Search

Globalization is frequently assumed to be responsible for creating the economic environment in which a much greater degree of European Union (EU) economic integration is deemed necessary. In contrast, this paper argues that globalization, in conjunction with neo-liberal growth, has led to autonomization as well as integration. The term autonomization designates both that economic governance is increasingly delegated to autonomous regions, and that neo-liberal economic policies tend to fragment and divide in their pursuit of growth. The paper investigates the tension between the role in which globalization has cast the region, and the region as a central player in the EU's cohesion strategy. Cohesion policy-measures to combat underdevelopment and backwardness-plays a key role in integration and growth strategies. It is argued that cohesion has become detached from its redistributive origins and incorporated in a discourse of competitiveness and growth. The region has emerged as both the site upon which the global acts upon the EU, and the level at which the EU has determined that the processes of globalization can best be accommodated. It is suggested that the tension between cohesion and autonomization introduced by globalization is a central dynamic at work in the contemporary EU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to assess the economic development and development policies in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries in 1990-2005, from the collapse of the USSR to the enlargement of the European Union. A great number of authors have generally seen the transition as a very positive process. They have concluded that the reform policies focusing on macroeconomic and price stability have been the key to success for CEE economies. A reliable economic environment is, of course, instrumental for longer-term economic success, as exemplified by the prolonged crisis in most of the former Soviet Union. Our analysis of the economic development and competitive advantages in the region, however, leads to the conclusion that the specific approach to transition that the Central and Eastern European countries followed came at a rather high cost. Comparative neglect and weakness of a set of policies crucial for longer-term development, such as science, technology and innovation policies, has led to deterioration in the last decade rather than the strengthening of the competitive advantages of Central and Eastern European economies. Furthermore, we argue that, in most cases, CEE countries have unfortunately overlooked or misjudged a number of development challenges, and have thus implemented policies that have generated growth at the cost of rapidly increasing risks. This is how the financial fragility of several Central and Eastern European countries has recently increased drastically, and the region seems to have virtually arrived at the brink of economic collapse. Since the CEE countries joined the European Union, the CEE governments have gradually moved towards acquiring a more active role in economic development. These policies need, however, to be strengthened considerably and reinforced by macroeconomic policies that curb current excessive dependence on foreign-financed growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates the mutual perceptions and misperceptions between Europe and the Arab-Islamic world. Based on a sociological theory of collective identity formation, a typology and set of hypotheses are developed in the first section concerning the relations between countries and cultures in the world; these are seen as being dependent on inequality in their level of socio-economic development, and on the similarity or difference of their culture and their political systems. In the second and third section, these principles are applied to an analysis of the self-concepts and the mutual perceptions between Europe and the Arab-Islamic world. Here, it is first investigated whether fundamental differences exist in basic value orientations between Europe on the one hand, and Islam and the Arabic world on the other, and in the value orientations of Christians and Muslims in two selected countries. In the third section, the mutual perceptions of these two culture areas are investigated. It is shown that--despite a lack of fundamental differences in value orientations--significant misperceptions exist, particularly of the Arab-Islamic culture and societies in Europe. They are related to colonial history, religious-cultural differences, and inequalities in levels of development. Further reasons for the misperceptions and perspectives for their correction after the terrorist attack in New York in 2001 are outlined in the final section. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]