The main objective of this paper is to analyze how the concept of security within the EU's Eastern Partnership (EaP) has evolved over time in response to the shifting security landscape in the Eastern neighborhood. The research aims to determine if securitization has become more prevalent in the EaP and how the security concept has shifted since the EaP's inception. Basing it on a qualitative strategy and supplemented with quantitative methods, the research used content analysis on selected key terms in official EaP documents spanning from 2009 to 2021. The coding was focused on ‘security’ and terms associated with it coupled with additional terms of ‘economic integration’; ‘stability’; ‘strategic’; ‘prosperity’; and ‘common values’. Securitization theory, rooted in constructivism, was used to explain how securitizing actors utilize speech acts to draw attention to issues. Findings indicate that ‘security’ has become more prevalent over the years and that it has evolved from dealing with ‘energy security’ to involving new types of security, such as ‘human security’ and ‘cyber security.’ Other non-security related terms, especially ‘economic integration’, has become less prevalent over the years. The results indicate the EaP is shifting its focus from economic integration to securitization, with 'Security' emerging as the new primary goal, encompassing areas like cyber and human security in response to Russian destabilization efforts. Future EU policies, particularly after the next EaP summit, are expected to further emphasize security, potentially including military aspects, especially considering the EU's support for Ukraine. The causes of this shift are complex, involving both reactive adaptations by the EU and strategic moves to counter Russian influence, necessitating further research post-summit on the evolving nature of securitization in the EaP.

This thesis investigates the role of industrial design in promoting sustainability and circular economy principles, particularly through collaboration with PaperShell AB, a company specializing in sustainable composites. The study focuses on developing a circular bio-economy system that integrates local mycelium cultures for material decomposition and soil regeneration. The central research question is: How can industrial design practices evolve to foster ecological regeneration while maintaining economic viability? Key findings emphasize the importance of closing material loops and reimagining industrial processes to harmonize with ecological systems. The Catifa Carta project, a collaboration with the Italian furniture brand Arper, serves as a case study demonstrating the practical application and success of these principles. Future research directions include exploring the scalability of these practices and additional ecological partnerships.

As the scale and scope of infrastructure projects have increased, so too has the array of stakeholders either involved or impacted. Such projects often take years to come together and evolve with time through the actions of project sponsors and the engagement of various stakeholders. Stakeholders through engagement and input can help legitimize and improve large-scale project initiatives. Stakeholders can also marshal opposition that can delay or block these projects. Consequently, the significance of stakeholder involvement is critical in megaprojects. Governments have increasingly utilized public-private partnerships (PPPs) for megaproject delivery. This method introduces characteristics that distinguish PPP megaprojects from others such as: private control, profiteering, foreign profits, and long-term concessions. This study investigates whether differences exist between PPP and non-PPP megaprojects with respect to stakeholder involvement strategies and stakeholder issues raised in such projects. This research employed a longitudinal multiple case study approach that examined four tolled fixed crossing megaprojects; two of them were delivered as PPPs and two were delivered as design-build (i.e. non-PPP). The approach followed the design of prior studies in this area by De Schepper, Dooms, and Haezendonck (2014) and Winn (2001). Pre and post milestone event analysis captured trends and shifts in involvement strategies and stakeholder issues. Subsequently, stakeholder issue tables (organized by issue themes) and stakeholder mechanism tables (organized by mechanism type and information flow) were utilized for across case synthesis and comparison to identify similarities and differences. Analysis of stakeholder involvements across cases showed that NEPA establishes a baseline for involvement, but its requirements are not sufficient for megaprojects; a more comprehensive strategy is necessary. Further, although participatory involvements may be beneficial particularly in complex settings, these mechanisms must be carefully managed in terms of process and criteria for evaluating stakeholder input. Additionally, when private partners/contractors are involved in megaprojects, they become part of the project team and support a coordinated involvement approach. Examination of stakeholder issues indicated that issues that are common to non-PPP and PPP projects are more prevalent than PPP specific issues. In particular, issues related to tolling are dominant; moreover, toll affordability is extremely sensitive, and its severity is predictable based on affected area demographics and past toll escalation practices. The study provided insights about how megaprojects are shaped through actions of project sponsors as well as impacted and interested stakeholders. It also demonstrated how these projects become artifacts of aspiration for politically powerful figures. Lastly, it identified the main stakeholder issues and suggested a set of guidelines to assist future practitioners in developing better stakeholder involvement strategies, which should both enhance and legitimize megaprojects. / Ph. D. / Megaprojects are large in scale and scope and they impact and involve a large array of stakeholders. These projects often take years to come together and evolve over time through the actions of project sponsors and the involvement of many stakeholders. Through engagement and input, stakeholders can help legitimize and enhance megaprojects. Stakeholders can also delay or block these projects through oppositions. Therefore, stakeholder involvement is critical in megaprojects. Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are becoming more prevalent for megaproject delivery. This delivery method introduces characteristics that distinguish PPP megaprojects from others such as: private control, profiteering, foreign profits, and long-term concessions. This study, through a multiple case study approach, investigates whether differences exist between PPP and non-PPP megaprojects with respect to stakeholder involvement strategies and stakeholder issues raised in such projects. This research showed that although project sponsors follow the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) as a baseline in developing megaprojects, the NEPA requirements are not sufficient and a more comprehensive strategy is necessary. Furthermore, although stakeholder participation in deliberative decision making may be beneficial in megaprojects, these mechanisms must be carefully managed in terms of process and criteria for evaluating stakeholder input. Additionally, when private partners/contractors are involved in megaprojects, they become part of the project development team and support a coordinated stakeholder involvement approach. This study also indicated that stakeholders are primarily concerned about issues that are common between PPP and non-PPP megaprojects rather than PPP specific issues. In particular, tolling is the main concern of the stakeholders. Moreover, toll affordability is a main stakeholders’ concern behind tolling issue and the severity of the issue is predictable based on affected area demographics and past toll escalation practices. The study demonstrated how megaprojects are shaped through actions of project sponsors as well as impacted and interested stakeholders. It also demonstrated how these projects become artifacts of aspiration for politically powerful figures. Lastly, it identified the main stakeholder issues and suggested a set of guidelines to assist future practitioners in developing better stakeholder involvement strategies, which should both enhance and legitimize megaprojects.

Yes / As the EU and UK negotiate a new relationship, this paper explores the welfare implications of this policy change and its interaction with major trade policy initiatives. We evaluate five Brexit scenarios, based on different assumptions regarding Brexit, TTIP and various free trade deals the UK may attempt to broker with the US or Commonwealth countries. We also consider the dynamics of welfare changes over a period of two decades. Our estimates suggest that the impact of Brexit is negative in all policy scenarios, with lower welfare losses under a soft Brexit scenario. The losses are exacerbated if TTIP comes into force, demonstrating the benefits of being a member of a large trade bloc. However, they occur gradually and can be partially compensated by signing new free trade agreements. To further minimise losses, the UK should avoid a hard Brexit.

Tato diplomová práce se zabývá systémy zdanění veřejné obchodní společnosti a komanditní společnosti, konkrétně daní z příjmů a srovnáním právních úprav v České republice a ve vybraných státech Evropské unie. V první části jsou vymezeny základní pojmy a charakteristiky osobních obchodních společností v České republice, dále se práce zabývá daňovým systémem České republiky v kontextu Evropské unie a současným stavem harmonizace. V dalších částech jsou postupně charakterizovány systémy zdanění daní z příjmů v Německu, Španělsku, Velké Británii a Belgii. Cílem této práce je srovnání jednotlivých právních úprav, zhodnocení a možnosti případných změn.

<p>The new Welfare Reform in Norway consists of the establishment of a new welfare office; NAV office. The NAV office will open in all municipalities within 2010 as local partnerships between the state and the municipals as equal partners. The central government will keep responsibility for the national services and the local governments will keep responsibility for the locally provided welfare services. As such the NAV office will consist of two separate public servcelines, with the accountabilities for their individual services intact. The Government wished to keep the separation between the national and local governmental services but needed to ensure the provision of a more holistic, integrated and effective service delivery, more in tune with the public need. The aim was to provide a more joined-up welfare service and to put more effect behind the efforts to achieve the reform goals: increased work participation, more user-friendly services and more effective public administration. The NAV office as such becomes a local one-stop-shop.</p><p>The challenge of this partnership is that two separate, traditionally hierarchic public structures embark on a partnership venture where the more relational and both vertical and horizontal communicational skills are required, true to the spirit of the joined-up government model. Our aim with this study was to investigate how a few early onset NAV offices cope with this partnership stunt. We particularly wished to examine how the partners establish and use the important vertical and horizontal dimensions, and how the partnership manager operate to facilitate the partnership activities.</p><p>We mean that the focus of 4 partnership actors rather than two governmental partners is more correct with respect to depicting the situation in the local NAV partnerships and how the central partnership managerial duties are shared. We have developed a new model of how they divide the partnership responsibilities between them and the operations of an emergent essential partnership driving force. We have also due to the nature of the NAV partnership actors and the way they operate in the partnership, developed a new partnership model. This dialogue model is a more accurate picture of the NAV partnership than the original partnership model.</p><p>The early attempts to provide integrated services has not reached the potential we have hoped for, partially due to the allowance of the two partners to continue service production in the old way while the reform structure and following administrative challenges are ironed out. We believe that an understanding of the particularities of partnership management and the adherence of the relational qualities to the partnership structure is a prerequisite in successfully managing the NAV partnership and thus the reform goals. This needs to be the imminent focus of the reform participants.</p>

The new Welfare Reform in Norway consists of the establishment of a new welfare office; NAV office. The NAV office will open in all municipalities within 2010 as local partnerships between the state and the municipals as equal partners. The central government will keep responsibility for the national services and the local governments will keep responsibility for the locally provided welfare services. As such the NAV office will consist of two separate public servcelines, with the accountabilities for their individual services intact. The Government wished to keep the separation between the national and local governmental services but needed to ensure the provision of a more holistic, integrated and effective service delivery, more in tune with the public need. The aim was to provide a more joined-up welfare service and to put more effect behind the efforts to achieve the reform goals: increased work participation, more user-friendly services and more effective public administration. The NAV office as such becomes a local one-stop-shop. The challenge of this partnership is that two separate, traditionally hierarchic public structures embark on a partnership venture where the more relational and both vertical and horizontal communicational skills are required, true to the spirit of the joined-up government model. Our aim with this study was to investigate how a few early onset NAV offices cope with this partnership stunt. We particularly wished to examine how the partners establish and use the important vertical and horizontal dimensions, and how the partnership manager operate to facilitate the partnership activities. We mean that the focus of 4 partnership actors rather than two governmental partners is more correct with respect to depicting the situation in the local NAV partnerships and how the central partnership managerial duties are shared. We have developed a new model of how they divide the partnership responsibilities between them and the operations of an emergent essential partnership driving force. We have also due to the nature of the NAV partnership actors and the way they operate in the partnership, developed a new partnership model. This dialogue model is a more accurate picture of the NAV partnership than the original partnership model. The early attempts to provide integrated services has not reached the potential we have hoped for, partially due to the allowance of the two partners to continue service production in the old way while the reform structure and following administrative challenges are ironed out. We believe that an understanding of the particularities of partnership management and the adherence of the relational qualities to the partnership structure is a prerequisite in successfully managing the NAV partnership and thus the reform goals. This needs to be the imminent focus of the reform participants.

The purpose of this study was to identify factors that influence leadership and its distribution in the Arab Bureau of Education for the Gulf States (ABEGS) Saudi Arabia. The research was undertaken in the ABEGS as a case study and its two initiatives, the Gulf Arab States Educational Research Centre (GASERC) Kuwait, and the Arab Educational Training Centre for Gulf States (AETCGS) Qatar respectively. The findings of this study reveal that the leadership in this interorganizational environment is distributed within the four levels of organizational structures. The visionary leadership comes from the inner most core political level that has its influence and direction at the strategic, managerial, and operational levels of the organization. . Based on extensive research of Leithwood and his colleagues, this study will integrate four leadership functions of setting directions, structuring the organization, developing capacity, and managing the (partnership) program into the analysis of interorganizational partnerships. The study also examined ‘securing accountability’ as another important leadership function in the partnership environment. I learnt that multiple factors influence leadership and enable different individuals and groups to perform these functions at the strategic, managerial and operational levels of the interorganizational structures. However, the major influence on leadership that weaves through the strategic level to the grassroots levels is the consultative process embedded in the organizational structures of the Arab Bureau. Some other prominent factors that influence leadership found in the study are positional power in the hierarchy, experience and knowledge, and dedication and commitment. Researchers like Benson, Mawhiney, Kickert, Proven, and Rodríguez, explored interorganizational partnerships and view the structures of leadership either vertically centralized or horizontally distributive. I argue that interorganizational leadership works horizontally at each level of the partnership i.e. strategic, managerial, and operational and vertically between these levels in the ABEGS partnership as shown in the ‘Circular Model of Interorganizational Leadership’ of this study. The leaders at various levels in the Arab Bureau from the member states function as equals. However, firm vertical hierarchy exists between various levels in the structures of the ABEGS. It is therefore established that horizontal and vertical leadership work simultaneously in interorganizational partnership environments as found in the case study of the Arab Bureau.

The purpose of this study was to identify factors that influence leadership and its distribution in the Arab Bureau of Education for the Gulf States (ABEGS) Saudi Arabia. The research was undertaken in the ABEGS as a case study and its two initiatives, the Gulf Arab States Educational Research Centre (GASERC) Kuwait, and the Arab Educational Training Centre for Gulf States (AETCGS) Qatar respectively. The findings of this study reveal that the leadership in this interorganizational environment is distributed within the four levels of organizational structures. The visionary leadership comes from the inner most core political level that has its influence and direction at the strategic, managerial, and operational levels of the organization. . Based on extensive research of Leithwood and his colleagues, this study will integrate four leadership functions of setting directions, structuring the organization, developing capacity, and managing the (partnership) program into the analysis of interorganizational partnerships. The study also examined ‘securing accountability’ as another important leadership function in the partnership environment. I learnt that multiple factors influence leadership and enable different individuals and groups to perform these functions at the strategic, managerial and operational levels of the interorganizational structures. However, the major influence on leadership that weaves through the strategic level to the grassroots levels is the consultative process embedded in the organizational structures of the Arab Bureau. Some other prominent factors that influence leadership found in the study are positional power in the hierarchy, experience and knowledge, and dedication and commitment. Researchers like Benson, Mawhiney, Kickert, Proven, and Rodríguez, explored interorganizational partnerships and view the structures of leadership either vertically centralized or horizontally distributive. I argue that interorganizational leadership works horizontally at each level of the partnership i.e. strategic, managerial, and operational and vertically between these levels in the ABEGS partnership as shown in the ‘Circular Model of Interorganizational Leadership’ of this study. The leaders at various levels in the Arab Bureau from the member states function as equals. However, firm vertical hierarchy exists between various levels in the structures of the ABEGS. It is therefore established that horizontal and vertical leadership work simultaneously in interorganizational partnership environments as found in the case study of the Arab Bureau.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität, Leipzig, 2000.