B. Reinalda

The Bologna Process and Its Achievements in Europe 1999-2007.

This article deals with the Bologna Process (BP), which since its creation in 1999 has deeply influenced European higher education: What is it? How did it come into being? How far has it come? The BP is both a political phenomenon and a reform taking place in European higher education. As a political phenomenon it consists of a series of multilateral conferences in which nearly all European countries participate, both European Union (EU) and non-EU members. The BP has produced a governance structure of its own, in which the EU is also engaged through the membership of the European Commission. As a transformation (harmonization) of European higher education systems, the pan-European BP moves towards a common, more or less Anglo-Saxon, model based on, for instance, the introduction of a two-cycle structure (Bachelor and Master), a system of comparable credits, cooperation in quality assurance, and the promotion of student and staff mobility. The BP can be analyzed from an International Relations perspective, which regards it as an international policy process with, on the one hand, decision making resulting in common positions and, on the other hand, an implementation mode based on adaptation of national regulations and practices. This mode includes national reports that, through a feedback process, inform the BP about its performance. In 2005 and 2007 the BPs stocktaking procedure resulted in two assessments of national progress. Although the BP is not yet an intergovernmental organization, it is expected to become one.

The Evolvement of International Secretariats, Executive Heads and Leadership in Inter-Organizational Relations

This chapter discusses inter-organizational relations (IORs) from the perspective of the international Secretariat of an International Governmental Organization (IGO) and the organization’s Executive Head. IORs are a long-standing phenomenon that resulted from the evolution of IGOs, the increase in their numbers and the complementarity or overlap of activities and mandates. The chapter follows the evolution of IGOs and their IORs by tracing the place of Secretariats and the leadership role of Executive Heads to discern four developments of IORs in chronological order: the emergence of IGO Secretariats and some early IORs, the League of Nations specialized agency relationship and the leadership role of Executive Heads in IORs, the United Nations (UN) specialized agency relationship and the leadership role of Executive Heads in IORs within and beyond the UN System, and the emergence of so-called ‘country clubs’ (like the G20) and the impact on the previous type of IORs. The focus on Secretariats and their Executive Heads helps to trace and better illustrate IORs and the related dimensions of leadership in conjunction with member-state governments. The IORs discussed show that governments allow IGOs room for maneuver (if needed by lessening control) and permit agency slack, with Executive Heads and their staff serving as vigorous actors in favor of their organizations’ objectives, also with regard to boundary issues. Leadership qualities with regard to both the bureaucracy (mobilizing staff and expertise) and the environment (assessing power relations and acquiring support from a variety of actors) are often decisive for the outcome. The emergence of country clubs has added a new dimension to the networks of IGOs and IORs.

EU Administration and Interaction with International Organizations

Does a European Union (EU) administration responsible for interactions with international organizations (IOs) exist? It does; but most people will find it difficult to indicate its precise location. Even if they point to the European Commission’s Directorate-General for External Relations (since 2010 the European External Action Service), it will be hard for them to identify the numerous interactions with a large variety of IOs. There are various reasons for this specific invisibility. Firstly, foreign policy, whether related to ‘low’ politics (for example, trade) or ‘high’ politics (for example, security), is a matter for nation states, which decidedly are aware of their national interests. Even if states cooperate in specific areas (for example, coal and steel), common foreign policies will meet with resistance, as they may reduce the national room for maneuver. Thus, it is no surprise that it took a long time before the EU had established its (still limited) foreign policies. Paradoxically, a regional group of states with internal policies needs external policies too, and EU member states only went ahead with common foreign policies after a lot of arguing and the acceptance of gradual expansion. This process resulted from ongoing evolution in practice and incremental decision making. Secondly, IOs exist and function, but for outsiders it is difficult to perceive what is going on, even if IOs are transparent about their work. Relations among IOs are even harder to recognize, and are also underresearched, although more attention is being paid to interorganizational relations (Biermann, 2011) and interregionalism (Van der Vleuten and Ribeiro Hof fmann, 2013).

De Gaulle's invloed op de Amerikaanse verwachtingen over een Atlantische Gemeenschap

Bespreking van: S. Reyn,Atlantis Lost. The American Experience with De Gaulle Amsterdam:Amsterdam University Press ,2010 9789089642141

Gewerkschaften und Umweltpolitik in Westeuropa

Zu Beginn der siebziger Jahre wird die Welt beunruhigt uber das Ausmass an Umweltverschmutzung und Naturbedrohung durch die moderne Gesellschaft. 1968 beschliessen die Vereinten Nationen eine Konferenz uber die menschliche Umwelt zu veranstalten, die im Juni 1972 in Stockholm stattfindet. Im selben Jahr erscheint der erste Bericht des Clubs von Rom. Ein Jahr spater billigen die westeuropaischen Minister das erste Umwe1taktionsprogramm.