy, the principle of Common Concern is inherently linked and limited by existing legal disciplines in particular of the law of the World Trade Organization.

Strengthening the Migration-Development Nexus through Improved Policy and Institutional Coherence

The complexity of migration issues is clearly reflected by states diverging national migration policy interests that exists within one state. In line with the Swiss Report on International Cooperation on Migration of the Swiss Federal Council , this complexity requires close coordination and cooperation between the governmental institutions and all offices. Only through a close and coherent cooperation between all governmental actors involved in migration issues the migration-development nexus can be strength. The present paper will suggest how intergovernmental cooperation can lead to better policy coherence in migration by interlinking all actors involved.

La contribution des dynamiques internationales formelles au renforcement de la cybersécurité canadienne.

La cybersécurité représente un enjeu important pour les services en charge de la sécurité canadienne à l’ère de l’expansion des Menaces Persistantes Avancées (MSP ou cybercrimes de type 1). Ces crimes se déroulent essentiellement dans le cyberespace, ce qui implique l’adoption de mesures spécifiques adéquates à l’environnement numérique, notamment à l’épreuve de son ubiquité. Le gouvernement canadien a pour sa part publié certaines mesures de défense passive et active dont la plus connue est la stratégie canadienne de cybersécurité. Puisque le cyberespace n’est pas limité territorialement, l’autorité canadienne a conclu plusieurs partenariats internationaux d’où ressortent des mesures bilatérales et multilatérales de protection et de renforcement de la cybersécurité. Toutefois, ces diverses mesures nationales et internationales ne tracent pas de cadre légal précisant la nature et le régime juridique des MSP; précisions sans lesquelles l’adoption de règles au plan national serait improductive. Considérant que l’espace numérique est international, il appelle la mise en place de mesures applicables à l’échelle universelle. Or, au plan international, il n’existe aucun texte à valeur légale spécifique à l’espèce. Ainsi, à la question de savoir, quels textes légaux pourraient s’appliquer, il s’est avéré que le jus ad bellum et la Convention européenne contre le cybercrime (Convention de Budapest) apportaient d’incontournables éléments de réponse. D’une part, le jus ad bellum permet de définir la catégorie d’acte dans laquelle peuvent être rangées les MSP, et d’autre part, la Convention de Budapest permet de définir les infractions informatiques commises par les différents acteurs en cause, les procédures d’investigation appropriées et les mécanismes utiles à la coopération internationale. Bien que les éléments ressortis de ces ententes internationales soient utiles à l’adoption d’un corps de règles internationales uniformes, les intérêts étatiques divergents constituent des obstacles de taille.

Las normativas del CONICET y la UNLP sobre la mención de la afiliación institucional en las publicaciones científicas. Problemas recurrentes y nuevas tensiones en el sistema científico y tecnológico argentino

Recientes normativas sobre el contenido y forma de mencionarla afiliación institucional de los investigadores de dos de las principales instituciones públicas de investigación de Argentina (la Universidad Nacional de La Plata y el Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas) obligan a reflexionar sobre problemas recurrentes y nuevas tensiones en torno a las relaciones institucionales del sistema científico-tecnológico argentino. Los objetivos de esta contribución son: 1) analizar las normativas de ambas instituciones; 2) señalar sus principales virtudes y falencias; y 3) alertar sobre los peligros de promulgar reglamentaciones no consensuadas. Las diferentes y hasta contradictorias normativas referidas a cómo los científicos deben registrar su afiliación institucional en las publicaciones están basadas en miradas aisladas, que colocan a numerosos investigadores con doble dependencia institucional en una encrucijada cuando deben cumplirlas. Los ejemplos analizados exponen la falta de coordinación inter-institucional y la necesidad de tener una mirada que contémplelas relaciones de cooperación nacional, regional e internacional en un escenario científico y tecnológico cada vez más globalizado. No parece razonable promulgar normativas que pongan a las instituciones estatales en una suerte de competencia por apropiarse de la producción científica de los investigadores, canibalizándose unas a otras. A contramano de la historia y del espíritu de colaboración que ha primado dentro del sistema argentino de ciencia y tecnología, estas visiones sesgadas ponen en serio riesgo el lugar privilegiado que ha logrado la Argentina entre los principales países productores de ciencia de América Latina, así como el reconocimiento internacional de sus instituciones científico-tecnológicas

Las normativas del CONICET y la UNLP sobre la mención de la afiliación institucional en las publicaciones científicas. Problemas recurrentes y nuevas tensiones en el sistema científico y tecnológico argentino

Recientes normativas sobre el contenido y forma de mencionarla afiliación institucional de los investigadores de dos de las principales instituciones públicas de investigación de Argentina (la Universidad Nacional de La Plata y el Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas) obligan a reflexionar sobre problemas recurrentes y nuevas tensiones en torno a las relaciones institucionales del sistema científico-tecnológico argentino. Los objetivos de esta contribución son: 1) analizar las normativas de ambas instituciones; 2) señalar sus principales virtudes y falencias; y 3) alertar sobre los peligros de promulgar reglamentaciones no consensuadas. Las diferentes y hasta contradictorias normativas referidas a cómo los científicos deben registrar su afiliación institucional en las publicaciones están basadas en miradas aisladas, que colocan a numerosos investigadores con doble dependencia institucional en una encrucijada cuando deben cumplirlas. Los ejemplos analizados exponen la falta de coordinación inter-institucional y la necesidad de tener una mirada que contémplelas relaciones de cooperación nacional, regional e internacional en un escenario científico y tecnológico cada vez más globalizado. No parece razonable promulgar normativas que pongan a las instituciones estatales en una suerte de competencia por apropiarse de la producción científica de los investigadores, canibalizándose unas a otras. A contramano de la historia y del espíritu de colaboración que ha primado dentro del sistema argentino de ciencia y tecnología, estas visiones sesgadas ponen en serio riesgo el lugar privilegiado que ha logrado la Argentina entre los principales países productores de ciencia de América Latina, así como el reconocimiento internacional de sus instituciones científico-tecnológicas

Power to the people : rural electrification sector, summary report /

"PN-AAL-027"--Cover.

The united nations of the world : a treatise on how to win the peace /

"First edition, August, 1942".

On the rim of the abyss,

Neutrality and nationalism.- The new order and the old.- Trial and error.- The changing League.

Patriotism and the fellowship of nations; a little primer of great problems,

Mode of access: Internet.

The Helsinki Follow-Up Meeting of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, March 24-July 8, 1992 : a report /

Shipping list no.: 92-0664-P.