@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} } @techreport{HeinemannIntraschakSalzeretal.2021, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Heinemann, Oliver and Intraschak, Nils and Salzer, Michel and Simon, Christoph}, title = {(Un-)Sichtbarkeit der EU in der Corona-Krise}, issn = {2625-6193}, doi = {10.25972/OPUS-24062}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-240625}, pages = {82}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Die Corona-Krise stellt eine der gr{\"o}ßten Herausforderungen in der Geschichte der EU dar. Aufgrund der geringen Kompetenzen der EU im Gesundheitsbereich liegt die Pandemiebek{\"a}mpfung fast ausschließlich in den H{\"a}nden der Mitgliedstaaten. Diese reagierten jedoch zun{\"a}chst mit „nationalen Reflexen" und unsolidarischem Verhalten. Erst nach {\"U}berwindung des ersten Schocks im Fr{\"u}hjahr 2020 konnte die EU sichtbarer bei der Krisenbew{\"a}ltigung werden. Den H{\"o}hepunkt stellte die Einigung auf das historische 750 Mrd. EUR schwere Corona-Hilfspaket „Next Generation EU" (NGEU) dar, welches mit einer gemeinsamen Schuldenaufnahme einen Pr{\"a}zedenzfall geschaffen hat. Diese Arbeit untersucht, wie die EU auf die Pandemie reagiert hat und ob diese Reaktion zu ihrer St{\"a}rkung f{\"u}hren kann. Sie soll einen Beitrag zum besseren Verst{\"a}ndnis der Geschehnisse in der EU zwischen Januar 2020 und Mai 2021 leisten. Hierf{\"u}r werden zun{\"a}chst die Kompetenzen der EU im Gesundheitsbereich und beim Katastrophenschutz sowie deren Nutzung in der Pandemie aufgezeigt. Hauptteil der Arbeit ist die Untersuchung von Entstehung und Inhalt des NGEU-Hilfspaktes. Hier zeigt sich, dass die EU - mit Hilfe des deutsch-franz{\"o}sischen Motors - zur Solidarit{\"a}t zur{\"u}ckgefunden hat. Die Schwerpunktsetzung von NGEU verdeutlicht, dass neben dem Wiederaufbau auch die aktuellen Kernthemen der EU - Digitalisierung und Klimaschutz - einen zentralen Stellenwert einnehmen. Damit kann NGEU zur wesentlichen St{\"a}rkung der EU beitragen. Eine St{\"a}rkung ist ebenfalls im Gesundheitsbereich festzustellen, wo erste Schritte zu einer Gesundheitsunion vollzogen wurden.}, language = {de} } @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} }