@techreport{Greubel2018,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Greubel, Johannes},
  title     = {Towards a Profound European Asylum System? On EU Governance during the Refugee Crisis},
  edition   = {1. Auflage},
  issn      = {2625-6193},
  doi       = {10.25972/OPUS-16879},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-168797},
  pages     = {43},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {The refugee crisis has developed as one of the major challenges for EU governance in recent years. From 2013 onwards, the crisis determined the political agenda and public discourse within European politics. During that time, the numbers of asylum seekers reaching Europe increased dramatically, with more than one million people applying for asylum at the crisis peak in 2015. This paper deals with the efforts taken by the EU and its member states to mitigate and overcome the refugee crisis. How exactly has the EU reacted to the refugee crisis and how and to what extend have the EU and its governance changed throughout the crisis? These research questions are approached through a reconstructive analysis of the whole period of crisis. This approach provides for a comprehensive examination of the refugee crisis that includes all issues, measures and processes of the EU's policy reaction at the same time. It will be argued that due to severe shortcomings of the Dublin regulation and the Common European Asylum System, a crisis in the EU's refugee policy was already predestined. This was the case from 2013 onwards. The EU approached the crisis in three stages - neglect and non-solidarity leading to unilateral approaches by affected states, supranational short-term emergency measures during the peak of crisis and enhanced cooperation with third countries, especially with Turkey, the Western Balkans states and African states - until the crisis lost traction in 2017. Yet, the asylum system's shortcomings are still not eliminated as the lasting measures of the EU's crisis management between 2013 and 2018 mainly focused on border security and externalisation. EU governance changed towards more intergovernmental, informal and regional action. Further, the crisis led to serious rows between member states, leading to the fragmentation of the EU into two blocs. With decreasing numbers of asylum seeker in the last few years, what remains is an incomplete asylum system and a political crisis among member states.},
  subject      = {Europ{\"a}ische Union},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{KrauseFischer2021,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Krause, Theresa and Fischer, Doris},
  title     = {Data as the new driver for growth? European and Chinese perspectives on the new factor of production},
  doi       = {10.25972/OPUS-22979},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-229794},
  pages     = {7},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Amidst an emerging international systemic competition between China and the Western world, China's sustained high economic growth rates, technological innovations and successful control of the corona pandemic have raised doubts over the West's systemic capabilities. In this context, data resources and regimes play an increasing role. This research note looks at data as present and future driver of innovation and economic growth in more detail. It compares the Chinese and the European perspective on data as well as their respective (planned) policy measures in order to draw tentative conclusions about their different approaches' implications.},
  subject      = {China},
  language  = {en}
}