|
|
2011. vol. 6. No. 1
.jpg)
|
Topic of the Issue
|
|
4–28
|
Larionova M., Dr. of Political Science, Head of International Organisations Research Institute of the National Research University – Higher School of Economics, Head of International Programmes at the National Training Foundation; E-mail: mlarionova@hse.ru The paper is prepared within the framework of the Ministry of Education and Science project “Organizational and analytical support to the national priority project “Education” on activities aimed at “Development of National Research Universities”, carried out by the National Training Foundation. The paper presents analysis of international and foreign approaches to universities’ research performance assessment. It focuses on a comparative analysis of the key performance indicators used in the international practice and the indicators of effectiveness applied in assessment of the national research universities performance. The analysis provides a groundwork for discussing how the emerging approaches and indicators can promote integration of Russian universities into the international research and education processes within the global landscape. |
Analytical Papers
|
|
29–40
|
Lagutina M., PhD in Political Science, Senior Lecturer, Saint-Petersburg State
University, School of International
Relations, e-mail: manipolis@hotmail.com This article analyses management potential of global
politics in the context of the new state of the international system at the
beginning of the XXI century – global stratification. The author considers some
possible ways of applying the world politics’ tools on the base of the existing
management institutions. |
|
|
41–64
|
Larionova M., Dr. of
Political Science, Head of International Organisations Research Institute of
the National Research University – Higher School of Economics, Head of
International Programmes at the National Training Foundation; E-mail: mlarionova@hse.ru
Rakhmangulov
M., Deputy Director of the Informational-Analytical G8 Research Centre of the International
Organisations Research Institute of the National Research University – Higher
School of Economics; E-mail: MRakhmangulov@hse.ru This paper attempts to put G8 and
G20 institutions within the same assessment paradigm on the basis of a
functional framework. This approach allows comparing the G8 and G20 across at
least three groups of indicators: performance of global governance functions,
accountability and compliance performance; contribution towards global
governance agenda; and engagement with the other international institutions. It
begins with outlining the methodology, and goes over to the main findings and
conclusions on each of the dimensions. Thus the study contributes to building a
quantifiable evidence base for an assessment of the G20 and G8 effectiveness
and to inform forecast of their future roles. |
|
|
65–71
|
Sochneva I., PhD Student at the Department
of Social and Political Philosophy at the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian
Academy of Sciences; E-mail: inna165@rambler.ru The author analyses the current situation in the accession negotiations between Turkey and the European Union. The paper gives an idea of the main factors and obstacles for further negotiation and successful accession of Turkey. The author also offers a detailed description of the accession requirements worked out by the EU which are to be implemented by Turkey in order to gain a full EU membership. Special emphasis is put on the efforts made by the Turkish government for implementing the reforms in all spheres of the country life in accordance with the Copenhagen criteria. Particular attention is paid to the problem of Euro-skepticism in the light of which Turkey's accession to the EU is treated as a threat to the existence of the European Union. |
|
|
72–79
|
Sochneva I., PhD Student at the Department
of Social and Political Philosophy at the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian
Academy of Sciences; E-mail: inna165@rambler.ru The article is focused on the analyses of the current situation with ethnic minorities (Kurds) in the Republic of Turkey. The author offers a research of historically shaped reasons and types of discrimination against them. Measures taken by the Turkish government for solving the Kurdish problem and their effectiveness, the attitude of the Kurdish people to these reforms are discussed in details. Perspectives of this question deciding are tackled in particular. The author emphasizes the direct interconnection between the Kurdish problem solving and the full membership of Turkey in the EU. In this regard, special attention is paid to the role of the European Union, its impact on the liberalization of the situation with human rights of the ethnic minorities in the Republic of Turkey. |
|
|
80–87
|
Rakhmankulov A., PhD student at the Department
of Economics and Finance of the Ural
State Pedagogical
University; Е-mail: rav66@66.ru Establishment of the Customs Union in 2010 accelerated the pace of integration in post-Soviet space. Integration of Russia with Kazakhstan, Belarus and other CIS countries is hindered by the fact that each country seeks only profit. SES-4 (Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine) had the greatest potential since its inception in 2003. The idea of a Customs Union within EurAsEC that would create a common customs territory, eliminate customs checks at internal borders and unify the mechanisms for regulating the economy and trade was formulated in the Treaty on the Customs Union and Common Economic Space. The Republic of Belarus regards the Customs Union as the defining framework of the EurAsEC, and at the same time - as a transitional stage to a more in-depth form of integration - the Common Economic Space (CES-3). |
|
|
88–98
|
Nagornov V., PhD in Economics, Deputy Director of the Centre for
International Comparative Studies of the International
Organisations Research Institute of the National
Research University
– Higher School
of Economics; E-mail: VNagornov@hse.ru The paper presents analysis of the G8 and G20 deliberations, decisions and delivery in the spheres of finance, economy and trade in the period from 2008 to 2010. The author shows the evolution of the efforts to stabilize the financial system, stimulate domestic demand and strengthen the regulatory system. The paper concludes that the division of labour between the two institutions through coordinated efforts and involvement of international organizations by the dual G8/G20 French presidency should contribute to economic recovery in 2011. |
|
|
99–109
|
Rakhmangulov M., Deputy Director of the
Informational-Analytical G8 Research Centre of the International
Organisations Research Institute of the National Research University – Higher
School of Economics; E-mail: MRakhmangulov@hse.ru The paper analyses the security issues on the G8 and G20 agendas. This sphere constitutes one of the most important G8 priorities during last decade and includes a wide range of issues (weapons of mass destruction non-proliferation, different regional problems settlement, fight with terrorism and drug trafficking and others). The G20 has been dealing with the security issues related to economic agenda (fight against corruption and terrorism finance) to date. On basis of G8 documents analysis a conclusion was made that this institution has sufficient flexibility to respond to security issues as need arises. Due to broader and more diverse membership G20 may not have enough flexibility. Security will remain a top priority on the G8 agenda. Possible inclusion of these issues in the G20 agenda can be expected with the leading role of G8 members. |
|
|
110–117
|
Lesage D., Professor
in Globalization and Global Governance at the Ghent Institute for International
Studies, Ghent University, Belgium; E-mail: Dries.Lesage@Ugent.be The paper presents the comparative analysis of the G8 and G20 evolution. The author highlights the issue of division of labor between two fora in international governance as its transformation from the finance ministers’ meetings to the leaders’ meetings. The proposed scenarios of future co-existence are based on the application of functional and pragmatic approaches and the idea of representing the interests of different countries through the mechanisms already being developed and applied during the G8 and G20 agenda deepening. |
|
|
118–132
|
This paper examines the role and impact of civil society in increasing the accountability of the G8 and G20, with particular emphasis on the 2010 summits: the back-to-back June Muskoka G8 and Toronto G20 summits, and the November Seoul G20 summit. The paper begins with a clarification of the key concepts of civil and uncivil society, and accountability. It then discusses for what and to whom the G8 and the G20, as global governance institutions, are accountable. This is followed by a look at the kinds of civil society organizations (CSOs) that play a role in the nexus with the G8 and G20. It then considers the motivations for, and range of, civil society interaction with the G8 and G20. Finally, the paper analyzes how and to what extent civil society engagement has, (or, as the case may be, has not), had an impact on the G8 and G20 accountability. Brief concluding observations end the paper. |
Welcome to a Debate
|
|
133–144
|
Perfilieva O., PhD in Sociology, Director of the Centre for International Comparative Studies of the International Organisations Research Institute of the National Research University – Higher School of Economics; E-mail: Perfilieva@hse.ru The paper discusses social aspects of higher education institutions engagement with their regional communities. On the basis of the cases of the Russian Siberian and Southern Federal Universities the author analyzes practices and formats of their interaction with different regional stakeholders as part of the FUs’ social function implementation. The FU’s capacity to enhance their third mission is assessed. The author suggests a set of indicators to assess universities social activities impact on development of the regions, and puts forward recommendations on building the federal universities capacity for fulfilling their third role. The paper is prepared within the framework of the Ministry of Education and Science project “Organizational and analytical support to the national priority project “Education” on activities aimed at “Development of Federal Universities”, carried out by the National Training Foundation. |
|
|
.jpg)
.png)
.png)
© 
