Über rheumatische Erkrankungen im Kindesalter in der Republik Moldova ist bislang nur wenig bekannt. Ziel dieser Arbeit ist die Einführung und erste Auswertung einer Kerndokumentation für rheumakranke Kinder und Jugendliche in der Republik Moldova. In der Auswertung sollen die Häufigkeiten der einzelnen rheumatischen Krankheitsbilder ermittelt und die Versorgungssituation der Patienten dargestellt werden. So soll durch die Kerndokumentation nicht nur mehr über die rheumatischen Erkrankungen gelernt, sondern auch die Qualität der Behandlung überwacht und verbessert werden. Das „Centrul mamei și copilului“ ist das einzige Krankenhaus mit rheumatologischer Abteilung für Kinder in Moldawien. Alle Patienten (Pat.), die sich hier zwischen März 2012 und Juni 2013 vorstellten, wurden mit Arzt- und Patientenfragebögen erfasst. Die Fragebögen orientieren sich an der Kinderkerndokumentation des deutschen Rheumaforschungszentrums, wurden ins Rumänische übersetzt und an die moldawischen Gegebenheiten angepasst. So wurden Daten zu Patienten, Diagnose und Versorgungssituation erhoben. Insgesamt wurden 200 Patienten (51,5%, n=103 weibliche und 48,5%, n=97 männliche) dokumentiert. 44% (n=88) waren 0-12 und 56% (n=112) 13-17 Jahre alt. Das durchschnittliche Alter aller Patienten beträgt 12,3 Jahre. Vom Symptombeginn bis zur Vorstellung bei einem Kinderrheumatologen dauerte es durchschnittlich 0,8 Jahre. Die häufigste rheumatische Erkrankung in der Republik Moldova ist die juvenile idiopathische Arthritis mit 32% (n=64), gefolgt von der reaktiven Arthritis mit 24,5% (n=49) und der eitrigen Arthritis mit 20,5% (n=41). Für die JIA errechnet sich eine Prävalenz von 11,2/100.000 und eine Inzidenz von 2,5/100.000. Der häufigste Subtyp ist die oligoartikuläre JIA (32,8%, n=20), die polyartikuläre JIA (31,3%, n=20) und die systemisch beginnende JIA (18,8%, n=12). Der durchschnittliche cJADAS-10 betrug 13,8, der durchschnittliche CHAQ 0,62. 96,9% (n=62) der JIA Patienten wurden mit NSAR behandelt, 33,3% (n=21) mit Glukokortikoiden und 46% (n=29) mit DMARDs. Methotrexat stellt mit 30,2% (n=19) das meist verschriebene DMARD dar. Das einzige verwendete Biologikum Tocilizumab erhielten 4,8% (n=3) der Patienten. Die reaktive Arthritis hat in der Republik Moldova eine Prävalenz von 8,6/ 100.000 und eine Inzidenz von 3,3/ 100.000. Die Krankheitsaktivität wurde von den Ärzten durchschnittlich 3,7 angegeben, von den Pat bzw. den Eltern 2,9. 89,8% (n=44) der Patienten erhielten NSAR und 50% der Patienten (n=24) Antibiotika. Mit 34,6% aller genannten Antibiotika war Amoxicillin das meist verschriebene Antibiotikum. Für die eitrige Arthritis ergibt sich eine Prävalenz von 7,2/ 100.000 und eine Inzidenz von 3,7/ 100.000. Die Krankheitsaktivität wird mit 3,7 von den Patienten bzw. deren Eltern genauso hoch eingeschätzt, wie von den Ärzten. 95,1% (n=39) der Patienten wurden mit NSAR behandelt. 78,0% (n=33) der Patienten erhielten eine antibiotische Therapie. Das meist verschriebene Antibiotikum war dabei mit 33,3% (n=11) Amoxicillin/ Clavulansäure. Im Vergleich zu Deutschland finden sich in der Republik Moldova signifikante Unterschiede im Patientenkollektiv: Anteilig gibt es in der Republik Moldova mehr Fälle mit reaktiver Arthritis und eitriger Arthritis und weniger mit juveniler idiopathischer Arthritis. Der Einfluss der rheumatischen Erkrankung auf das alltägliche Leben aller betroffenen Patienten wird durch folgende Daten deutlich: 32,5% (n= 65) aller Kinder wurden in den letzten 12 Monaten im Krankenhaus behandelt und blieben dann durchschnittlich 11,2 Tage dort. Und 19% (n=38) der Patienten fehlten aufgrund ihrer rheumatologischen Diagnose in ihrer Schule bzw. ihrem Kindergarten in den letzten vier Wochen vor Dokumentation. Fast die Hälfte aller Patienten (45,6%, n=90) gab an, Sport in der Freizeit zu treiben, etwa ein Viertel der Patienten (25,9% n=51) trieben nie Sport und knapp die Hälfte der Patienten (46,9%, n=92) war dauerhaft vom Schulsport befreit. Auf einer Skala von 1-10 (0= gar nicht, 10= maximal) bewerteten die moldauischen Patienten ihre Einschränkung im täglichen Leben mit durchschnittlich mit 2,5, ihre Schmerzstärke mit 3,8, das Zurechtkommen im Alltag mit 3,1 und ihre Resistenz/ Belastbarkeit (0= sehr resistent, 10= nicht resistent) mit 3,2. Nicht medikamentöse Therapien sind für viele Patienten in der Republik Moldova kaum zugänglich: 49% (n=97) der Patienten machten keine nicht medikamentöse Therapie in den letzten 12 Monaten. 43,4%(n=86) aller Patienten erhielten Physiotherapie, 7,6% (n=15) Ergotherapie, 0,5% (n=1) Wassergymnastik. 2,5% (n=5) aller Patienten nahmen an einer Patientenschulung teil. Vergleicht man die Daten mit anderen Ländern, fällt auf, dass die durchschnittliche Schmerzstärke, der Grad der Einschränkung im täglichen Leben, die Resistenz/Belastbarkeit im Alltag, der cJADAS und die Krankheitsaktivität eher hoch sind. Und die Lebensqualität ist durch seltenere Teilnahme am Schulsport, stärkere Schmerzen sowie Einschränkungen, Belastbarkeit und Zurechtkommen im Alltag eher gering. Besonders ins Auge sticht auch die relativ lange Zeit bis zur Vorstellung bei einem Kinderrheumatologen. Auch eine leitliniengerechte Therapie ist nicht für jeden Patienten verfügbar - besonders wenn eine Eskalation der Therapie notwendig wird, z.B. mittels Breitbandantibiotika oder Biologika, sind die Optionen in der Republik Moldova limitiert. Dabei würde eine frühzeitige Diagnose und eine angemessen aggressive Behandlung die Lebensqualität der Patienten erheblich verbessern.

of the Master thesis The thesis deals with relation of the constitutional framework (institutional architecture) and democratic consolidation. Institutional framework has undoubtedly an impact on the stability of a political system. A scholar debate of suitability of presidential form of government has been started by Linz and Valenzuela in the late 1980s. The political development of East European countries allows us to study relation of constitutional framework, certain forms of government and political stability (the core of the theoretical part of the thesis). Focusing on Central and East European political systems, the thesis tries to explore, how much the strengthened position of the president, disposing constitutional powers is conducive the systemic stability, instability respectively. The Moldovan case offers the possibility in the great extent; the system has undergone both the semi-presidentialism and parliamentarism, electing its president by using the popular as well as indirect vote. The position of the Moldovan president influences the stability of the political system to the certain extent. At the end, an alternative notion of the semi-presidentialism based on the principal-agent theory is developed.

This work aimed to investigate the groundwater situation in and around Mina din Chisinau, an underground limestone mine in Chisinau, Moldova, in order to contribute to a sustainable solution to its flooding problem. Work on-site was done including visits inside the mine, to points of hydrogeological relevance to the mine, well inventories/search, and an attempt at an infiltration test. An on-site literature study was done using printed materials as well. Water quality in the mine and locally was examined. A GIS interpolation of groundwater levels was done and groundwater flow was visualized. Groundwater flow locally is thought to be in the west-southwest direction. Water quality is good but high in minerals, making it suitable for blending with surface water. A proposed project to pump groundwater from outside the mine to the municipal drinking water system seems to be a suitable solution, however groundwater modelling, ideally based on pumping tests, should be done to inform the system dimensions and design. / Detta arbete syftade till att undersöka grundvattensituationen i och runt Mina din Chisinau, en underjordisk kalkstensgruva i Chisinau, Moldavien, för att bidra till en hållbar lösning på dess översvämningsproblem. Arbetet på plats utfördes inklusive besök i gruvan, till punkter av hydrogeologisk relevans för gruvan, brunnsinventeringar och ett försök till ett infiltrationstest. En litteraturstudie på plats gjordes också med tryckt material. Vattenkvaliteten i gruvan och lokalt undersöktes med hjälp av befintligt resultat. En GIS-interpolering av grundvattennivån gjordes och grundvattenflödet visualiserades. Grundvattenflöde tros vara lokalt i väst-sydvästlig riktning. Vattenkvaliteten är god men mineralrik, vilket gör den lämplig för blandning med ytvatten hos vattenverket. Ett föreslaget projekt för att pumpa grundvatten från utanför gruvan till det kommunala dricksvattensystemet verkar vara en lämplig lösning, men grundvattenmodellering, helst baserat på pumptester, bör göras för att informera systemets dimensioner och design.

In this article I have analyzed the world legislation that regulates the environmental impact assessment but also the attributions of the public authorities related to this topic. By researching the results obtained during the implementation of the legislation in this field, we can deduce that the existence of the legal framework does not fully guarantee the successful execution of a procedure, and in this case the implementation of environmental impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process that identifies, assesses and mitigates the environmental impacts of a proposed project. This article examines the challenges faced in carrying out EIAs, the similarities and differences between EIAs in different countries, and the evolution of EIA effectiveness over time. Although, the legislation of the Republic of Moldova regulates this process, in practice very few projects, whether public or private, are subject to environmental impact assessment. At the end of the article I have proposed some solutions to improve the performance of this large procedure.

This thesis provides an empirical contribution to the existing literature regarding Russian foreign policy and its application in Russia's near abroad. The primary case study is Russian foreign policy instruments applied to the Eastern European country of Moldova. This thesis directly cites the Russian National Security Concept (RNSC) documents from 2000 and 2016 as the foundation for analysis of Russian foreign policy actions applied to both Eastern Europe and Moldova. A summation of the type of instruments used within Moldova, either "soft power" or "hard power" resources, citing specific examples of each, is included. The result of this thesis is a foundation for future research of Russian foreign policy based on Russian foreign policy documents, as it pertains to the former republics of the Soviet Union. / Master of Arts / This thesis is a study of Russian foreign policy documents and actions as they pertain to the Republic of Moldova. The primary research question addressed here in is “What is Russia’s foreign policy in regard to its “near abroad,” and how does Russia enforce this foreign policy?” The Republic of Moldova is used as a case study because since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Moldova has not been able to extricate itself from the political influence of Russia. Each time Moldova seeks trade and military agreements with the European Union (EU) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Russia uses various methods to redirect Moldovan foreign policy towards Russia. These methods, their applications, and the goals Russia seeks to achieve through their use are examined in this thesis.

The aim of this study is to find out how one organisation in Moldova is working with the issue of human trafficking. It will therefore be explained how the professionals in that organisation describe how the human trafficking situation has developed in Moldova according to them and how they work and prevent the issue according to that developed situation. This study is a qualitative study and has been carried out utilizing 14 semi-structured interviews. The information given from the interviews has been categorized, and then analysed in relation to previous research and Bronfenbrenner's ecological system theory. This theory is applied to explain how an individual's development is affected by factors on several levels; micro-, meso-, exo-, macro- and chronosystems. The causes for human trafficking explained by the professionals included the culture, religion, economics and the history of the country, and these in turn can have affected the family and the view of one’s self. The conclusions based on this study are that because the factors that could be causes for human trafficking are found on all the levels, it is important that social workers and the society has this in mind and as an approach when dealing with human trafficking. / Syftet med den här studien har varit att ta reda på hur en organisation i Moldavien arbetar med den aktuella situationen gällande människohandel som finns i landet. Det kommer därför att förklaras hur de professionella i den specifika organisationen beskriver hur de sett att situationen utvecklats i Moldavien och hur de arbetar preventivt med problemet i förhållande till den utvecklade situationen. Studien är kvalitativ och har genomförts med hjälp av 14 semi-strukturerade intervjuer. Informationen från intervjuerna har kategoriserats för att sedan analyseras mot tidigare forskning och Bronfenbrenners ekologiska systemteori. Denna teori är applicerad för att förklara hur en individs utveckling påverkas av faktorer på flera nivåer; mikro-, meso-, exo-, makro- och chronosystem. Orsakerna till människohandel som är förklarade av de professionella innefattade kultur, religion, landets ekonomi och historia, och dessa i sin tur kan ha påverkat familjen och synen på sig själv. Slutsatserna som är möjliga att dra utifrån denna studie är att eftersom faktorerna, som kan vara orsaker till människohandel, återfinns på alla olika nivåer är det också viktigt att socialarbetare och samhället har detta i åtanke och som angreppssätt vid arbetet med människohandel.

The aim of this thesis is to critically assess the diplomatic performance of the European Union (EU) in its neighbourhood, namely in Moldova, Ukraine and Belarus after the inauguration of the European External Action Service (EEAS). The Lisbon Treaty announced the need for a stronger, more efficient, more coherent EU in world politics. This implied, inter alia, that in third countries, the former Commission representations have been transformed into Union Delegations that represent the EU. Besides this, the Treaty changes opened an opportunity for coordination between national and EU level diplomacy in order to obtain a more effective collective effort. These changes where focused on EU s overall performance, which has been a salient issue on the agenda of European policy-makers. The issue of the EU s performance in the wider Eastern Europe remains poignant, not least because of current developments in its neighbourhood (such as the crisis in Ukraine, Moldova s downturn in its democratization efforts or the inclusion of Belarus on the list of most repressive countries in the world). While the Brussels-based part of the EEAS has captured the attention of both academic and non-academic literature, this thesis turns its focus to the performance and diplomatic practice of the EU in third countries, i.e Moldova, Ukraine and Belarus. When talking about European diplomatic performance abroad, a key focus in the thesis is on practices through which the details of everyday practices that form and shape the performance of any actor is explored. In order to do so, the investigation conducted for this research is guided by three assumptions on the use of EU diplomacy in overcoming its foreign policy dilemmas. Looking at performance, then, implies examining EU diplomatic practices against pre-set goals; evaluating the cooperation between member-states (MS) embassies and Union Delegations towards formulating and implementing a common approach ; and, conducting a screening of diplomatic capabilities on the ground. Findings show that the EU delegations represent the EU as a whole, became communication hubs on the ground and took the lead on cooperation with the EU MS embassies. Empirical evidence revealed that, in practice, the Delegations continued to conduct aid-driven diplomacy, as a legacy from the former Commission representations. And, that the coexistence of national and EU diplomacy was marked, at times, by MS opting out of the common approach in favour of parallel actions. While the Delegations in these countries have grown in size and, most importantly, have diplomats as staff members; the development of the Delegations also came with an intra- and inter-institutional tension on the ground that echoed Brussels institutional dynamics. Lastly, a comparative evaluation of EU diplomatic performance in Eastern Europe more generally uncovered multistakeholder diplomacy, burden-sharing, bloc diplomacy, unilateral diplomatic actions and interest-driven diplomacy as key drivers and dividers in EU s attempt to address its foreign policy dilemmas.

The thesis deals with the topic of operating space for civil society organizations in the Republic of Moldova during the period from March 2017 to February 2019. The main aim of the thesis was to determine whether the case of Moldova corresponded to the concept of shrinking space for civil society defined by Saskia Brechenmacher in her paper Civil Society under Assault in 2017. Shrinking or closing space, which occurs more and more frequently in different countries throughout the world, can be defined on the basis of three main areas: tactics, impact and international reaction. The operational space for the civil sector in the Republic of Moldova differed from Brechenmacher's concept partially in the areas of tactics and international reaction and more significantly in the area of impact due to fact that that the restrictive legislation remained in the phase of a bill. As Brechenmacher's concept does not cover all aspects of operating space in Moldova, a supplementary chapter has been added. The main difference from Brechenmacher's concept was the aspect of "simulated collaboration". State officials pretended that the civil society was involved in the decision-making process, but in fact they ignored its views.

25 Jahre nach dem Zusammenbruch der Sowjetunion sind aus einem unitären Hochschulsystem 15 einzigartige nationale Systeme hervorgegangen. Deren Entwicklung wurde von je eigenen ökonomischen, kulturellen und politischen Kräften beeinflusst und geprägt, sowohl nationalen wie internationalen Ursprungs (Johnstone and Bain 2002). Die vorliegende Doktorarbeit untersucht die Veränderungen der Governance von Hochschulsystemen der drei postsowjetischen Staaten Russland, Kasachstan und Moldau über den Zeitraum von 1991 bis 2015, analysiert, zu welchem Grad diese Entwicklungen einem Prozess der Konvergenz hin zu einem „globalen Modell“ oder einem „postsowjetischen Modell“ folgen und formuliert Hypothesen über die treibenden Kräfte und Pfadabhängigkeiten, welche auf nationalem, regionalen und globaler Ebene diese Entwicklungen befördert, gehemmt oder auf idiosynkratische Art und Weise geprägt haben. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass global propagierte Governanceinstrumente – wie z.B. Globalbudgets, erweiterte Befugnisse der Hochschulleitung, externe Qualitätssicherung, Stakeholdergovernancegremien – in allen drei untersuchten Ländern Verbreitung finden und ein Prozess der Konvergenz hin zu einem „global Modell“ der Hochschulgovernance stattfindet. Gleichzeitig zeigen die Ergebnisse, dass die spezifischen Eigenarten der nationalen Governancearrangements durch die Einführung dieser neuen Instrumente in der Regel nicht ersetzt werden und dem Bestehenden stattdessen als zusätzliche Ebenen hinzugefügt werden. Wo die Logiken der neuen mit den alten Strukturen kollidieren, zeigt sich, dass sich die tradierten Strukturen und Prozesse in der Regel durchsetzen. Zudem zeigt sich, dass die Governancearrangements der drei untersuchten Länder eine große Zahl spezieller Eigenschaften teilen, durch die sie sich systematisch von jenem propagierten globalen Modell abheben. Jenes „Postsowjetische Modell“ der Hochschulgovernance zeichnet sich durch dominante Rolle des Staates, Hierarchie als primäre und legitime Form der Governance sowie einen geringen Grad an Vertrauen zwischen den zentralen Akteuren des Hochschulsystems aus. Zuletzt illustriert die Dissertation die Divergenzen und Besonderheiten der Governancemodelle in Russland, Kasachstan und Moldau. Die vorliegende Dissertation leistet somit einen Beitrag zum Verständnis der Entwicklung der Governance der Hochschulsysteme in einer sich dynamisch entwickelten Weltregion, welche in der akademischen Literatur bislang nur wenig Aufmerksamkeit erhalten hat.:Table of Contents Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................. 5 Preliminary remarks and acknowledgements .................................................................................. 6 Glossary ........................................................................................................................................... 8 1 Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ 11 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Research Topic ...................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Starting point and personal research interest ......................................................................... 14 2.3 Research approach ................................................................................................................. 15 2.4 Relevance to research and practice ........................................................................................ 16 2.5 Structure ................................................................................................................................ 16 3 Steps towards a framework of analysis ........................................................................................ 17 3.1 The Governance of Higher Education Systems ..................................................................... 17 3.1.1 Higher Education systems ............................................................................................. 17 3.1.2 Governance in higher education .................................................................................... 23 3.1.3 Summary: Making sense of higher education governance ............................................ 32 3.2 The changing governance of higher education systems ........................................................ 33 3.2.1 Conceptualizing forces of change in the governance of higher education systems: The ‘Glonacal’ agency heuristic ........................................................................................................... 33 3.2.2 Global trends and the emergence of a “global model” of higher education governance36 3.2.3 Instruments of Governance of Higher Education Systems ............................................ 49 3.2.4 Conclusion: A global model of HE governance? .......................................................... 66 3.3 State of research on the governance of higher education in post-Soviet countries ............... 67 3.3.1 European Integration in the post-Soviet space .............................................................. 70 4 Framework of Analysis and Research Design .............................................................................. 73 4.1 Research Questions and Scope of Analysis ........................................................................... 73 4.2 Research Methodology, Case Study Design, and Data Collection ........................................ 74 4.2.1 Case Studies and data collection ................................................................................... 74 4.2.2 Comparing the governance of higher education systems and assessing convergence .. 77 4.2.3 Discussion of validity and reliability of the chosen case study design .......................... 78 4.3 Limitations of the study ......................................................................................................... 79 5 The Point of Departure: The Soviet Union ................................................................................... 80 5.1 Introduction - Key features of the Soviet Higher Education system ..................................... 80 5.2 Structure of the HE system .................................................................................................... 83 5.3 The governance of higher education in the Soviet Union ..................................................... 85 5.3.1 Actors and their capabilities .......................................................................................... 85 5.3.2 Educational Standards and Quality Assurance .............................................................. 86 page 3 5.3.3 Regulation of admission into higher education ............................................................. 88 5.3.4 Institutional governance, decision-making and institutional autonomy ........................ 89 5.3.5 Financing of HEIs.......................................................................................................... 90 5.4 The HE Reforms of 1987 ...................................................................................................... 91 5.5 The break-up and transition of the Soviet higher education system ...................................... 94 6 The Russian Federation ................................................................................................................ 99 6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 99 6.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Russia .................... 99 6.2.1 De-regulation and marketization of higher education (1991-2000) ............................ 100 6.2.2 Renaissance of state control, internationalization and renewed investment into higher education (2000-2004) ................................................................................................................ 105 6.2.3 Asserting state control and promoting differentiation of the higher education system (2004-2012) ................................................................................................................................. 110 6.2.4 Differentiated state steering (2012-2016) .................................................................... 119 6.3 The governance model of the Russian HE system by 2015 ................................................ 128 7 The Republic of Kazakhstan ........................................................................................................ 134 7.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 134 7.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Kazakhstan .......... 135 7.2.1 Establishing statehood and institutions (1991-1999) ................................................... 136 7.2.2 Curbing corruption and saddling the market (1999-2004) .......................................... 139 7.2.3 Preparing to join the Bologna Space (2005-2010) ...................................................... 146 7.2.4 Differentiation and expanding autonomy (2011-2017) ............................................... 153 7.3 The governance model of the Kazakh HE system by 2015 ................................................. 171 8 The Republic of Moldova ............................................................................................................. 173 8.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 173 8.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Moldova .............. 176 8.2.1 Experimentation and laisser-faire after independence (1991-1994) ............................ 177 8.2.2 Attempts to establish impartial instruments to regulate quality (1994-2001) ............. 178 8.2.3 Re-Centralization of powers in the Ministry of Education (2001-2006) ..................... 181 8.2.4 Creation of dysfunctional public structures (2006-2009) ............................................ 183 8.2.5 The long struggle for a new system of governance (2009-2015) ................................ 184 8.3 The governance model of the Moldovan HE system by 2015 ............................................ 194 9 Cross-National Comparison of Developments and Discussion of Results ................................... 197 9.1 How has the governance of higher education systems changed between 1991-2015? ....... 197 9.1.1 Common challenges and similar answers .................................................................... 197 9.1.2 Diverging paths ........................................................................................................... 200 9.1.3 Two-track state steering system in Russia ................................................................... 203 9.1.4 Marketization and expanding state-overseen stakeholder governance in Kazakhstan 205 page 4 9.1.5 Imitation of “European” institutions in Moldova ........................................................ 207 9.2 Is there a convergence towards a “post-Soviet” or global model of governance of higher education systems? .......................................................................................................................... 208 9.2.1 Quality Assurance ....................................................................................................... 208 9.2.2 Institutional Governance and University Autonomy ................................................... 210 9.2.3 Regulation of access .................................................................................................... 211 9.2.4 Financing ..................................................................................................................... 212 9.2.5 Conclusion: Is there a common model of governance? ............................................... 213 9.3 The interplay of national, regional and global factors on the development of the governance of higher education .......................................................................................................................... 218 9.3.1 Global and European forces ........................................................................................ 218 9.3.2 Regional forces ............................................................................................................ 224 9.3.3 National-level: Governments and Ministries responsible for higher education .......... 225 9.3.4 National-level: Stakeholder organizations................................................................... 232 9.3.5 National-level: Higher Education Institutions ............................................................. 234 9.3.6 National-level: Institutional factors of path dependence ............................................. 235 10 Discussion and Outlook .............................................................................................................. 244 10.1 Concluding reflections on the contribution of this study to the field of research ................ 246 11 References .................................................................................................................................. 247 12 Annexes ...................................................................................................................................... 269 12.1 Annex 1: Russia - The governance of the higher education system .................................... 269 12.1.1 Russia: Structure of the higher education system ........................................................ 269 12.1.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 273 12.1.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Russia ............................................... 283 12.1.4 Competitive programs for investment and differentiation of higher education........... 295 12.2 Annex 2: Kazakhstan – The governance of the higher education system ........................... 299 12.2.1 Kazakhstan: Structure of the higher education system ................................................ 299 12.2.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 302 12.2.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Kazakhstan ....................................... 310 12.3 Annex 3: Moldova – The governance of the higher education system ............................... 322 12.3.1 Moldova: Structure of the higher education system .................................................... 322 12.3.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 325 12.3.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Moldova ........................................... 328 12.4 Annex 4: The European “infrastructure” of quality assurance ............................................ 336 / After 25 years of transformations of higher education systems in post-Soviet countries, the single Soviet model of higher education has evolved into fifteen unique national systems, shaped by economic, cul-tural, and political forces, both national and global (Johnstone and Bain 2002). International agencies such as the World Bank and the OECD have lobbied for a set of policies associated with the Washington Consensus (Neave, G. R. & van Vught, 1991). The Bologna Process has created isomorphic pressures, supported by EU policies and funding. Many post-Soviet States have responded to these influences, albeit with different motivations and unclear outcomes (Tomusk, 2011). Comparative research on these developments, however, is scarce and has primarily discussed them in terms of decentralization, mar-ketization and institutional autonomy (Heyneman 2010; Silova, 2011). This PhD thesis aims to 1) reconstruct the developments of governance of higher education systems, 2) analyze to what degree the developments represent a convergence towards a “global model” or a “Post-Soviet model” and 3) formulate hypotheses about driving forces and path dependencies at national, regional and global level which have driven or impeded these changes. Following work by Becher & Kogan (1992), Clark (1983), Jongbloed (2003), Paradeise (2009); Hood (2004); Dill (2010) and Dobbins et al. (2011), the research analyzes the object of analysis, the govern-ance of higher education systems, on five dimensions: 1. Educational Standards, quality assessment, and information provision; 2. Regulation of admissions to higher education; 3. Institutional structures, decision-making, and autonomy; 4. Higher education financing and incentive structures; and 5. The relationship of higher education and the state. Explanatory approaches draw upon perspectives of path dependence and models of institutional change drawing on work by North (1990), Steinmo (1992), Weick (1976), Pierson (2000) and Witte (2006). Three post-Soviet, non-EU, Bologna signatory states were selected to represent a diverse geographical sub-sample of the 15 post-Soviet States. The three countries studied in-depth are Russia, Moldova and Kazakhstan. The period of analysis comprises the changes taking place over a 25-year period between 1991 and 2015. Methodologically, the study rests on extensive literature analysis of previous academic publications, reports by international organizations such as the World Bank, OECD, and the EU, and national strategy papers. Building on this document analysis, over 60 semi-structured expert interviews were conducted with representatives of State organizations, HEIs and other stakeholder groups engaged in the govern-ance of higher education. The outcomes of interviews were used to situate developments in the particular page 12 social-political and societal contexts and to triangulate policy documents with various stakeholder per-spectives, in order to reconstruct how and why specific policy changes came about, were implemented or abandoned. The results show a differentiated picture: The governance instruments promoted by OECD, WB and EU are clearly recognizable in the 2015 governance arrangements in all three case countries. On this instru-ments-level “surface”, a process of convergence towards the “global model” is clearly taking place. While these new instruments are being adopted, however, the specific national governance arrangements persist and continue to matter. Only in isolated instances are old instruments fully displaced. More com-monly, new structures are added as additional layers to existing governance arrangements. The three countries continue to share a number of unique characteristics which sets them apart from the Anglo-Saxon higher education systems, which have inspired the “global model”. The dominating con-trolling role of the state has remained in place in all countries. This is strongly reinforced by national-level institutions and mental models which affirm hierarchy as the legitimate principle in governance and a lack of trust between actors in the system. In all case countries, the mutual expectation of state and HEIs alike remains that the state should be steering the higher education sector. This it does (Russia and Kazakhstan) or attempts to do (Moldova). Clearly, the adoption of governance instruments which are inspired by the “global model” does in no way equate with a retreat of the state. While the elements of university autonomy and stakeholder governance are slowly expanded, even this very process of loosening the reigns of the state is in great measure overseen and steered by the state. Shared character-istics, such as centralized control over admission; a state claim to steer and, in many cases, control the system; a hierarchical, authoritarian, personalized style of governance, management, leadership, as well as accountability form the discernable core of a common “post-Soviet” model of HE governance. The shared institutional past of the Soviet era, as well as common challenges, have facilitated and maintained these commonalities. As time passes, however, these post-Soviet commonalities are getting weaker. Divergent national-level forces and actors are driving or impeding reforms: While in Moldova, political volatility and underfund-ing have repeatedly undermined substantial reforms, Russia and Kazakhstan have each adopted govern-ance and management practices from New Public Management in new idiosyncratic ways: Kazakhstan has embarked on an authoritarian-driven decentralization program. Russia has created a two-tier system of state steering through financial incentivization and evaluation on the one hand, and tight oversight, control and intervention on the other. This dissertation sheds light on the developments, driving forces and mechanisms behind the convergence and divergence of approaches to higher education governance in an under-studied region of the world.:Table of Contents Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................. 5 Preliminary remarks and acknowledgements .................................................................................. 6 Glossary ........................................................................................................................................... 8 1 Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ 11 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Research Topic ...................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Starting point and personal research interest ......................................................................... 14 2.3 Research approach ................................................................................................................. 15 2.4 Relevance to research and practice ........................................................................................ 16 2.5 Structure ................................................................................................................................ 16 3 Steps towards a framework of analysis ........................................................................................ 17 3.1 The Governance of Higher Education Systems ..................................................................... 17 3.1.1 Higher Education systems ............................................................................................. 17 3.1.2 Governance in higher education .................................................................................... 23 3.1.3 Summary: Making sense of higher education governance ............................................ 32 3.2 The changing governance of higher education systems ........................................................ 33 3.2.1 Conceptualizing forces of change in the governance of higher education systems: The ‘Glonacal’ agency heuristic ........................................................................................................... 33 3.2.2 Global trends and the emergence of a “global model” of higher education governance36 3.2.3 Instruments of Governance of Higher Education Systems ............................................ 49 3.2.4 Conclusion: A global model of HE governance? .......................................................... 66 3.3 State of research on the governance of higher education in post-Soviet countries ............... 67 3.3.1 European Integration in the post-Soviet space .............................................................. 70 4 Framework of Analysis and Research Design .............................................................................. 73 4.1 Research Questions and Scope of Analysis ........................................................................... 73 4.2 Research Methodology, Case Study Design, and Data Collection ........................................ 74 4.2.1 Case Studies and data collection ................................................................................... 74 4.2.2 Comparing the governance of higher education systems and assessing convergence .. 77 4.2.3 Discussion of validity and reliability of the chosen case study design .......................... 78 4.3 Limitations of the study ......................................................................................................... 79 5 The Point of Departure: The Soviet Union ................................................................................... 80 5.1 Introduction - Key features of the Soviet Higher Education system ..................................... 80 5.2 Structure of the HE system .................................................................................................... 83 5.3 The governance of higher education in the Soviet Union ..................................................... 85 5.3.1 Actors and their capabilities .......................................................................................... 85 5.3.2 Educational Standards and Quality Assurance .............................................................. 86 page 3 5.3.3 Regulation of admission into higher education ............................................................. 88 5.3.4 Institutional governance, decision-making and institutional autonomy ........................ 89 5.3.5 Financing of HEIs.......................................................................................................... 90 5.4 The HE Reforms of 1987 ...................................................................................................... 91 5.5 The break-up and transition of the Soviet higher education system ...................................... 94 6 The Russian Federation ................................................................................................................ 99 6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 99 6.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Russia .................... 99 6.2.1 De-regulation and marketization of higher education (1991-2000) ............................ 100 6.2.2 Renaissance of state control, internationalization and renewed investment into higher education (2000-2004) ................................................................................................................ 105 6.2.3 Asserting state control and promoting differentiation of the higher education system (2004-2012) ................................................................................................................................. 110 6.2.4 Differentiated state steering (2012-2016) .................................................................... 119 6.3 The governance model of the Russian HE system by 2015 ................................................ 128 7 The Republic of Kazakhstan ........................................................................................................ 134 7.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 134 7.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Kazakhstan .......... 135 7.2.1 Establishing statehood and institutions (1991-1999) ................................................... 136 7.2.2 Curbing corruption and saddling the market (1999-2004) .......................................... 139 7.2.3 Preparing to join the Bologna Space (2005-2010) ...................................................... 146 7.2.4 Differentiation and expanding autonomy (2011-2017) ............................................... 153 7.3 The governance model of the Kazakh HE system by 2015 ................................................. 171 8 The Republic of Moldova ............................................................................................................. 173 8.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 173 8.2 The development of the governance of the higher education system in Moldova .............. 176 8.2.1 Experimentation and laisser-faire after independence (1991-1994) ............................ 177 8.2.2 Attempts to establish impartial instruments to regulate quality (1994-2001) ............. 178 8.2.3 Re-Centralization of powers in the Ministry of Education (2001-2006) ..................... 181 8.2.4 Creation of dysfunctional public structures (2006-2009) ............................................ 183 8.2.5 The long struggle for a new system of governance (2009-2015) ................................ 184 8.3 The governance model of the Moldovan HE system by 2015 ............................................ 194 9 Cross-National Comparison of Developments and Discussion of Results ................................... 197 9.1 How has the governance of higher education systems changed between 1991-2015? ....... 197 9.1.1 Common challenges and similar answers .................................................................... 197 9.1.2 Diverging paths ........................................................................................................... 200 9.1.3 Two-track state steering system in Russia ................................................................... 203 9.1.4 Marketization and expanding state-overseen stakeholder governance in Kazakhstan 205 page 4 9.1.5 Imitation of “European” institutions in Moldova ........................................................ 207 9.2 Is there a convergence towards a “post-Soviet” or global model of governance of higher education systems? .......................................................................................................................... 208 9.2.1 Quality Assurance ....................................................................................................... 208 9.2.2 Institutional Governance and University Autonomy ................................................... 210 9.2.3 Regulation of access .................................................................................................... 211 9.2.4 Financing ..................................................................................................................... 212 9.2.5 Conclusion: Is there a common model of governance? ............................................... 213 9.3 The interplay of national, regional and global factors on the development of the governance of higher education .......................................................................................................................... 218 9.3.1 Global and European forces ........................................................................................ 218 9.3.2 Regional forces ............................................................................................................ 224 9.3.3 National-level: Governments and Ministries responsible for higher education .......... 225 9.3.4 National-level: Stakeholder organizations................................................................... 232 9.3.5 National-level: Higher Education Institutions ............................................................. 234 9.3.6 National-level: Institutional factors of path dependence ............................................. 235 10 Discussion and Outlook .............................................................................................................. 244 10.1 Concluding reflections on the contribution of this study to the field of research ................ 246 11 References .................................................................................................................................. 247 12 Annexes ...................................................................................................................................... 269 12.1 Annex 1: Russia - The governance of the higher education system .................................... 269 12.1.1 Russia: Structure of the higher education system ........................................................ 269 12.1.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 273 12.1.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Russia ............................................... 283 12.1.4 Competitive programs for investment and differentiation of higher education........... 295 12.2 Annex 2: Kazakhstan – The governance of the higher education system ........................... 299 12.2.1 Kazakhstan: Structure of the higher education system ................................................ 299 12.2.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 302 12.2.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Kazakhstan ....................................... 310 12.3 Annex 3: Moldova – The governance of the higher education system ............................... 322 12.3.1 Moldova: Structure of the higher education system .................................................... 322 12.3.2 Actors and their capabilities ........................................................................................ 325 12.3.3 Instruments of higher education governance in Moldova ........................................... 328 12.4 Annex 4: The European “infrastructure” of quality assurance ............................................ 336

The Republic of Moldova is a relatively new state in Eastern Europe, formed as an independent country in 1991, after the fall of the Soviet Union. While nation branding efforts in Moldova are still in their infancy, the country’s tensioned historical legacy, divided identity and current discursive struggles make it a valuable, albeit highly unexplored subject for nation branding research. This study draws of a transdisciplinary integrative approach to analyze the ways in which a governmental institution, Invest Moldova Agency, constructs and communicates the nation brand. The aim, as highlighted in the research question, was to identify the discourses employed by the government in the process of nation branding and their relationship to national identity, society, and social practice. Theoretically, the study is informed by Critical Discourse Analysis and Keith Dinnie’s Category flow model of nation branding. Methodologically, I use Fairclough’s three-tier CDA model, additionally employing Multimodal CDA to extend my analysis to include visual alongside textual content. The qualitative study uses Facebook posts, official documents, and an in-depth interview as data. The findings show that discursive strategies on nation branding either focus on national identity or on the practice itself, and they are consistently shaping and being shaped by social practices. Moreover, five discourse categories were identified: critical, accountability, transformative, assessment, and cultural discourses, each of them responsible for creating a specific reality.