“ The process of the doctoral training has gone through some fundamental changes ” Doctoral education at the EUI has changed profoundly. Until 1985 the doctoral programme was based on a minimum set of rules of which actual- ly the major milestone was passing the June paper, at the end of the first year. Not surprisingly, less than half man- aged to defend their Ph.D. thesis at the Institute. Now, 25 years later more than 90% of the research students de- fend their doctorate successfully. This article purports to be a brief overview of the major milestones that changed doctoral education at the EUI over the last 25 years. In 1988 a major novelty was brought in with the introduction of the first com- pletion grants. It became clear from the analysis that those who finished their Ph.D. in a reasonable amount of time (around four years), were those who had managed to find in the course of their third year a part-time job as research assistant, usually with their supervisor. Examples from other universities (especially the writing-up grant at Yale) were the inspiration for the Institute to create a very small number of these grants for successful students: those who could prove that they had reached a stage in which they would be able to wrap up writ- ing their thesis in about six months. The number of these grants was rather limited – 5 or 6 in the first year – but little by little, the Institute managed to make additional sources available in order to fund the scheme more gener- ously. By 1995 the number of theses defended per year had tripled. In 1992 a first comprehensive set of measures to improve the doctoral pro- gramme was discussed in and ap- proved by Academic Council. They were based on best practice of top US graduate schools and the analysis of Inside 03 From Iceland to Florence 05 Take Off into Self-sustained Growth 06 The View from Taiwan 07 Tuscan Toiling 08 Putting Research First 09 Sobre inmigración, belleza y atajos culturales 10 From Russia with Love 11 Learning from Diversity 12 Moldovan Perspectives 13 Getting Energised 14 Putting Practice into Theory 15 We are from Mars 16 Anthropologically Speaking 17 Tutto cominciò con un pavone 18 A la recherche 19 Thirty Years On 20 Lawless Roads 21 The Web Matters 23 Ten Years of Sports 30 Years of Doctoral Training Director of the Academic Service | Andreas Frijdal The European University Institute - Badia Fiesolana - Via dei Roccettini, 9 - I-50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI), Italy - www.eui.eu e-mail: [email protected] - EUI Review also available at: www.eui.eu/Research/EUIPublications/CorporatePublications/EUIReview.aspx }} Summer 2009
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
“ The process of the doctoral training has gone through some fundamental changes ”
Doctoral education at the EUI has changed profoundly. Until 1985 the doctoral programme was based on a minimum set of rules of which actual-ly the major milestone was passing the June paper, at the end of the first year. Not surprisingly, less than half man-aged to defend their Ph.D. thesis at the Institute. Now, 25 years later more than 90% of the research students de-fend their doctorate successfully. This article purports to be a brief overview of the major milestones that changed doctoral education at the EUI over the last 25 years.
In 1988 a major novelty was brought in with the introduction of the first com-pletion grants. It became clear from the analysis that those who finished their Ph.D. in a reasonable amount of time (around four years), were those who had managed to find in the course of their third year a part-time
job as research assistant, usually with their supervisor. Examples from other universities (especially the writing-up grant at Yale) were the inspiration for the Institute to create a very small number of these grants for successful students: those who could prove that they had reached a stage in which they would be able to wrap up writ-ing their thesis in about six months. The number of these grants was rather limited – 5 or 6 in the first year – but little by little, the Institute managed to make additional sources available in order to fund the scheme more gener-ously. By 1995 the number of theses defended per year had tripled.
In 1992 a first comprehensive set of measures to improve the doctoral pro-gramme was discussed in and ap-proved by Academic Council. They were based on best practice of top US graduate schools and the analysis of
Inside03 From Iceland to Florence05 Take Off into Self-sustained Growth06 The View from Taiwan07 Tuscan Toiling08 Putting Research First09 Sobre inmigración, belleza y atajos
culturales10 From Russia with Love11 Learning from Diversity12 Moldovan Perspectives13 Getting Energised14 Putting Practice into Theory15 We are from Mars16 Anthropologically Speaking17 Tutto cominciò con un pavone18 A la recherche 19 Thirty Years On20 Lawless Roads21 The Web Matters23 Ten Years of Sports
30 Years of Doctoral TrainingDirector of the Academic Service | Andreas Frijdal
The European University Institute - Badia Fiesolana - Via dei Roccettini, 9 - I-50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI), Italy - www.eui.eue-mail: [email protected] - EUI Review also available at: www.eui.eu/Research/EUIPublications/CorporatePublications/EUIReview.aspx
}}
Summer 2009
2 Summer 2009
the statistical data collected by the Academic Service. For example it became clear that chances to fin-ish the Ph.D. research declined dramatically after 5 years. These findings were recently confirmed by the NSF’s inquiry on the low
completion rates of US doctoral programmes. Pedagogical assess-ments of teaching and supervi-sion, rules for the organisation of the defence and appeals proce-dures were introduced.
In 2002, several important novel-ties took place: the (re-)structur-ing of the first-year curriculum, and the introduction of the posi-tion of Dean of Studies, a position which was first filled with great success by Neil Walker. The Presi-dent made it his top priority to offer the possibility of obtaining a fourth-year grant to all students who were on track with their doc-toral work. Finally in 2004, after some serious resistance, the High Council decided to introduce the fourth-year grant. Obviously this extension was conditioned by the continuous progress made by the
Ph.D. candidates over the first three years.
The last important step was the setting up of the career develop-ment programme. Based on its exit surveys the Institute struc-
tured a number of activities in the 3rd and 4th year that greatly facilitate the transition to the la-bour market. These activities con-sist of providing the “intensive teaching skills weeks” and, based on the alumni network and a number of bilateral agreements with other universities in Europe, the possibilities to get short-term teaching appointments. Further-more career events are organized once a year with the help of our alumni employed by international organizations, NGOs, the Euro-pean institutions, legal firms and consultancy firms. These semi-nars gave an insight about the career opportunities after the de-fence. Last but not least, mock interviews are held for those who are close to finishing their Ph.D. with a view to increasing success during job interviews.
What was the result of all these changes, apart from shorten-ing the time-to-degree down to roughly four years and increas-ing the completion rate beyond 90%? Is it still the same doctor-ate? The answer is no. The proc-ess of the doctoral training has gone through some fundamental changes with a different learning outcome. The thesis is different and so is the new doctor. To put it bluntly, the old one-to-one (Doktorvater) model had a strong predisposition for creat-ing clones according to a certain school, with all its possible nega-tive connotations. Today, doctoral students while benefiting from the support and advice of their main supervisor are integrated in a larger framework of reference. The meaning of what a thesis is has also changed. It is not the first (and sometimes final!) mas-terpiece of life, but the first inde-pendent research work and the foundation for further publica-tions. These fundamental changes in the way doctoral candidates are being trained will have a long-lasting effect on the development of sciences: doctoral education will drive science. n
}
3
I “come from the land of the ice and snow, from the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.” These words were used by Led Zeppelin to describe my home country, Iceland. Why on earth did I choose to leave the cool air of Iceland to plunge straight into the hot, sticky, humid Italian climate?
I first became interested in European law when I had the opportunity to study for one year in Charles Uni-versity in Prague as an ERASMUS exchange student. It was then later, during my work on my Master’s thesis at the University of Iceland, that I decided to apply for the LL.M. programme at the EUI. My profes-sor, Dr. Elvira Mendez had told me many things about the Institute but for an Icelander, the EUI is a well kept secret and does not come naturally to mind when one thinks of a top place to pursue graduate studies. It was her enthusiasm for this wonderful élite research insti-tution perched on the side of Florence’s hills that made me to decide to apply. At the time I certainly wasn‘t ready to commit to the life of a doctoral student, what-ever I imagined that might be, because, after all, I was to start working as a highly paid lawyer in Iceland. Not many people remember it anymore but just over one year back, Iceland was considered a rich country with one of the highest levels of economic well-being. But that was then. This year few want to go near the place for reasons other than cheap holiday.
When I went to Florence for the interview I took the opportunity to see some of the beautiful places that Florence offers. I even took time to view the art in the Uffizi Gallery which everyone says is great but I just can’t quite get (I was much more affected by the Accademia Gallery with its display of the passionate work of Michelangelo). But I will keep the Uffizi on my “things to explore better one of these days” list.
After my short visit to Florence during the interview I knew that it was where I wanted to be. This is why I was so ecstatic to learn that I had been accepted. For me this was like winning the lottery after being elected emperor of the whole wide world and the Playboy mansion to boot. Okay, maybe I exaggerated that last bit a little.
It was with great pleasure that I discovered the EUI, set among green hills, valleys and magnificent land-scape, to be a very fertile research environment. The academic life at the Institute has exposed me to a new kind of thinking and provides me with the opportu-
nity to interact with ambitious colleagues sharing the same research interests. In particular, I have benefited from the experience to study under the direction of professors of the highest calibre.
After only a short stay at the Institute, I opted to enrol in the EUI’s PhD programme which gives me a golden opportunity to broaden my chosen subject. My project focuses on the interaction between the EFTA Court, the ECJ and Icelandic courts and aims to clarify this
Journey from Iceland to FlorenceResearcher, LAW | Ólafur Ísberg Hannesson (Iceland)
}}
4 Summer 2009
multilevel judicial governance for the benefit of pri-vate individuals and economic operators.
The finding will take place with special focus on the Icelandic legal system. This requires looking at the judicial cooperation from two distinctly different and
mutually contradictory points of view at the same time. These points are sovereignty and homogeneity. The Icelandic Supreme Court has made important contributions to the homogeneity objective as it, al-though officially advocating dualism, has found a way to implement the EFTA Court rulings when applying the EEA Agreement. The Supreme Court has accom-plished this without creating constitutional problems, similar to the Solange crisis which EC law underwent at one time. This particular example of judicial dia-logue and the interaction between courts is a subject that has not been researched properly yet. It is further-more important that the main judicial contribution of the Icelandic courts will be made available to the other European countries. n
}
“ It was with great pleasure that I discovered the EUI, set among green hills, valleys and magnificent landscape, to be a very fertile
research environment. ”
The inauguration of the new site of the Historical Archives of the EU at Villa Salviati will take place on 17 De-cember 2009 in the presence of Italian President Giorgio Napolitano.
5
It is no coincidence that around 1500 Leonardo Da Vinci conducted his ingenious flight experiments on the very same hill where the Euro-pean University Institute (EUI) is located today. After four years in Florence, I can conclude with con-fidence that the EUI truly lives up to Da Vinci’s spirit in being a place where new and daring ideas as well as individual careers are engineered, tested and finally take off to Europe, the US and all over the world.
But let’s start at the beginning. Why did I choose the EUI to do a PhD? At first sight one might be tempted to attribute such a decision to the beauty of Tuscany, its cultural and culinary richness or lifestyle. How-ever, it was this international institu-tion and thriving community with its unique intellectual magnetism that I could not resist. Not only is the EUI PhD in economics recognised as one of the leading programs in Europe and beyond, but it is also characterised by its outstanding in-ternationality as well as the high calibre, variety and collegial spirit among graduate students, junior and senior fellows, faculty and staff.
Once at the Institute, my ideas and time started to fly. After investing a considerable amount of effort in the immense course work and exam pressure throughout the first two years, the Institute started to “pay back” by unfolding its abundant re-sources for applied research. Close supervision, top resident and part-time faculty, a policy think-tank like the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, cutting-edge research workshops or the inter-disciplinary Max Weber lectures are among the many factors that allowed me to freely follow my scientific curiosity and develop a research agenda. Various institu-
tional and departmental exchange programs link the EUI with world class peer institutions, a valuable opportunity to gain an outside per-spective that led me to spend a term at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business.
Within this outstanding framework, I reaffirmed and deepened my in-terest into economic policy making and decided to take a microeco-nomic perspective when investigat-ing the drivers of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Milton Fried-man stated as early as 1970 that “the only social responsibility of Busi-ness is to increase its profits”, and all goods and services that markets cannot supply efficiently, e.g. public goods, should be assured by demo-cratic governments. However, today many often multinational firms seem to have invaded the sphere
of classic public responsibility and shifted Friedman’s dichotomy. In this context, economic theory turns out to be a well equipped toolbox to confirm the validity of the neoclassi-cal firm paradigm, while identifying an altered market environment as the premier source able to explain the empirical evidence at hand.
Although I would like to elaborate further on the analysis of CSR, I will dwell shortly on memories of my very own social responsibility, which led me to Bar Fiasco, nu-merous aperitivi across Florence, as well as fantastic concerts, operas
and great parties. In short, the mi-crocosm created by the Institute is unique in that it balances the highest level of professionalism and achievement with personal development, friendship as well as
social and cultural stimulation. Fi-nally, the EUI program pushed my career onto the right track. After a well structured job market process and full support of my supervisors, I was hired by the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, where I will spend the next two years as an Erb Fellow. Ultimately and more importantly, in the middle and longer term, the knowledge and networks acquired here will con-tinue to shape my professional and personal advancement as a conse-quence of the inspiring experience at the EUI. n
Take-off intoSelf-sustained Growth
Researcher, ECO | Markus Kitzmüller (Austria)
“ After four years in Florence, I can conclude with confidence that the EUI truly lives up to Da Vinci’s spirit in being a place where new and daring ideas as well as individual careers are engineered, tested and finally take off to Europe, the US and all over the world. ”
6 Summer 2009
He became a legend of his year, who has never been to either the Bar Fiasco or the June Ball. He will also be absent from the conferrring ceremony. People are surprised when I tell them that I have never been to Bar Fiasco. By contrast, the giardino in Pian di Mugnone is probably the most often visited place during my stay in Florence. Being a non-European re-searcher with two young kids, I had a different lifestyle from most researchers in the Institute: sweetness and bitterness mixed.
When I decided to come here, people asked why I planned to go to Italy for further studies, since most Taiwanese law students go to US, UK or Germany for their PhD degree. When arriving at EUI, I was con-fronted with the same question, since I am the first Taiwanese researcher here. By chance, I would say. The Institute is hardly known, if not unknown, in Taiwan. I applied the institute merely because I occasionally came across an article written by my supervisor, Prof. Petersmann. Then I thought it might be interesting to pursue my PhD degree here. I then left for Florence twelve days after the birth of my daughter, which justi-fied her constant anger with me. She, her brother and my wife joined me here four months later.
Largely, research activities in EUI are lively and of great variety. During my stay here, I have benefitted not only from my supervisor but also from the faculty of law department, especially Prof. Cremona. With her guidance and the participation in the RELEX working group, I learned of the exciting external dimension of the EU and the debates there were always enjoyable.
My researches relate mainly to international economic law, particularly WTO law. My doctoral project ex-plores the impact of the WTO membership on do-mestic policy-making and examines the interaction of four members - : China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, China and Macau, China - within the WTO framework The existence of the four members in the WTO is as unique as the EC and its member states. In addition to my doctoral project, I am also interested in EU ex-ternal relations law with a special focus on EU-China and EU-ASEAN relations. Nevertheless, I am not in-terested in EU-Taiwan relations since there is no such thing as EU-Taiwan relations.
However, there is always something imperfect. The In-stitute is proud of its European characteristics. None-theless, sometimes it seems a bit too Eurocentric. Even in its external links, it focuses mainly on transatlantic dialogues or transatlantic conflicts. To some extent, it explains why people kept asking why I came to Insti-tute. I guess my fellow researcher from SPS, Fernando Casal, asked this question more than ten times.
It has been a great experience and wonderful memory for my family to know our friends here, especially the large Spanish community. We have spent so many enjoyable days in the giardino di Pian di Mugnone. We also have our treasure there. Our children have had an even more colourful social life than their parents, including the never-ending feste di compleanno. When leaving Florence, my children speak Italian perfectly with a Tuscan accent, laughing at their parents for their shaky grasp of the language. I am not sure whether my wife and I will miss Italy, but I am sure that my children will.
I have been always reflecting The Road Not Taken written by Robert Frost. I have no idea what differ-ence it had made with my decision to come to this institute. In looking back, I would not say it was an easy and pleasant journey. However, ‘to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield,’ that is what I always say to myself. n
The View from TaiwanResearcher, LAW | Chien-Huei Wu (Taiwan)
“ The Institute is proud of its European characteristics. Nonetheless, sometimes it seems
a bit too Eurocentric. Even in its external links, it focuses mainly on transatlantic dialogues or
transatlantic conflicts ”
7
When my thoughts return to that glorious day when I committed myself to these four years of Tuscan toil, I wonder if it was the université européenne par excellence (now a renowned cliché by Yves Mény) or the Badia mensa which determined my choice? Hmm!.. And there lies perhaps the greatest fallacy. Be-cause the Karmic truth suggests that it is not you who chooses the EUI, but rather her majesty EUI who gathers you up to receive the communion from her all-embrac-ing knowledge among those fabu-lous Etruscan hills. Who of us hasn’t been a wise first year virgin bravely registering for the EUI doctorate – in one of those stuffy Florentine days alla fine di agosto? We all [or nearly all – “June Paper”, blessed be your name!] come through the light-hearted second year, timidly pre-senting our bits of writings in front of our sisters and brethren in PhD. Then we spend a hard-core-writing third year - somewhere between the library and the cosy benches of the Badia terrace. And, ultimately, we find ourselves among not-that-virgin but apparently not-that-wise fourth year departing trains in the Cloister, steamed by the final draft and challenged by the melodra-matic job-hunting in our vehement years of the economic crisis. Sometimes I am puzzled by the riddle of what the EUI is about and what it is not? And by the way, I wonder who was that crank who named it a “university institute”, a wording hardly translatable into half of Europe’s languages! But not only is its title terribly unconven-tional. Everything that goes with the EUI is so uncommon. It is neither a university stricto sensu (you won’t see here any callow un-
dergraduates), nor is it a research think-tank. It cannot be character-ized as Italian nor does it belong to any other country. It is indeed European at heart and interdisci-plinary in spirit. However, despite its first impression, the EUI is not only a group of lovely Renaissance monasteries and stately villas on the Tuscan hills. First and foremost the EUI is a constellation of some bright personalities. My EUI is the ever-maternal Françoise Thauvin, modestly hid-ing somewhere among our “per-sonal” folders. It is an incredibly friendly and open-hearted anglo-
italiano Ken Hulley. C’est Mon-sier le Président who apparently sends his car with a personal driver to pick you up from the hospital (watch out! – gli autisti italiani sono pericolosi!). Michela M., Giovanni U., Linda G., Camilla S., Antonio C. and many many other sunny individuals whom you meet each week for all sorts of questions. It’s your Polish-Australian supervisor – professor Sadurski – whom you want to clone one day, impressing you by producing three books per year! The EUI is a lady every inch, Ruth Gbikpi, making your library odyssey truly enjoyable. Finally, it is an always-smiling Fiamma in the institute’s bar: ogni mattina alle nove – con caffè e panino. (I bet she know the names of all the research-ers by heart!)
My EUI is a bouquet of my bosom buddies from Estonia to Taiwan, with whom I’ve spent a heck of a long time in the endless conversa-tions about recent ECJ cases, Foucault’s account of rhetoric, Eastern-Eu-ropean history, cook-ing traditions, carnival in Viareggio and even kissing techniques. My EUI is about a Eu-rope of diversities. And therefore if I may take this opportunity to
make, at least, one statement – I would like to protest against the fact that in recent year my belov-ed Law Department approached a very slippery border when convert-ing into a totally English-speaking institution. One thing I particu-larly cherish the EUI for, and why I won’t change it for anything else, is the luxury of shifting between three or four languages in my daily communication. I do strongly be-lieve that the European project is not about speaking the impersonal Brussels English. It is about mutual enrichment and respect for variety. Vive la différence! Therefore I hope that we shall soon overcome these menacing tendencies and return to being the cradle of multilingualism. L’Istituto europeo non è Oxbridge anglofono! And that’s so devilishly sexy, isn’t it?! n
Tuscan ToilingResearcher, LAW | Uladzislau Belavusau (Belarus)
“ Sometimes I am puzzled myself by the riddle of what the EUI is about and what it is not? And by the way, I wonder who was that crank who named it a “university institute”, a wording hardly translatable into half of Europe’s languages! ”
8 Summer 2009
Sabah Al- kheir at the EUI(Putting Research First)Researcher, SPS | Georges Fahmi (Egypt)
Sabah al-kheir, which means “Good Morning” in Arabic, were the first words I heard on my first day at the EUI. I still remember that day, when I was trying to find my way through the different desks for registration and Ken Hul-ley behind the desk for the Mediterranean countries and his warm greeting to me in Arabic. His smile and friend-liness made me feel immediately at home in this new environment, giving me a first impression of belonging to this place. This initial feeling has been confirmed every day since then.
After two years now at the EUI, I can safely say that the European Institute is not only a friendly place to be, but also a suitable environment to undertake a PhD. I came to the EUI with a vague project on the relation between Islam and democracy. Within a few months, it had al-ready improved immensely, becoming a “real” research project with well defined concepts, a profound analytical framework and an interesting question to be answered: under what conditions would Islamic religious authori-ties support democracy, and under what conditions would they offer support for authoritarian rule? I believe this progress within such a short period of time would never have been possible anywhere else. This is mainly due to the unique structure of the EUI itself. As a doc-toral and postdoctoral institute, the EUI gives professors enough time to work closely with their supervisees. Un-like my former colleagues who are affiliated with other doctoral programs, I can always knock on my supervi-sor’s office door when I need to, he always has time to comment on my work, discuss my ideas and clarify my confusion. The interdisciplinary aspect of the EUI also gives me an opportunity to discuss my project with other professors coming from different fields and approaches. Another important feature of the doctoral program at the EUI is the researchers themselves. The EUI bring to-gether a group of 400 PhD researchers working on differ-ent subjects from different backgrounds. Having lunch or coffee at the Badia is always a great chance to learn a whole host of different topics whether it be relations between Taiwan and China, the post-civil war situation in the Balkans, Muslim minorities in Europe or voting behavior in Estonia. To be able to acquire this amount of knowledge in such short period of time from people who will become experts in their fields is a truly unique opportunity at the EUI.
For me, the key element to the success of the EUI is that the administration, the professors, the library and the language centre put the researchers and their research projects first. Writing a good PhD is the EUI’s raison d’ être. I have had the chance to observe this closely through my experience as a student representative last year. Although we might not always agree with some of the measures and the rules, the aim is definitely un-questionable: guaranteeing the researchers an excellent environment in which they could work and complete their thesis. n
“ This is mainly due to the unique structure of the EUI itself. As a doctoral and postdoctoral
institute, the EUI gives professors enough time to work closely with their supervisees… I can
always knock on my supervisor’s office door when I need to, he always has time to comment
on my work, discuss my ideas and clarify my confusion ”
9
Yo tenía muy claro que en el título de mi tesis debían aparecer las palabras inmigración y Europa. Para ser más preciso, también intuía que la palabra inmigra-ción debería salir de las primeras. Por su condición de tema importante. Por ese áurea de objeto crucial, des-conocido y con proyección de futuro. Un poco como el término interdisciplinariedad, que parece justificar-lo todo, aunque a veces sea una mera yuxtaposición de lenguajes académicos. Pero volviendo al tema. Mi interés sustantivo por las consecuencias políticas del fenómeno migratorio y mi voluntad comparativa eu-ropea me llevaron a considerar el EUI como un centro ineludible para realizar el doctorado.
Lo malo es que en el titulo de mi tesis también de-bían aparecer dos términos más: actitudes y com-portamiento electoral. Y no estaba seguro de que la orientación pluralista del Departamento de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales contemplara una tesis estricta-mente cuantitativa de análisis de datos individuales de encuesta. El tiempo convirtió esas dudas en ridículas, pero cuando estaba redactando mi proyecto alguien me sugirió poner estas palabras en una nota al pie de página. Luego aprendí que la nota al pie de página es una estrategia para preservar aspectos esenciales pero aburridos o sospechosos en un trabajo académico. Nunca he entendido del todo este truco. Si se asume que el lector va a leer la nota al pie de página le es-tamos castigando igual. Y si se asume que no la va a leer, ¿por qué no eliminarla? Pero yo no podía obviar la principal variable independiente (actitudes hacia la inmigración) y la variable dependiente de mi tesis (comportamiento electoral en Europa) al redactar el título de mi proyecto. Así que asumí el grado de in-certidumbre inherente a cualquier solicitud de beca, incluí todos los términos y funcionó.
En los siguientes tres años me he dedicado a disec-cionar el miedo y la atracción hacia lo diferente, y a entender el impacto que esto tiene en cómo nos expresamos en las urnas. El EUI ha resultado ser un centro adecuado para estudiar este tema gracias a su poso bibliográfico y a la sintonía de intereses teóricos y metodológicos con algunos de los estudiantes y pro-fesores que han circulado por aquí. Mi única crítica es que es un sitio demasiado bonito para estudiar. Espero que en el mercado de trabajo sepan valorar lo que significa escribir delante de un jardincito de no-vela romántica y con vistas a interminables hileras de cipreses toscanos. Se tiene que tener una personalidad muy particular para decidir quedarse detrás de un
portátil en un contexto similar. Es por ello que des-pués del primer año decidí evitar las mesas del piso de debajo de la biblioteca y sus vistas al mundo. Durante el segundo curso trabajé en el extremo del piso de la entrada, y en el tercero he continuado huyendo de los cantos de las sirenas paisajísticas en el último piso, lejos de cualquier ventana. Parece que no caben más excusas ni pisos en la biblioteca para el futuro.
Pero mi aprendizaje en el EUI no ha sido sólo aca-démico, sino sobre todo vital. No cabe duda de que un centro de naturaleza europea tiene sus encantos. Sin embargo, su descontextualización urbana, social
y local, así como su independencia de cualquier sis-tema universitario nacional requieren otro tipo de adaptación. Construir una vida personal con gentes sin una lengua materna y un antecedente cultural común es raro pero apasionante. Permite conocer a las personas en su esencia, sin escudos o atajos culturales concretos, con el peligro y la agradable intensidad que esto conlleva. No hay duda de que ésta será la huella principal del EUI cuando nos separemos. n
Sobre inmigración, belleza y atajos culturales
Researcher, SPS | Sergi Pardos-Prado (Spain)
“ Construir una vida personal con gentes sin una lengua materna y un antecedente cultural común es raro pero apasionante. Permite conocer a las personas en su esencia, sin escudos o atajos culturales concretos, con el peligro y la agradable intensidad que esto conlleva. ”
10 Summer 2009
I visited EUI for the first time in October 2005 with a group of students and professors of Saint Petersburg State University, which I graduated from. It is written in every guidebook that October is the best month to go to Italy. That is perfectly true. The view from Badia church over hazy olive groves in early autumn sun-shine has come up to my mind many times since then. The memory of this view along with the promising description of the PhD programme in the Department of History and Civilization made me apply to EUI in 2008. The view of the green garden from the Library still brings me with my laptop every morning to one of those tables in the ground floor.
Having mentioned the beauty of the place present in everybody’s impression of EUI, it should also be said that EUI is an open lively international institution that transcend boundaries of the disciplines and national discourses and that brings so many different people together. I am writing my PhD on the history of Soviet urban design and urban designers. Once having a glass of wine in Fiasco bar after the usual day in the library I talked with someone having his expertise in econom-ics about how I want to change the topic. By chance he had a very beautiful postcard of Soviet urban design of the late 1950s that turned out to be one of the most important insights I got during this academic year. The next day at the meeting with my supervisor I used the postcard as another eloquent testimony to my ar-gument why the topic should be changed this way. You could get your insight at the bar or mensa talking to people with so different backgrounds, interested in so different subjects and having expertise in so different fields. You never know whether it comes from books, articles, professors suggestions or colleagues’ com-
ments, but don’t worry - if it’s insight you are looking for you will find it here. I would say that apart from the lively and challeng-ing environment that is vitally important for writing my PhD I also need time, just time. The EUI PhD program gives you that time for research and study-ing, time for yourself and your PhD thesis. I believe that this four years is an once-in-a-lifetime period when you could immerse yourself into broad reading, conducting archival research, and thinking over your field. The PhD thesis is just another stage on your way to academia and it is fundamentally important to have time for reshaping the project, changing perspectives, and reconsidering approaches. I could imagine that afterwards I will have quite a number of occasions to start feeling nostalgic about these times and even an-noyed at having finished my PhD once.
By now I have spent almost one year here at EUI, in Florence – one sunny autumn, one rainy winter, one spring under June paper stress and my summer fi-nally started after 3rd June. I have never had to regret about my choice so far. I was lucky to meet interesting people from different parts of the world who turned out to be my close friends and brilliant colleagues. I have enough courage to forget about my PhD thesis from time to time to go downhill to explore Florence. After one year of living here I don’t speak Italian flu-ently and haven’t visited a number of churches in the historic centre, but I seem to know the difference between Montepulciano d’Abruzzo and Brunello di Montalcino, Caffè doppio and macchiato, know how beautiful empty Florence is at night, and how impres-sive the Arno is when the rain starts in December. n
From Russia with LoveResearcher, HEC | Daria Bocharnikova (Russia)
11
When I was invited to write this article, some words of President Meny referring to the EUI’s vocation, which “… in its search for universality, it embraces cultural di-versity and respects different academic traditions,” came into my mind because of previous academic, professional and in general living experiences. These experiences in-volve learning opportunities from top academics of well regarded universities in Latin America (Universidad del Pacífico), the United States (UCLA) and now, Europe (EUI, LSE) as well as from researchers, central bankers, regulators and principal advisors for ministers during the years I worked as a lecturer, private consultant and public official in my country and as a consultant for the World Bank in its headquarters office before joining to
the Institute. These experiences happened to be enrich-ing as they occurred in very diverse environments, with people of different cultures and in countries at different stages of economic and institutional development and they may constitute a ‘distinct’ reference (as they come from a non-European member of this lively community known as EUI) to compare my ongoing experience at the Institute. My years in Florence and EUI add to this personal elation of living in the midst of and learning from diversity.
I come from a world in which terrorism, coup d’état, political persecution, ten-digit hyperinflation, discre-tionary nationalisation, etc. are not bad memories of the generation of my parents or grandparents, but of my generation, a world where presidents who took a country to its worst socioeconomic situation in history are re-elected after fear of having much worse options, a world where one can paradoxically find more inequality after government intervention and where, in general, many socioeconomic distortions (reflected in huge and pervasive inequality) preventing the operation of the free market and democracy as they do in more developed countries. Thus, I mention my past experiences also because they shaped and strengthened my preferences for applied research as they exposed me not only to what colleagues in the profession call ‘the frontier of theoreti-
cal knowledge’ but also to the no less relevant pragmatic counterpart of the efforts performed in this abstract and intellectually challenging enterprise called academia. I found in EUI a prestigious institution that largely owes its reputation to faculty internationally known not only for their academic achievements but also for their contribu-tions to the policy debate in the most egalitarian and redistributive countries of the world.
After two years of intense interaction with my Euro-pean colleagues I have learnt of aspects that go be-yond academic realms. My research-mainly oriented to development and labor-has been benefitted from motivating discussions with professors and peers but
also from the day by day life among persons with very different cultural backgrounds. Heterogeneity of agents and institutions in different countries at different peri-ods are key arguments for the contentions of my work (that deals with heterogeneous cross-country contribu-tions of R&D investments into growth according to a country’s stage of economic development and with heterogeneous bargaining and informal arrangements in labour markets in LDC according to a country’s stage of institutional development after controlling for its workers characteristics). And this heterogeneity is something that transcends ink and paper and proves to be non-negligible in daily relations with people I have been acquainted with during the years I have been liv-ing abroad, especially during my time in Europe. The position of external observer has allowed me to compare different systems and idiosyncrasies and to learn that the spirit of self-critique is based upon comparisons and it is an important ingredient to engage into improvement and innovation. I think that here, in the Economics De-partment of EUI, challenges are still to be addressed, in particular related to the organization of the compulsory and advanced blocks of the Program, but I also think that the department is endowed with the finest human capital that already makes its program an outstanding one in Europe and confers potential to make it a close competi-tor to top American Programs. n
Learning from DiversityResearcher, ECO | Edwin Antonio Goñi Pacchioni (Peru)
“ I come from a world in which… many socioeconomic distortions (reflected in huge and pervasive inequality) preventing the operation of the free market and democracy as they do in more developed countries… I found in EUI a prestigious institution that considerably owes its reputation to faculty internationally known not only after their academic achievements but also after their contributions in the policy debate in the most egalitarian and redistributive countries of the world. ”
12 Summer 2009
There have been numerous moments in the past three years in which I have realised – with my friends – that our time in Florence will be one to remember. And yet I couldn’t say that I came to the EUI fully aware of what this place was, or of what doing a PhD here would mean. At that point I was searching not only for a place to do my PhD, but also for an environment that would help to shape my future choices. I chose the EUI in the hope that it would be the right place in which to work and live – and sometimes even just to survive!
At first, coming to the EUI was a wake-up call. Wait-ing in the interminable queues at the Italian Embassy in Bucharest to obtain a visa, together with hundreds of other Moldovans looking for jobs throughout Europe, became a sort of “rite of passage” which so many go through on their way to the European Union. Moreover, once arrived here, there is a stage when one looks for a place in which they can feel at home. In the first month after my arrival in Florence, at the October presentations in the History Department, my paper – together with one on Russian gas supplies and another on Finnish Gypsies – was placed in the panel named “Other Europe”. I understood then that the place I was seeking is not a given – that I had to look for it.
The EUI might not be the right place for writing a the-sis about Second World War memorials in post-Soviet Moldova – it has a considerable lack of resources for the region in the library and a relatively short tradi-tion of research on Eastern and former-Soviet Europe. However, being here has given me a new perspective on my topic, and a new understanding of its realities, precisely because of my distance from the location of my research. Even if it has been hard at times to access sources and to spend enough time doing the necessary empirical research, the advantage of writing a thesis in Florence on a subject like mine is precisely that it of-fers a “neutral” space and, simultaneously, the oppor-tunity to exchange ideas with my fellow researchers and benefit from the expertise of the professors.
While being in Florence, I have become more aware of the world around me through my friends. Taking Sunday trips to the Tuscan hills, or playing Polish Little Animal Farm in Pratolino, or singing Turkish and Arabic songs on the way to Pian del Mugnone at 1 am, or listening to (truly!) fascinating stories about medieval castles at 8.30 am while waiting for the Badia bar to open before spending another long day in the library – these are the moments that I will take away with me from Florence.
In the end, there isn’t just one feeling that describes my time spent in Florence. Living here has meant that there are things I have appreciated (Florence as a whole), things I have hated (the 21 bus), things I have wished were friendlier (deadlines), things I will take away with me (my friends), and things for which I would come back anytime (caffé latte at the Badia bar). n
Moldovan PerspectivesResearcher, HEC | Gabriela Popa (Moldova)
“ …being here has given me a new perspective on my topic, and a new understanding of its
realities, precisely because of my distance from the location of my research. Even if it has been
hard at times to access sources and to spend enough time doing the necessary empirical
research, the advantage of writing a thesis in Florence on a subject like mine is precisely that
it offers a “neutral” space ”
13
Getting EnergisedResearcher, LAW | Rozeta Karova (Macedonia)
Undertaking a Ph.D. has become more and more common and many people decide to enrol to doctoral studies as a continuation of their educational process. Some of them even spend the first years searching for “their” topic. I have always thought that it should be the other way around, and that doing a Ph.D. should be taken as an opportunity for one to spend an exten-sive period in doing research and studying the topic that is of his/her highest interest. Therefore, after my LL.M. in the Netherlands where I wrote my thesis about the liberalisation of the Macedonian electricity market, I decided that if I ever did a Ph.D. it would be related to the liberalisation of the electricity market in the region where I come from, the South East Europe (SEE). Until recently energy was considered to be a field with which engineers and economists deal. How-ever, with the liberalisation and opening of the energy industry in many countries, including the Member States of the EU, it became clear that if energy markets were to be established, then lawyers were more than necessary. The countries from the SEE due to their clear membership perspective into the EU need to open their electricity markets as well and even to es-tablish a regional energy market. This regional energy market, not covered in the academic literature so far, is the focus of my doctoral thesis.
During the first two years, I have found the EUI to be an excellent place for conducting a doctoral degree in law. It is a unique academic institution in Europe with great openness providing many possibilities for discussing one’s research with diversity of researchers and professors. For instance, besides the great help, friendly relationship and constant cooperation with my supervisor, Prof. Micklitz, I have gained valuable comments from other professors in the Law Depart-ment as well. Prof. Schweitzer, being a second reader of my work, has even supported publishing my first year’s work as a RSCAS Working Paper. Furthermore, one of the seminars of Prof. Cremona that I attended in my first year and discussing my research with her, gave me the incentive to start my research by answer-ing the question whether the existence of the Energy Community is sustainable and why is worth studying this topic.
One of the reasons for applying to the EUI was the fact that studying energy law in this institution has great benefits because of the proximity of the Flor-ence School of Regulation and from this year, the newly established Loyola de Palacio Energy Policy
Programme. They create a platform for examining issues of European energy policy and regulation. The Ph.D. students at the EUI are welcomed to attend the workshops, conferences and training courses, and to be part of the forum for discussion of energy topics between policy decision makers, regulators, business managers and other researchers. I have so far attended
the FSR Advanced Training Course on Electricity Markets and the FSR Summer School on Regulation on Energy Utilities last year, in addition to a great number of one-day conferences and workshops.
Besides the academic environment, being admitted to the EUI meant to find myself again in the same coun-try with my fiancé, who had started the Ph.D. at the EUI the year before me. We were given a possibility to continue the relationship that started in 2005 during our LL.M. in the Netherlands. During these two years being together at the EUI, we found the Institute a great place for socialising and making friends among the researchers from all over Europe, many of which in September 2009 are going to witness the beginning of our life together by being present at our wedding ceremonies in Macedonia and Italy. n
“ One of the reasons for applying to the EUI was the fact that studying energy law in this institution has great benefits because of the proximity of the Florence School of Regulation and from this year, the newly established Loyola de Palacio Energy Policy Programme ”
14 Summer 2009
Putting Practice into TheoryResearcher, SPS | Conor Little (Ireland)
It’s June as I write this – a good time in the academic year to reflect and to look ahead. Personally, I’ve trav-elled some distance in the past ten months. For five years before coming to the EUI, I had worked in Dub-lin, first at the Irish Foreign Ministry and then for the Green Party. In both organisations, I worked in broadly policy-related positions. As with all jobs, there were good days and bad days, but what I rarely doubted dur-ing that time was that I was contributing to something bigger than me; something current; and, quite often, something that was relevant to the wider world.
Whisper it, but academ-ics and policy-makers (be they politicians or civil servants) do not always get on. When I told one colleague of my decision, he implored: “Conor, whatever you do, please don’t become an academic!” For him, an academic was some-one who had opted out of the cut-and-thrust of policy-making. He saw analysis and action as somehow being mutu-ally exclusive. On the other side of the fence, academics share with many others a certain scepticism about the motives and effective-ness of policy-makers.
When I spoke to friends and colleagues about
my decision to pursue a doctorate, they were generally supportive. However, there was also some talk about ‘ivory towers’; the potential isolation that came with academic work; and questions about the relevance of my research to the ‘real world’ beyond academia. Against this background, one of the major challenges facing me when setting out on an academic career path was to retain some of the relevance that had helped to give me satisfaction in other jobs.
Within weeks of arriving at the EUI, I found myself listening to Professor Jaap Dronkers urging the new contingent of SPS Researchers to keep in touch with policy-making – particularly in their home countries – and to engage with current debates. A couple of months later, at the SPS Department’s annual weekend away, some researchers were already talking about the danger of failing to connect with Florence, Italy and the wider world while working at the Institute. A common theme was emerging, and I realised that many people at the Institute recognised this potential pitfall and were working on ways to avoid ‘living in a bubble’.
How then, does an academic researcher with broken Italian go about bursting the bubble? How could we engage with the outside world, both local and further afield? Throughout the year, I saw a variety of con-certed efforts to connect with the world beyond the Institute by staff and researchers. (At this point, I feel obliged to refer to the social and sporting efforts of the Institute’s rowing club!) Some things were obvi-ous: learn Italian (still a work in progress for me!); get involved in activities in the city; keep in touch with friends, colleagues and current affairs outside of Florence. Approaching the next academic year, these remain something of a ‘to-do’ list for me and, beyond these platitudes, I have learnt that each person has to find their own way to connect, to get outside the bub-ble. A year on from deciding to come to Florence, I haven’t mastered the Italian language; I am not doing all I can to burst the bubble – but I certainly have a roadmap, some guides and plenty of companions with whom I can do it. n
“ When I spoke to friends and colleagues about my decision to pursue a doctorate, they were
generally supportive. However, there was also some talk about ‘ivory towers’; the potential
isolation that came with academic work; and questions about the relevance of my research to
the ‘real world’ beyond academia ”
15
We are from Mars – and you are from… Where?
Researcher, LAW | Pierre Thielbörger (Germany)
Fiamma’s unconditional smile and a cappuccino in the sun of the Badia terrace – who could deny that the EUI is the perfect place to be? However, here, I am writing a critical comparison between my academic experiences at the EUI and in the US where I am currently complet-ing a Masters in Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School, and I will try my best to remain impartial.
The academic worlds of the US and the EUI reflect their differences in other spheres, namely in their societies and economies. However, where can things actually be com-pared? What does the EUI do comparatively well, and where is there need for improvement?
The first point of praise in favour of the EUI is its li-brary. The library is a jewel. While I have spent many a miserable day searching for books in American libraries, whereas there are few that can’t be found in the EUI library, or supplied through the mythical “Inter-Library-Loan” within a few days. Believe it or not, problems with the air-conditioning are not a EUI problem alone: even in the US, the homeland of air-conditioning, libraries resemble the Sahara one day, and Antarctica the next.
Second, our grant situation as researchers at the EUI is superb. If you tell someone in the US that you are a PhD student with a full grant for four years, they will take you for a demi-god. It is so hard to obtain a PhD place in the US – and nearly impossible to have it fully funded. In this respect, we are truly lucky.
Finally, I want to mention the Bar Fiasco. I have really missed a social meeting place like Bar Fiasco during my time in the US – just a place to hang out after a day in the library with other people who are as lost in their work as you are.
But enough of this flattery! There is worse yet to come. The EUI is far from perfect, and indeed could still learn a great deal from the American experience.
The first problem is the EUI’s profile. “You study at the EU…what? Is that in Brussels?”. Americans are often ig-norant of non-American universities, but the EUI has a real image problem. Whereas Oxford, Cambridge and the LSE are known, we are not. How is that possible, if we claim to be the best PhD programme in Europe?
Second, in my view the EUI lacks a proper Career Service and an Alumni-Network. I haven’t even gradu-
ated from Harvard and I already get several helpful emails a day from the Career Service. Every year, the university organises an Alumni-Weekend where you can all meet at your old university again (and, along the way, the school manages to collect dona-tions in the millions). The EUI has a lot of strong informal networks, but we also need a professional Career Service. The EUI has recently started this endeavour - better late than never!
Finally, it is the “teaching” that makes the biggest difference for me. I believe that the format of teach-ing at the EUI to be flawed: First, mandatory “pres-entations” in seminars are often boring, as research-ers present their own work while ignoring the topic of the class. Why not encourage more presentations in working groups, and let the professor, hopefully the most-skilled teacher in the room, do the teaching?
Second, presentations could be graded or evaluated. Otherwise where are our incentives to perform well? One could also introduce a more sophisticated system of prizes and rewards for the best PhDs at the EUI.
Third, real discussions should be encouraged, and contributions restricted to short statements instead of long monologues. And finally, evaluations of seminars and supervision should be taken seriously. I often had the impression that evaluations have little impact on curriculum design or the future employment of profes-sors at the EUI. In the US, they definitely do – and that improves the quality of the classes.
Coming back to initial argument: the US academic sys-tem, compared to that of the EUI, bears a great deal of comparison to larger EU-US differences. Whereas the EUI system offers us more social security and is gener-ally more community-oriented, the US system is more consumer (“students”)-oriented, has stronger market-ing strategies, works closer with the job market and creates incentives through performance-evaluation.
The EUI would be foolish to ignore these US lessons (as would be the case vice versa). At the end of the day, the US academic system is very successful. However, some features of the EUI will remain unique. Multi-lingualism, multi-culturalism, multi-coffee choice, not to mention Fiamma’s smile. n
16 Summer 2009
Anthropologically SpeakingResearcher, SPS | Kathryn Dominique Lum (United Kingdom)
When I first came across a reference to the EUI when studying for my Masters in Lund, Sweden, I initially thought that my research would not fit in within the EUI academic environment. My re-search and fieldwork at the time were focused on India, and seemed miles away from the EU-focused topics at the EUI. However, having finished my Masters, I decided to shift my focus from the homeland to the diaspora, and when I saw an ad-vertisement for PhD positions at the EUI, I decided to take a fresh look and applied to the Department of Political and Social Sciences. I was drawn espe-cially by the prospect of studying in a pan-Europe-
an institution, and thought that completing my PhD in a diverse cultural and linguistic environment would be more stimulating and challenging. The appeal of a university in which no one national culture would dominate was strong.
I come from an anthropological and area studies background, so it has been a novel and good experi-ence to go beyond disciplinary boundaries and receive academic training in a more interdisciplinary environ-ment. I believe the anthropological approach is highly transportable and is enriched by contact with other disciplinary perspectives, especially the historical one. I must in particular commend the EUI Library, for I have had no difficulty in sourcing the literature I need due to the excellent policy of interlibrary loans and book purchases that the library offers.
I study caste and gender relations within the Punjabi Sikh diaspora in Spain. I am one of those researchers who needs to explain who and what they study, since ´Punjabi´ and ´Sikh´ are usually not familiar terms and can evoke confusion. Punjabis hail from the Indi-an state of Punjab, and constitute one of the multifari-
ous ethnic and linguistic groups of India. The majority of Punjabis are Sikh, a religion that was founded in the Punjab in 1469 and has approximately 24 million followers worldwide. The vast majority of Indians set-tled in Europe are of Punjabi origin, and have added yet more diversity to the European religious landscape in erecting their gurudwaras, or Sikh temples and holding their colorful annual religious festivals. The Sikhs tend to be identified with their most visible and emblematic symbol- the turban, along with their long beards, and often present an image of unity and equality to outsiders. The reality, however, is that the Sikh community is profoundly divided by caste, and throughout Europe, Sikh temples are often associated with a particular caste group.
I focus on a low-caste group of Sikhs who are still fighting for social respect and struggling to overcome centuries of caste discrimination, stigma and preju-dice. Recently, the caste tensions that are latent within the community erupted into violence when one of the leading spiritual leaders of the low caste Sikhs was murdered during a packed religious service in a gu-rudwara in Vienna. Six armed men entered the temple and started shooting, aiming at the two visiting low-caste spiritual leaders (the second leader was also shot, but is currently recovering from his gun wounds). In the ensuing bloodshed, thirty devotees were injured, eleven of them seriously. As news of the Vienna at-tack spread, the Punjab exploded and rioting started in low-caste areas, resulting in the army being called in and a strict curfew being imposed. This tragic in-cident highlights the need for European policy makers to become more aware of the internal dynamics of religious minorities, in order to prevent future inci-dences of violence. Policy- makers in countries with significant Indian communities will now need to take into account a new form of discrimination previously unknown in Europe: discrimination based on caste.
The beautiful city of Florence forms the backdrop of my research. A city in which it is possible to cycle everywhere (important for a devoted cyclist such as myself), and become involved in a wide range of activities both at the EUI and beyond. For the sustain-able and eco minded, the Florence city administration is a leader in promoting eco initiatives, such as this year’s ´Ricomincio da me´ program. I feel the EUI is unique, and choosing the EUI has allowed me to com-bine my passion for India with my interest in southern Europe. n
“ I believe the anthropological approach is highly transportable and is enriched by contact
with other disciplinary perspectives, especially the historical one. I must in particular commend
the EUI Library, for I have had no difficulty in sourcing the literature I need due to the
excellent policy of interlibrary loans and book purchases that the library offers ”
17
Tutto cominciò con un pavoneResearcher, LAW | Valentina Falco (Italy)
“Come vedrai, l’IUE è un posto veramente eccezio-nale: per le mille opportunità che offre, per il livello dei professori che vi insegnano, per l’ambiente co-smopolita ed infine per le grandi risorse che mette a disposizione. La vita tra le colline fiesolane è dolce, e gli anni passano in fretta; ci si sente privilegiati a poter lavorare in un luogo simile”. Così, in un’e-mail del maggio 2006, un ricercatore del Dipartimento di Legge – col quale ero entrata in contatto tramite il mio relatore di tesi alla Statale di Milano – mi dava il ben-venuto all’EUI, pochi giorni dopo la sospirata lettera di ammissione dell’Academic Service.
Sono certa non se ne avrà a male se prendo in prestito le sue parole di allora per riassumere, a pochi mesi dalla consegna dei temuti “due terzi”, i miei anni all’ Istituto, perché semplicemente non saprei trovarne di più adeguate: per comunicare il senso di profonda am-mirazione verso tutti coloro con i quali si ha la fortuna di potersi confrontare quotidianamente; per descrive-re il costante stupore del far parte di una comunità di persone fuori dall’ordinario sotto ogni punto di vista; e, perché no, per trasmettere quel perenne senso di inadeguatezza che fa da corollario all’ammirazione ed allo stupore di cui sopra, e che ti spinge a far bene non fosse altro che per essere all’altezza del privilegio avuto in sorte.
In realtà, del caleidoscopio di sensazioni che l’EUI è in grado di generare avevo già avuto un assaggio – giova-ne e timida studentessa al secondo anno di università - nel corso di una gloriosa summer school sul diritto dell’Unione Europea alcuni anni prima. Potrei descri-vere ancora oggi l’emozione che provai all’arrivo a San Domenico, la solennità della prolusione di Sir Francis Jacobs, l’impatto travolgente della vis polemica di Renaud Dehousse, del genio di Charles Sabel e Gian-domenico Majone, del fascino solenne del corso di Carol Harlow…ed il perentorio richiamo del pavone che allora dimorava nei giardini di Villa Schifanoia, e che di quando in quando si affacciava in Sala Europa. Risalgono a quelle due settimane di tanti anni fa la salda amicizia - che mi accompagna ancora oggi – con alcune delle persone più splendide che io conosca; il desiderio, o più che altro il sogno, di poter completare la mia formazione accademica in quello straordinario luogo di ricerca ed elaborazione intellettuale che allora mi pareva irraggiungibile, nella sua unicità; e, soprat-tutto, il mio primo approccio alla parola – fino ad allora a me, monomaniaca del diritto internazionale, totalmente ignota - di “comitatologia”.
Eredità, quest’ultima, che imparai ad apprezzare ap-pieno solo molti anni dopo, quando proprio su co-mitatologia e basi giuridiche derivate – oltre che sulla politica europea di difesa, caposaldo della mia tesi - mi trovai a lavorare, da dottoranda EUI, durante il mio stage al Servizio Giuridico del Consiglio dell’Unione. Del resto, di certi singolari corsi e ricorsi, di mille buffe coincidenze, è fatta la storia dell’EUI, così come la quotidianità di ciascuno di noi ricercatori. Come quando, sempre a Bruxelles, nel darmi l’arrivederci prima del mio ritorno a Firenze, il capo della mia Di-rezione mi rivelò, quasi come un segreto faticosamen-te custodito per cinque mesi, di essere anche lui parte della EUI Community, in quanto marito orgoglioso e fiero di una ricercatrice della prima coorte di dot-torandi di Storia. O come quando, ad una conferenza all’Università di Macerata, mi ritrovai di fronte, nei panni di una delle più brillanti giovani internaziona-liste europee, la gentile sconosciuta con cui due anni prima, il giorno dell’intervista di ammissione, mi ero fermata ad osservare un fagiano che zampettava nei giardini dell’Istituto, e che mi aveva congedato con un sorridente “Andrà tutto bene”. Non mi resta che spe-rare di ritrovarli entrambi sulla mia strada – Francesca De Vittor ed il fagiano – la mattina della difesa... n
18 Summer 2009
A la recherche…Academic Service | Françoise Thauvin
Que pourriez-vous dire de ces années passées au contact des chercheurs de l’Institut ?Maintenant que l’on me pose la question, je me rends compte qu’il n’est pas facile de parler de ce que l’on fait quotidiennement depuis plus de 20 ans, mais si je dois résumer en quelques mots, je peux dire qu’il s’agit, somme toute, d’une belle expérience avec beaucoup plus de hauts que de bas.Tout n’est pas idyllique (d’ailleurs ce serait trop en-nuyeux !) mais ce contact avec tant de personnes d’ori-gines et de cultures les plus diverses est sans nul doute la partie la plus enrichissante de mon travail.L’arrivée des “nouveaux” dans la chaleur écrasante de la fin août est une espèce de rite renouvelé chaque année mais toujours un peu différent. Le stress de certains et la tranquillité apparente ou réelle des autres et puis bien sûr, les mêmes problèmes à résoudre: un conseil pour le logement, les premières impressions et puis aussi les premières difficultés. L’installation à Florence coûte cher, alors inévitablement au bout de quelques jours, la question qui revient le plus souvent est : Quand ma bourse sera-t-elle payée ? Et puis les questions d’assurance, les couples avec enfants, les
femmes enceintes, ils arrivent tous dans mon bureau avec mille questions et autant de problèmes à résou-dre, dans la mesure du possible!
Ces rapports ont-ils évolué au cours de années ?Oui et non.Bien sûr en 20 ans, les mentalités ont changé, mais pas autant que cela. Mondialisation oblige, il me semble que les différences qui pouvaient exister en fonction de la provenance des chercheurs se sont atténuées. Ils ont tous eu à peu près les mêmes expériences avant de venir à l’IUE et les “caractéristiques nationales” se sont estompées.L’E-mail a parfois remplacé le contact personnel et cela est dommage mais il est vrai que les chercheurs étant de plus en plus nombreux, il serait bien difficile de tous les connaître maintenant. Ils sont quand même nombreux à me rendre visite !Et puis même si moi je ne vois pas les années passer, il faut se rendre à l’évidence: quand ils arrivent, ils ont toujours entre 20 et 25 ans alors qu’il n’en est pas de même pour moi. Il y a 10 ou 15 ans, ils pouvaient me considérer comme une amie un peu plus âgée qu’eux maintenant ce serait plutôt comme leur mère. Je crois que je m’en irai avant qu’ils me voient comme leur grand-mère !!En réalité, il me semble qu’il y a une grande continuité, les chercheurs sont peut-être juste un peu plus stressés mais il est vrai que les délais à respecter sont beaucoup plus stricts que par le passé.
Un résumé de ces années ?Comme je vous le disais au début, pas mal de joies et parfois quelques moments difficiles à partager avec quelques uns. Beaucoup de souvenirs avec tant d’entre eux, François, Philippe, Sylvie, Léa, Antonio, Esther, Pedro, Hakim, Eva et tant d’autres que je n’oublie pas. J’aime avoir de leurs nouvelles et la photo de leurs enfants et encore plus leur visite lorsqu’ils sont de pas-sage à Florence. Je ne voudrais pas apparaître comme une vieille dame nostalgique mais c’est vrai qu’ils occupent une belle place dans mes souvenirs des épi-sodes heureux ou malheureux que nous avons abordé ensemble ou du moins c’est ainsi que je l’ai vécu.L’Institut est un endroit particulier, physiquement en Italie mais un peu ailleurs aussi et nous avons parfois l’impression de vivre dans une bulle où se mêlent tant de cultures et de langues différentes, je crois que même les chercheurs italiens n’ont plus tout à fait l’im-pression d’être dans leur pays et cette “extraterritoria-lité” crée des situations particulières à vivre. n
“ L’E-mail a parfois remplacé le contact personnel et cela est dommage mais il est
vrai que les chercheurs étant de plus en plus nombreux, il serait bien difficile de tous les
connaître maintenant. ”
Dear Yves:
I am deeply troubled by the fact that recent debates about the European Union and its “democratic deficit” seem disconnected from empirical data and scholarly analysis about what Europeans actually think about the EU, what they really want from it, and how they act politically. This is not just true of popular views and journalistic accounts, as one might expect, but of the work by our most thoughtful public intellectuals and pol-iticians, such as Jürgen Habermas, Joschka Fischer, Simon Hix, and Andrew Duff.
Most of these thinkers believe the Europe suf-fers from a “democratic deficit”--that is, that the institutions of the European Union are less “democratic” than those of its member states. Nearly all who hold this view believe one or more of six “myths” about Europe: First, Brus-sels increasingly dominates national politics. Second, overwhelming numbers of powerful EU officials act secretly and without proper procedural controls. Third, EU decision-mak-ing is electorally unaccountable. Fourth, recent negative referendum votes have expressed fun-damental public dissatisfaction with the EU and its policies. Fifth, the EU is disliked and mistrusted by Europeans because it allows less direct public participation in politics than na-tional institutions. Sixth, voters fail to partici-pate actively in EU politics because its institu-tions discourage or disallow them from doing so. For these reasons, many people believe Eu-rope is structurally “undemocratic”--and that this has sparked a crisis in European politics.
As I have argued in recent research, each of these claims is empirically false. The EU re-
mains under the constant, tight control of 27 powerful and democratic member states, backed by a directly elected European Parlia-ment. Because European publics and their governments want it to be so, only a small and stable portion of national laws (9-15%) originate in Brussels. With every law scruti-nized by 27 directly elected governments, a directly-elected European Parliament, plus the technocratic Commission, EU decision-making is by necessity slower, more transpar-ent, and more democratically accountable to broader constituencies than in its individual member states. Every member state gets a say, not only because EU directives must pass by a high 60-70% vote, but because in practice they are generally passed by consensus, tak-ing minority concerns into account. Moreo-ver, any member state can at any time choose to have its national parliament approve all EU votes, as do Denmark and Sweden. The EU remains weak, with no police, no army, a limited mandate, an administration no larger than that of a small city (only 6,000 actually make decisions), and disposition of a minis-cule portion (2%) of European public finance. Almost all laws and rules are therefore imple-mented in a decentralized fashion by Italian, French, German and other national officials. The few exceptions of more “insulated” deci-sions—such as the decisions of the European Court of Justice, European Central Bank, regulatory authorities—are the sort found in every national system.
Contrary to lurid tabloid headlines and the claims of extreme right- and left-wing Eu-roskeptics, there is no evidence of a popu-lar backlash against the EU. Polls reveal that Europeans trust and like EU political institu-tions more than their own national political institutions. Integration remains popular. Is lack of participation a public concern? No. In fact, polls show citizens across nearly all European countries trust and like insulated political institutions like courts and regu-lators (national or European) more than “democratic” ones like legislatures and elect-ed politicians. Whatever problems the pub-lic perceives in modern political institutions, lack of “democracy” is evidently not one of them. What of the recent referenda? Exit polls and voting behavior studies reveal that up to 80-90% of negative votes in Ireland, France, and the Netherlands were motivated not by any coherent critique of the EU but by protest voting against national govern-ments, false beliefs about the EU, or outright ignorance. For example, over 40% of Irish “no” voters admit they opposed the Lisbon treaty because they had no idea what was in it, while another 25% opposed it because anti-Lisbon treaty groups spent millions to convince them that the EU could institute
a military draft, ban abortion, and do other things it cannot and will never do.
Finally—and very importantly—the primary reason why Europeans abuse referendums to debate irrelevant issues, why they decline to debate the EU in national elections, and why they fail to show any enthusiasm for Euro-parliamentary elections, is not because EU institutions in any way impede their demo-cratic participation. It is because the EU stays away from the areas voters care about enough to motivate intense political par-ticipation. These issues, the same in every European country, are social welfare, fiscal policy, health care, pensions, education, em-ployment policy, law and order, and such. Europeans want these issues to stay national, and the EU has respected their wish. But the result is that intense democratic debate by necessity remains national as well. When one compels Europeans to debate EU issues, about nearly all of which they care very little, the result is not an enlightened ideal deliber-ation. As the Irish referendum demonstrates, it is chaos. In short, the problem today is not that Europeans are angry at Europe; it is that they are apathetic. No institutional reform can change this basic fact.
Thus the best arrangement for Europe--in any case, the only feasible one in the real world--is the existing one. Italians, Swedes, Lithuanians and 24 national publics vote for national gov-ernments they trust on the basis of issues they care about, and those national governments support corresponding policies in Brussels. The directly-elected European Parliament serving as a secondary democratic conduit. The overall result of this hybrid system is, in fact, to make the EU both transparent and very responsive to public pressure--as illus-trated by the outcome of recent policies in ex-ceptional areas of modest public concern, like services deregulation, genetically modified foods, and the WTO Doha Round, where the views of leaders and technocrats have been trumped by popular pressures. If Europeans do not like the results, they can vote their na-tional governments or Euro-parliamentarians out of office, just as they do with non-Euro-pean issues.
My plea is aimed at those who favor facts over myths, pragmatic over utopian concep-tions of democracy, and a Europe that works today over idealistic conceptions of future federalism. And so, as you are one of Europe’s leading empirical political scientists, but also now—as Rector of the European University Institute—a practical man of politics, I hope that you will be touched by the spirit of this critique.
Andy
A Transatlantic Dialogue about Democracy and its Future*
Andrew Moravcsik, Professor of Politics and International Affairs and Director, European Union Program, Princeton University
Dear Andy,
Your plea in favour of a “realistic” Europe against the views of “utopians” is at first sight very convincing. The achievements of the “European project” over a period of 50 years (or more if you consider the Coal and Steel Community) are impressive. Managing to build up over the years a single market and currency and then enlarging successfully to most of Europe can only be a matter for re-joicing.
So why bother? So far so good.
I am willing to buy part of your argument and to go even further. The European sys-tem is probably more sophisticated and protective of citizens’ rights than those in place in the national components of the EU. In many areas it goes beyond the protection and guarantees secured by the Bill of Rights and the US Supreme Court. After all, and just to take one example, not a single EU country is entitled to apply the death pen-alty, while this remains the privilege of the States in America. Europe has “enjoyed” more centralisation and uniformity in the field of human rights than any other politi-cal space in spite of being divided between 27 “sovereign” states.
I have always been supportive of this evolu-tion in particular in the light of the tragic European experiences of the past. But I have also argued in my work on populism that democracy could be at risk if one pillar (for instance the constitutionalist one, based on rights, checks and balances etc…) was over developing in contrast with the popular pil-lar so well captured by Abraham Lincoln “Government of the people, by the people, for the people”. The US still today reflects rather well this equilibrium between the populist and the constitutionalist compo-nents of democracy.
The problem in Europe is that there has been a growing imbalance between these 2 di-mensions over the years. The reasons for this are many. Some are purely national. Some stem from the globalisation process, which increases regulation through treaty negotia-tion to the detriment of national rules. But in Europe the crucial factor has been the Eu-ropean integration process.
This process was initially political under the disguise of economic cooperation and devel-opment. Still in 1989 and 2004 the integra-tion of the former soviet-dominated states was more political than anything else as it would be the case of Turkey, should it join the EU.
These political moves and goals have dramat-ic consequences on the functioning of exist-ing democracies. You tend to minimize this impact by emphasising the limited scope of the transfer of competencies (economic reg-ulation), the small number of civil servants, the full involvement of national bureaucra-cies and policy-makers, the possibility for the citizens to control their representatives and governments. This is true, at least at first sight. But the reality is rather different. There is no need to have large bureaucracies to produce regulations which penetrate the entire society in a very detailed and cumber-some way. Regulation is the most efficient instrument ever invented to externalise costs on others at minimum price!!
Another feature is that any regulation cre-ates losers and winners. In national systems governments know that their survival is de-pendent on balancing as much as possible the distribution of pain and benefits. By
construction, the EU is unable to do that. The division of labour between States and the Union is rather dramatic and unsustainable in the long term: economic and monetary regulation to the Union, welfare and income taxes to the national governments. The ca-pacity to act is limited within a narrow band which conditions governments and political parties. The collapse of social democrat par-ties everywhere in Europe is testimony to the indirect impact of the Union on national politics. Neo-liberal parties (including the Labour Party in Great Britain) can live well within that straitjacket which favours their preferences and their electorate. But it jeop-ardises the left and exacerbates the rage of the losers who join extremist, radical, some-times xenophobic parties at the 2 ends of the political spectrum. I do hope I am wrong, but I believe we have to prepare ourselves for the shock of the forthcoming European elections. Absenteeism will be high. The anti-European parties from the left and from the right will be on the rise. The electoral legitimacy of Europe will be eroded at the worst possible time, when the international economic crisis exacerbates tensions, self-interest, between individuals but also coun-tries.
We should not be surprised by such a de-velopment. As Europe has forgotten its po-litical dimension to privilege a rather tech-nical management of more and more issues related to the economy, we have deprived the national democracies of what was their flesh and blood from their very inception: in other words debating and deciding about economic issues. Today, everywhere in Eu-rope there is a feeling of powerlessness and frustration. People understand that they
Yves Mény, President of the EUI
can still debate but that it does not matter. Economy is too important an issue to be left to the people…Remember Bill Clinton’s words during his political campaigns “it’s the economy, stupid!”.
At this point, I believe that our choices are limited. If we agree that economic issues should be a matter for democratic debate and decision, the choice is between re-na-tionalisation of economic policies or a de-mocratisation of higher levels of decision-making. Let me underline immediately that the first choice is a non-option. The dream of mastering its destiny at the national level is an illusion that event the great powers are acknowledging.
If we are left only with the second option, we should not content ourselves with the present situation which is unsatisfactory and poten-tially risky for the future of democracy.
Dear Andy, remember the dominant para-digm before the American and French Revo-lutions. Democracy was perceived by most thinkers and philosophers as an ideal form of government. Unfortunately, its pre-con-ditions were reserving it to miniscule states. The combination of the democratic ideals with the concepts of representation made the miracle, i.e. the feasibility of democracy in large states.
Our challenge today is of the same nature: how to “democratise” regional and/or global authorities in order for democracy not to be-come an empty shell.
Yves
Dear Yves:
I am glad we find ourselves so much in agreement in rejecting simplistic Euroskep-tic views of the EU as a despotic “superstate,” and in espousing an ideal of democracy in which popular involvement is balanced by non-participatory institutions and practices. We share, also, a concern about the future of European democracy. Europeans are disil-lusioned about their national democracies in part because the options are limited for increasing (or maintaining) national social spending and policies. This strengthens ex-tremists at the expense of the traditional center-left—a concern I feel acutely as a so-cial democrat myself.
But why do you blame the EU for this trend? And recommend EU democratization as a panacea? Here we disagree. Your critique rests on two claims. First, limits on national social policies today result from “dramatic” increases in “neo-liberal” EU policy-making, which impose a “regulatory straightjacket” on left-wing policies. Second, the proper re-sponse is a “democratisation of higher levels of [European] decision-making”, ostensibly to implement more “social” policies at the European level, thereby satisfying voters and legitimating Europe.
In admirably succinct form, Yves, you have encapsulated the core belief of today’s con-tinental European left, from Jürgen Haber-mas to the militants of the French Socialist Party. Democratic socialism has lost its way! Let’s blame Europe’s democratic deficit! At-tractive though it may be to social demo-cratic politicians who seek to evade politi-cal responsibility, journalists who seek easy
explanations for referendum results, and socialist militants mired in the ideologies of yesteryear, such a diagnosis is unsupported by the facts and the resulting policy proposal is unworkable.
No serious analyst believes that European governments could realistically spend more on social welfare today, or even maintain current levels. This is a utopian fantasy of the left. Far from being excessively “liberal”, as you claim, overall European economic policy is excessively “social”, in this sense: National social welfare systems are not be-ing reformed quickly enough—redirecting social expenditure, consolidating spend-ing, rendering labour markets flexible, and permitting immigration—in order to be sustainable over the longer term. Everyone knows it, even if some pretend otherwise.
This fundamental constraint on socialist policies, moreover, is not imposed by the EU, but by deeper forces. These include ag-ing demographic trends, the post-industrial economy, slowing productivity growth, shifting demand for unskilled workers, ris-ing health care costs, fiscal constraints, the power of insiders, and third-country globali-zation. Because (directly elected) European national leaders know that these structural trends cannot be reversed, they unani-mously agreed on the “Lisbon agenda” for economic competitiveness and reform. You call this “technocratic”; I prefer to call it “en-lightened.”
For 50 years the EU has played this useful role as a counterweight to national social systems, maintaining a healthy balance. Contrary to what you claim, Yves, the mem-ber states, not the EU, dominate this part-nership. Your “straightjacket” metaphor implies a “dramatic” recent increase in Eu-ropean legislation, but the number of EU laws passed annually—small anyway, not the 85-90% one reads in the Euroskeptic press, but 9-15% of national totals—has declined markedly. Far from imposing excessive neo-liberalism, the problem is, if anything, that the EU is far too weak vis-à-vis voters to in-duce even “liberal” reforms such as the Lis-bon Agenda—even when they would help save social democracy! The problem is not technocratic despotism; it is a lack of nation-al political will.
Critics like yourself and Habermas claim that European liberalization and national so-cial policies are incompatible. Social policies must be Europeanized to be effective. This sounds good in theory, but where is the em-pirical evidence? In fact there is no viable EU alternative. What would a “European Social Policy” actually be? Subsidies from richer countries to weaker, poorer economies like Poland and Italy? Poor country acquiescence to measures to protect workers and restrict
The Berlaymont building in Brussels
immigration in rich countries like Germany and France? Uniform social and fiscal regu-lation imposed from above across the EU on disparate social systems? Just to state the options is to demonstrate that all of this is a pipedream. The 27 European member states lack any consensus. Polls consistently show European citizens do not want EU action in this area. The national systems are too varied to be reformed in tandem. At best European social policy is illusory; at worst, it would destroy the EU—most importantly because it does respect the true source of EU legiti-macy, the national democracies.
By obsessing about European social policy and the “democratic deficit”, rather than at-tending to necessary national reforms, the European left has talked itself into a cul-de-sac. Socialists now favour undesired, un-workable policies in order to legitimate and democratize the EU or, as Habermas puts it, to create a European “public space.” This sort of muddled thinking brought about the re-cent EU constitutional debacle. It “puts the cart before the horse”. The only reasonable purpose for shifting the level of policy-mak-ing and democracy from the nation-states to Brussels is the reverse: One proposes worka-ble policies, and democrats mobilize around them. This is what motivated the great do-mestic democratic transformations of the past. It is time for Europe—led by the Euro-pean left—to return to its pragmatic roots.
Andy
Dear Andy,
It seems that we have difficulty in fully agree-ing with each other, while being unable to disagree completely.
You are right when you underline the inca-pacity of social-democratic parties to cope with the tremendous economic, social and political changes of the past years. The par-ties which were supposed to be international by choice and vocation have been trapped in their national thinking, structures and clienteles. They can certainly be blamed for their incapacity to react and counteract to the sweeping tide of the neo-liberal ideol-ogy. And those who have tried, such as the Labour Party, have made such concessions to the most outrageous excesses of wild capi-talism that, in my view, it is difficult to con-sider, from a moral or ethical point of view, the labour party as a party of the left. Tony Blair combined in a messianic fashion the fascination for money and the attraction of religion in a way which is more reminiscent of the Reagan years than anything else.
I believe we do not disagree on that. But let me remind you that they had to face an un-precedented ideological U-turn, character-
ised by the supremacy of the neo-liberal par-adigm over the traditional social-democratic one (or the so-called German social market economy). Our diagnosis converges on their failure. We probably diverge about the im-pact of the changing environment of the ac-tual policies of EU. The Lisbon Agenda that you mentioned was not an attempt to rescue the social-democrat model by pushing the national governments in the right direction. It was rather the vehicle of the dominant paradigm forcing the adjustment of national policies through economic regulation on one hand, and “soft” competition between the Member States on the other.
What Fritz Scharpf has labelled as “negative integration” (the elimination of economic barriers) benefits from appropriate and centralised instruments, while the “positive integration” has practically no instruments and no means, with a few exceptions.
Should a social policy, set up and funded at the European level, be the alternative as you seem to suggest? Certainly not. Most national welfare systems suffer from bureau-cratic pesanteur and blindness. Shifting so-cial policies to Brussels would not only be a mistake, but a nightmare. But a social policy is not made only of social benefits. The main issue at stake is that many social rights are challenged or turned down at the national level because the economic regulations per-meate and condition them. Is it so neces-sary to promote equality between men and women by forcing Member States to erase the prohibitions of night shifts for women? Why is it so difficult to change the VAT rates for services which are essentially provided locally (unanimity is required) while income taxes or corporate taxes are fixed at their pleasure by national governments impeding de facto some political choices because of this race to the bottom.
Do not misinterpret me. I am not advocating the rescue or safeguard of obsolete policies that social democratic parties are unable or unwilling to change. What I do not accept, because I believe it is detrimental to the very purpose of Europe itself, is the supremacy of market forces on every dimension of life and the actual incapacity of governments to reconcile through political choices econom-ic and social constraints. For the past 150 years, this has been the heart of politics.
If we believe this is a dream or an illusion, we should say so, as for instance Nino Majone so eloquently argued the case some years ago. But obviously it is difficult to sell it to the citizens. If we believe that economics is still a crucial part of democratic govern-ance; if at the same time we are convinced that economic (and other) issues have to be dealt with beyond the borders of the Nation State, then, to come back to my initial point,
we have no other option than to try to de-mocratise little by little these supra-national or international authorities. One way is the promotion of the rule of law and most of the road has already been accomplished at the European level. Even with more modest ob-jectives this “democratisation process” has to develop at the international level. Some lim-ited examples such as the International Pe-nal Tribunals or the “jursidicisation” of the WTO procedures are promising openings. The road however is long and bumpy. Now that Europe has put in place an extremely sophisticated system of rights and of checks and balances, time is more than ripe to de-velop the other “pillar”, the popular one. I have not enough space here to indicate how this could be done, except by emphasising the need for an incremental approach. The ways and means are open to debate and ex-perimentation, but I do not think we can evade the objective. A democracy without the people is not an option. As somebody put it in relation to the customs union cre-ated around Prussia, “A Zollverein is not a polity”. The observation remains truer than ever.
Yves
*This exchange has been originally published in Italian: Yves Mény, Andrew Moravcsik, Discutono di democrazia europea, Il Mulino: Rivista bimestrale di cultura e di politica, 3 May-June 2009, pp. 457-466.
19
Thirty Years OnAcademic Service | Ken Hulley
A day in June… outside the terminal room in the bank corridor. Uh uh, you’ve caught me on the hop here… an interview? Oh no, you can’t have an interview, sorry, haven’t got the time. Rushed off my feet these days… it’s not like June 1979, you know, when I first started and when the very first researchers, those first pioneers were taking off just as I moved in. I thought there were sooo many of them!! Off the top of my head, the intake for that year was about 32 research-ers – no LLMs or post-docs at the time - and my knees were knocking at the idea of having to find temporary and permanent accommodation for all those people in September. At the time, my main task was looking after student housing, but as time went on, I picked up other jobs such as health insurance, grant payments, not to mention (the most important one of all), the ‘Entertainments Committee’ (the forerunner of the ‘4B’). It was fun, but boy! did people make life tough for you if you didn’t get them cheap season tickets at the Teatro Comunale or a front-row seat for the Estate Fiesolana concerts at the Badia! If ever there was a time I got angry with anyone, it was then – and perhaps my neighbouring office colleagues will still remember!
The ‘Bureau d’accueil’ they liked to call my office then - French was still buzzing around in the admin-istration, remember – it was the front office where everybody came, for anything and everything: flats, moans and groans about landlords, grants, names of good doctors and dentists, hotels in Venice, opera tickets for Verona. And you know, there wasn’t an e-mail or a computer around at the time – everything was done with phones, paper, typewriters and even telegrammes! Old-fashioned you may think, but it had a great advantage: I got to know just about everyone, new research students, research assistants, admin and teaching staff.
I have to say, these days, with the hundreds of people around, I feel I hardly know anybody! Then again, the things I deal with now are much more ‘serious’, so
it’s hardly surprising – well, how many people do you think would fancy a season ticket for the Admissions Committee or a front-row seat for the Grants Com-mittee meeting, even if they were free – or even if they were paid to go!
Just a few weeks ago, I bumped into one of our former professors in the Badia coffee bar – I’ve bumped into him on a couple of occasions, in fact, at the airport or in Florence, but we never talked about ‘work’. This time, though, here we were, on Institute premises and he came straight out with it: ‘what is it you do exactly these days?’ Put to me in those terms, I didn’t have a quick answer. Years ago I could have answered in one word - ‘housing’ – and the matter would have been settled. These days, I have to try - without too much luck – to condense a whole range of tasks into a suitably attractive phrase… research student administration, pedagogical and supervision assessments and welfare services may be the real description, but what a mouth-ful! And it’s so, how can I put it, so very ‘admin’ and that’s what I’ve been trying to avoid all along: being that ‘person from the administration’ sat on the other side of the desk. Admittedly, 25 years ago, age was on my side, most researchers being about the same age – I shared flats with them, went out for a drink or to a concert with them. These days… well, what do you expect, it’s a generation on! Many of those research students have children who are at university, or have even become researchers at the Institute – I could quote you two cases straight off.
But enough of the reminisc-ing…..despite the age gap, I be-lieve that I still have a good, friendly relationship with the research students - and vice versa - and I still don’t see myself on ‘the other side of the desk’. And you know, it is grati-fying to see that this and other offices in Academic Service are still points of reference for a lot of people, helping them solve their everyday problems.
Now, sorry for the longish di-gression there - what was this interview you were talking about? n
“ The ‘Bureau d’accueil’ they liked to call my office then - French
was still buzzing around in the administration, remember – it was
the front office where everybody came, for anything and everything:
flats, moans and groans about landlords, grants, names of good
doctors and dentists, hotels in Venice, opera tickets for Verona. ”
20 Summer 2009
Lawless Roads: To and fro between Ireland and ItalyLibrary | Michiel Tegelaars
In December 2009 Emir Lawless will be leaving the service of the Institute and of the EUI Library after having worked here since 1976. She participated fully in the “heroic age” of the Library. During most of 1976 the embryonic library holdings consisted of a number of big cartons full of books and journal volumes heaped high in what today is the Vasco da Gama room. The small crew of recently recruited librarians was then racing to put together a small collection of material to offer to the ten professors and forty researchers who were going to kick off the first academic year in 1976-1977. The Library opened in October 1976 with some 10,000 volumes which occupied provisional shelving in a corner of the Refectory.
Emir was there during the difficult period of the combined task of building up the library collections at breakneck speed, and of the in-house development of the Library’s first online automated system and catalogue – with both librarians and researchers in the role of guinea pigs - while at the same time trying to put together a set of library services for a growing and impatient audience of academics. When, after some years, the basics were in place she was given the further task of running and developing the European Documentation Centre. Having worked in the Euro-pean Parliament Library before coming to the EUI,
she was a natural for the job. Besides dealing with the constant influx of the publications of the European institutions, over the years she built up a network of correspondents in all the institutions. As a result, and to the advantage of our library users, there were not many documents or texts, circulating in Commission, Council, Court or Parliament, that she could not get hold of. In addition, she is one of the team of subject specialists who do most of the selection of the book-, journal-, and now also digital material that the Library acquires. If today the Library of the EUI is rated in the first rank of European studies collections, a fair deal of the merit belongs to her.
Add to this that all this time she has been ever ready to give help and advice - smilingly and unstintingly - to both her colleagues and to generations of researchers. We are going to miss her in more ways than one.
She is now going to divide her time between Florence and Dublin and keep in close touch with two sets of friends. We count on being included in the Florence set! n
“ If today the Library of the EUI is rated in the first rank of European studies collections, a fair deal of the merit belongs to her. ”
21
On 22 July 2009, the EUI launched its new website, the first major overhaul in nearly seven years.
A short story - a long process.
Some years ago a usability study on the EUI website was carried out by outside consultants1 specialised in user testing and usability so as to identify the strengths and weak-nesses of the website. Numerous tests with long-term and new users, both academic and administrative, revealed that the EUI needed to: move towards a much more user-friendly system by re-organising the structure and the content of its website; acquire and implement a Content Management System (CMS) to manage web content,
streamline design and to use the newest technologies.
With the aim of increasing the visibility of the EUI’s activities, programmes, research themes and research output, as well as to be ready to offer new communication tools, and to streamline communi-cation and workflows in the EUI. These recommendations were ac-cepted by EUI management and the years of hard work began. Major steps in the project were the drafting of a Request for Propos-als that included all the necessary technical specifications, evaluating various products and design offers and related budgets, assuring inte-gration with existing databases, re-
thinking the structure of both the internet and intranet (some 11.000 pages), rewriting and migrating current content as well as archiv-ing and deleting old content
The project involved EUI Man-agement, Departments, Centres, Programmes and Services and re-quired a huge job of coordination by the EUI’s new Webmaster and the web team, as well as support from the Computing Service and the active collaboration of some 35 web editors.
The CMS system2 became avail-able to the web team in Septem-ber 2008 and the real work could begin.
First of all, training was offered to web editors on ‘Writing for the Web, a course provided by the AG consult, and training on the CMS system was given first by the Contensis trainer followed by an update on the system by Jules Pic-cotti, the EUI’s webmaster. An ‘on-line web support system’ was set up to provide online assistance to all web editors, to create a knowledge base on web is-sues and to store important docu-mentation such as glossary and a writing-for-the-web guidelines.
The core web is now live, but the project is not finished as there are still a number of issues to be fixed, additions and corrections to be made and, and a number of tech-nical issues to be solved. The following features will be im-plemented in the autumn.
Provision of web collaboration tools; W3C compatibility enabling full access for those with disabili-ties; Addition of personal home
The Web MattersDirector of the Library | Veerle Deckmyn
“ The EUI has a new web site with a more streamlined structure and a fresh modern design.
Based on Contensis Content Management System, it integrates new information tools to provide more
up-to-date and accessible information for both internal and external users. ”
}}
22 Summer 2009
pages; Enabling of mini-web sites; Provision of an ex-tended Who’s Who and People database; Press Room.
The major and most difficult step have been made however which was to get a good product up and run-ning. The challenge is now to improve the integration of a number of linked databases, to review various workflows, to create user friendly interfaces, to provide continuous training and assistance to the web editors, but most of all to assure the continuous development of the web for our academic environment - the most important tool we all have at our disposal. n
1 The usability study was undertaken by AG Consult, Bel-gium: www.agconsult.be/en/” http://www.agconsult.be/en/2 The CMS chosen was Contensis: www.contentmanage-ment.co.uk/home.aspx” http://www.contentmanagement.co.uk/home.aspx
}
The EU Profiler, a voting advice application for the European Par-liament elections in June 2009, has been selected for the “Top 10 Who are Changing the World of Inter-net and Politics”. The international e-democracy award is internation-ally the most renowned award in the field of e-democracy. This prestigious award seeks to reward “those who have made a com-
mitment to affecting meaningful political change through use of the Internet and new technologies”. During the World e-Democracy Forum in Paris, the trophies will be awarded at a ceremony held in the French National Assembly on 22 October. On 23 October project leader Alexander Trechsel will present the EU Profiler in a presentation with the other award-winning initiatives in the City Hall of Issy-les-Moulineaux.
The EU Profiler (http://www.eu-profiler.eu), which was developed by the European University Insti-tute in cooperation with the Am-sterdam-based Kieskompas, and the Zurich-based NCCR Democ-racy/Politools network, provided information on the European Par-liament elections in an innova-tive, unique and comprehensible
manner, easily accessible to a wide range of users. The Profiler was available in almost all official lan-guages of the EU and was cus-tomised to each country’s national campaign context. The tool was online for six weeks and attracted more than 2.5 million users and considerable media attention. In addition, the Profiler generated a huge amount of data, which will be used for academic research. n
The web matters indeed: EU Profiler selected for the “Top 10 Who are Changing the World of Internet and Politics” of the International E-democracy Award
Project board and Webmaster Jules Piccotti having a rest after hard work
23
Ten Years of Sports and Cultural Activities
Academic Service | Beatrijs De Hartogh
In the late 1990s the management of the EUI consid-ered that research students needed more than research seminars, supervision, training and academic confer-ences alone. The underlying idea was that in order to guarantee better development of the body and mind, students should also be able to enjoy the many facets of cultural life that Florence has to offer. Furthermore, it was felt that any form of physical movement would be beneficial in counteracting a life of study that was increasingly spent staring at computer screens.
In the past some cultural activities had existed at the Institute. In the late 1970s the so-called Entertain-ments Committee, composed of a few staff members, had seen to an occasional course being set up (yoga), but not on a regular basis. During the 1980s, a first at-tempt was made to gather a group of singers into what would later become the EUI Choir (or Coro IUE). However, possibly due to the accidental nature of these first steps, finding any kind of financial support turned out to be quite difficult. The only exceptions to this were the series of history art lectures, given for many years by Maria Fossi Todorow which were an enormous success right from the start, and the yoga course.
The name Body and Brain Boosting Board was coined, and a staff member started to collect ideas about courses to offer or the kind of activities that would be most attractive for researchers and fellows. As a result in the late 1990s the EUI football team Squadra fantastica, or International Heroes as they were then called, was set up by students and staff with the finan-cial support of the Institute and a lot of moral support
from the then President Patrick Masterson. The team was soon mirrored by a female team (five-a-side), which is as successful as its male counterpart in local competitions. The Mucche Pazze team (Mad Cows) is known throughout Tuscany for its scoring capacity, and relentless pursuit of victory!
Other initiatives followed and currently, more than twenty different activities receive financial support through Institute funds. Anyone who wants to pro-pose an activity can forward suggestions to the Aca-demic Service, preferably before the end of the calen-dar year.
There are a few rules of thumb: for example, activities must have some kind of ‘critical mass’, which implies that around 12-15 participants must be involved. Participants organise their own activity, with financial and administrative support provided by the Academic Service, and practical support by the Logistics Service (example: finding rooms for practising; upkeep/clean-ing of the EUI gym, or palestra).
“ None of the above would be possible without the invaluable support of the research students themselves. They make proposals, they arrange for teachers to come to the Institute or they simply take others out and about (cycling; hiking; sailing). ”
}}
24 Summer 2009
Where necessary, teachers are hired but always on the under-standing that participants them-selves fund 50% of total costs. An annual meeting is held – if needed – at the beginning of the year in order to establish a calendar year’s budget but more often than not, with the help of the coordinator, budget requests virtually match the total amount available through Institute funds, rendering a meet-ing superfluous.
The EUI community is grateful to current president Yves Mény for locating and buying a baby grand piano, which has been housed in the Sala delle Bandiere after a thorough restoration. By carry-ing out some research (as is only fitting…), we concluded that our little gem is a Blüthner from 1926 – and a very good year it was too! The request for a proper piano for the Institute had been made insistently by the same group of students who played such an ac-tive role in setting up the Institute’s own concert series, “I concerti del giovedi sera”, so named as the first concert was held on a Thursday… Over a period of over four years, Dr. Johannes Müller first and Dr. Giuseppe Mazziotti later – who is also a gifted clarinet player – or-ganised an annual series of inspir-ing chamber music concerts, both in the Refectory and in the Sala delle Bandiere. This is kept alive today by musicians of the N.E.M.
association – Nuovi eventi musi-cali – who play a vital part in the Florence and Fiesole music scene: NEM have been artistic directors of the classical music division of the Estate Fiesolana summer festi-val for some time.
Other (close) ties exist with the music scene in Florence through excellent relations (and preferen-tial treatment) both with the Mag-gio Musicale Fiorentino organiza-tion and with the Associazione Amici della Musica.
At the same time that the concert series started at the Institute, new life was breathed into the EUI Choir. Under the stimulating direction of Valerio Del Piccolo, the choir per-formed both within and outside the Institute culminating in a rave-up of classical pieces presented to the complete European Commission when it met at the Institute in the autumn of 2003 – a highlight un-likely to be forgotten by those wit-nessing or participating in it.
Each year more ideas are present-ed for courses, and sometimes – as was the case in 2009 – re-present-ed after being abandoned for a variety of reasons. Contacts were made earlier this year with a pro-fessor of art history who has been actively involved in supporting the vast number of Florentine muse-ums. Mrs Sidsel Vivarelli Colonna, friend and colleague of Maria Fossi Todorow, delivered a number of well-frequented lectures in which, taking the Etruscans as a point of departure, she investigated and spoke of those beloved and well-known Tuscan ‘greats’ such as Gi-otto, Masaccio and many others besides. An ever increasing and spell-bound audience enjoyed her lively and always learned delivery so much that the 4B coordinator received calls for an encore. The subjects for next year’s lecture se-ries have been agreed so let’s hope that generations to come may also enjoy her enthusiasm, while she
}
}}
25
enhances our knowledge of artists or paintings we thought we knew everything about!
None of the above would be possi-ble without the invaluable support of the research students them-selves. They make proposals, they arrange for teachers to come to the Institute or they simply take others out and about (cycling; hik-ing; sailing). They organize the annual success story of the five-a-side mixed football competition, our very own Coppa Pavone – rightly called the highlight of the
academic year! The researchers in-sisted that a place like the Institute had to have a piano; had to have its own music series; had to build up a choir; had to set up a drama group. They also had to have their own rowing boat, and with the support of Yves Mény, that has been realized. Last year the EUI’s own boat was baptized at the Flor-ence Rowing Club “Canottieri di Firenze”. The rowers take their ac-tivity very seriously, and they have already participated successfully in a number of international uni-versity regattas.
The complete list of activities is long and is best consulted on the “Extracurricular activities” web-page-aka the 5B, or the Bulle-tin of the 4B (http://www.eui.eu/ServicesAndAdmin/Extracur-ricularActivities/Index.aspx) or on Outlook (click on Public Folders, then on All Public Folders, then on Activities (4B et al). Let me assure you that, if properly organized and financed, there is always room for just a little more. n
}
26 Summer 2009
When we arrived in Florence three years ago we had never touched a football before, did not particular-ly like football and did not know what calcetto (seven-a-side) was. That was before we joined the Mad Cows! Now the calcetto pitch has become a sort of second home, not only to us but to several EUI girls and Florentines. On Monday night
the Cows come in to graze on the pitch and learn some tactics from our great coach, Paolo Merante, a Calabrian thoroughbred who’s always telling his herd to ‘show themselves’ (make space), ‘push up’ (attack) and most importantly, ‘be proud!’ This year we have also been fortunate to have a second coach, Giovanni Mazzoni, not only versed in the art of football and fit-ness but also a wine expert of some standing. When he’s not training
the Cows he is off around the globe, imparting his knowledge and promoting very ‘full bodied’, ‘complex’ and ‘linear’ wines from Tuscany. The Mad Cows entourage doesn’t stop there however: we are also priviliged to have a dedicated fan, Marco Panchetti; a diligent reporter, Jannis Panagiotidis, and our mascot, Laister Iraizoz. Should
our reporter ever tire of academia, there’s a career waiting for him in the Gazzetta dello Sport. For samples of his fine reporting see forzamucche.blogspot.com. The references to many significant his-torical football moments are lost on most of us Cows, but we are proud to have him anyway!
The team means many things to many of the players but we all agree on the fact that without the Mad
Cows our lives in Florence would not be as fun or as healthy. There is also the fact that the team has a nice balance of researchers, staff, partners and non-EUI locals. Our ages range from 20 to 35 and our nationalities cover almost all the continents, including Raya from Thailand! We play in a Florentine league during the year; most of our games taking place next to the runway of Florence airport, or at the swish Virgin grounds in Firenze Sud. We make good use of the calcetto pitch at the Villa Schi-fanoia, where we not only train but also organise friendly games from time to time. This year we came second in our league (not Serie B or even C or even D) but more im-portantly we improved our game and had a great year.
In June it was again time for the EUI annual calcetto tournament, the Coppa Pavone. As usual the Mad Cows were very attractive on the players market since all teams had to play with at least one girl on the pitch at all times. Happily the Mad Cows newcomer and top scorer, Alessandra Torre, scored the winning goal of this year’s final for her team Union Birra! Also, the team Santo Subito, consist-ing mostly of local players, made themselves noticed when at one point fielded three girls along with only two male colleagues.
The endeavours of the Mad Cows would not have been possible with-out the generous financial support of the EUI. A big Thank You Moo for that. n
The Mad CowsResearcher, LAW | Amy Strecker (Ireland)Researcher, SPS | Mi Ah Schoyen (Korea)
“ The team means many things to many of the players but we all agree on the fact that without the Mad Cows our lives
in Florence would not be as fun or as healthy ”
27
The Department of History and Civiliza-tion has awarded the first Marc Bloch Prize in Modern European History to Milos Jovanovic (CEU) for his MA thesis entitled “Constructing the National Capital: De-Ottomanization and Urban Transformation in 19th Century Belgrade”. A prize of 4000 € was awarded during a ceremony at the EUI.
Manfred Boni (HEC 1976/77):
Paul Kellermann, Manfred Boni und Elisabeth Meyer-Renschhausen (eds), Zur Kritik europäischer Hochschulpolitik : Forschung und Lehre unter Kuratel betriebswirt-schaftlicher Denkmuster, Wiesbaden, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften., 2009.
Harold James:
Harold James, The Creation and Destruction of Value, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2009.
Recent books
Ruth Rubio Marin:
Ruth Rubio-Marin (ed.), The Gender of Reparations: Unsettling Sexual Hierarchies while Redressing Human Rights Violations , New York, Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Marc Bloch Prizein Modern European History
28 Summer 2009
Adrienne Héritier, Professor in SPS and in the Robert Schuman Centre, who has been elected to a three-year term as Chair of the
Executive Committee of the Eu-ropean Union Studies Association (EUSA). EUSA is the premier schol-arly and professional association focusing on the European Union, the ongoing integration process, and transatlantic relations, and organises an important bi-annual conference on Europeanthemes. Founded in 1988, and based at
the University of Pittsburgh, EUSA now has almost 1000 members throughout North America, all EU member states, and on all con-
tinents, representing the social sciences, the humanities, busi-ness and law practitioners, news media, and governments on both sides of the Atlantic (see: www.eustudies.org/). n
Francesco Francioni, who has been elected member of the prestigious Institut de Droit In-ternational. In 1904 the Institute won the Nobel Peace Prize, and its membership comprises the world’s leading public internation-al lawyers. The Institute’s mission is the promotion of justice and peace through the codification of international law.n
EUI Alumnus John Loughlin (SPS 1982), Professor of European Politics at Cardiff University since 1985, who will receive an Honor-ary Doctorate from the Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Umea, Sweden to be conferred in October 2009. The Faculty is conferring this honour “in recogni-tion of his great contribution to research in the fields of European politics and regional and local governance”. Professor Loughlin has also been appointed a Visiting Fellow of St Edmund’s College, Cambridge (2009), a Distinguished Visiting Research Fellow at the Humanities and Social Sciences Graduate School, Queen Mary University of London (Sept-Dec
2009) and a Member of the Resi-dential Colloquium of Princeton’s Center of Theological Inquiry (Jan - June 2010). In Princeton he will develop a new research project on Religion and Politics in Europe. Loughlin is an Academician of the UK’s Academy of Social Sciences and a Fellow of the Royal His-torical Society as well of the Royal Society of Arts. He is also a Visiting Scholar of Nuffield College and a member of St Antony’s College both in Oxford. n
Congratulations to…
29
EUI Alumnus Peter Van den Bossche (LAW 1990), who has been appointed Judge at the Ap-pellate Body of WTO. Prof. Van den Bossche will return to the EUI as a Fernand Braudel Fellow in 2010. n
EUI Alumnus Ralf Rogowski (Law 1982-1986), who has been promoted to a personal Chair at the School of Law of the Univer-sity of Warwick, with effect from 1 October 2009 n
Massimo La TorreThe Alexander von Humboldt Re-search Award (Forschungspreis) is awarded to a scholar on the basis of a general assessment of his/her career and academic achieve-ments. More often than not it is granted to people conducting research in the natural and em-pirical sciences or to mathemati-cians; however, a small number of awards are also assigned to schol-ars in the humanities, in social sci-ences and in law. The decision about the award to Massimo La Torre was taken in December 2008 and in May 2009 there was an initial ceremony at the University of Münster (whose School of Law had proposed the grant to the Humboldt Founda-tion), with a laudatio by Professor Valentin Petev (Emeritus at the Law School) and a subsequent Festvortrag, a lecture, by the Preisträger. On 9 June 2009, the Bundespräsident personally con-ferred the award to the scholars at his residence (Schloss Bellevue) in Berlin. n
30 Summer 2009
Jackie Gordon, Gianni Tozzi and Iacopo announce the birth of Nicolas on 16 May 2009.
Claudia Roberto and Claudio Barzini are happy to announce the birth of their daughter Giulia on 20 May 2009.
Congratulations to Ruth Rubio Marin and Pablo de Greiff on the birth of their son, Lucas, on 23 December 2008.
Cécile Brière and Alessandro Masselli are happy to announce their wedding which took place on 20 June 2009.
Three Births and a Wedding
31
Une rencontre avec Thierry ne laissait jamais indifférent, telle-ment il y mettait de chaleur et de simplicité. Au sein de l’institut, nous sommes nombreux à avoir été marqués de son empreinte et à partager aujourd’hui la douleur de sa disparition.
Thierry Péguet était arrivé à Flo-rence en septembre 2000, avec sa compagne Laurence Fayolle, cher-cheuse en droit. Au cours des cinq années passées ici, il a successive-ment apporté sa contribution au sein de la bibliothèque, du Centre Robert Schuman et du départe-ment d’économie. Curieux de tout et de tous, Thierry avait trouvé au sein de l’institut un environne-ment social, culturel et intellectuel à la mesure de son appétit : tout ce qu’il connaissait, il aimait à le par-tager, et tout ce qu’il ne savait pas, il aimait à l’apprendre des autres. Passionné des arts, des langues, de la politique, de la société et des médias, du rire et de l’humour sous toutes ses formes, passionné de l’Afrique et du monde dans sa diversité mais aussi, à ses heures, bricoleur, cuisinier ou apprenti-relieur dans l’Oltrarno, il s’inté-ressait à des domaines innombra-bles. Derrière son caractère jovial,
Thierry était un être d’une grande délicatesse, toujours prêt à écou-ter, à témoigner sa sympathie et à encourager.
Autant de passions, autant d’ami-tiés dans lesquelles Thierry est allé puiser la force et le courage qu’il fallait pour affronter sa ma-ladie. Jusqu’au bout, il a continué de s’enquérir de ses amis, curieux de leur travail et de leurs pro-jets, heureux aussi de partager les siens, comme si la vie restait et devait rester, pour lui et pour les autres, une donnée intangible. n
Valérie Mathevon, Roch Hanne-cart & Ruth Nirere-Gbikpi
In Memoriam
Thierry Péguet Alain BonzonAlain Bonzon, Executive Se-cretary of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterra-nean (GFCM) passed away on 21 August 2009. Alain had worked in the EUI Library, in the Euro-pean Documentation Centre, in the early eighties. n
32 Summer 2009
Árpád Abraham from the Uni-versity of Rochester joins the De-partment of Economics.
Jérôme Adda from University College London joins the Depart-ment of Economics.
Russell Cooper from the Univer-sity of Texas joins the Department of Economics.
Massimo Morelli from Columbia University joins the Department of Economics.
Luís Miguel Poiares Maduro joins the Department of Law. Professor Maduro was formerly Advocate General at the European Court of Justice.
Dennis M. Patterson from the Rutgers School of Law joins the Department of Law.
New Professors
33
A new villa for the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies: La Pagliaiuola
New Buildings
34 Summer 2009
GARCIA ESPADA, Antonio, Marco Polo y la Cruzada: Historia de la literatura de viajes a las Indias en el siglo XIV, Madrid, Marcial Pons Historia, 2009, Published version of EUI Ph.D. thesis (2006)
MOLLER, Jorgen, Post-communist Regime Change: A compara-tive study, London / New York, Routledge, 2009, Published ver-sion of EUI Ph.D. thesis (2007)
ROMEI, Valentina, The Transforma-tion of Marketing and Business Organisation: 19th Century Eu-rope, Saarbruecken, VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, 2009, Published version of EUI Ph.D. thesis (2006)
DORIS, Martin, Dispute avoidance and European contract law, Gro-ningen, Europa Law Publishing, 2008, Published version of EUI Ph.D. thesis (2007)
HERMANN, Andrea, One political economy, one competitive strat-egy? : comparing pharmaceutical firms in Germany, Italy, and the UK, Oxford/New York : Oxford Uni-versity Press, 2008, Published ver-sion of EUI Ph.D. thesis (2006)
BRACKE, Maud, Which socialism? whose détente? : West European communism and the Czechoslo-vak crisis, 1968, Budapest /New York : Central European University Press, 2007, Published version of EUI Ph.D. thesis (2004)
EUI Doctors are encouraged to notify [email protected] of the publication of their theses
A selection of books based on EUI theses
CADMUS cadmus.eui.eu
35
The Evaluation Report of the Euro-pean Research Council’s first two years has been made public by the European Commission at:http://erc.europa.eu/PDF/final_re-port_230709.pdf.
The Expert Group was chaired by Vaira Vike-Freiberga, Vice-presi-dent of the Reflection Group on the long-term future of the Euro-pean Union (Dec 2007 - ), former President of Latvia (1999-2007) and former Professor of Psychol-ogy at the University of Montreal.
President Yves Mény was the Rap-porteur, the other Members were: Lord (David) Sainsbury(Vice-Chair), Former Under Secretary of State at UK Department of Trade and Industry with responsibility for Sci-ence & Innovation; Head of Gatsby Charitable Foundation Fiorella Ko-storis Padoa Schioppa, Professor of Economics at “La Sapienza”, Rome; former President of ISAE (Istituto di Studi e Analisi Economica), Rome; Lars-Hendrik Röller, President of European School of Management and Technology, Berlin; Professor
of Economics, Humboldt Univer-sity, Berlin; Elias Zerhouni, Former Director of National Institutes of Health, US (until Oct 2008), previ-ous executive Vice-dean of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, US.
Evaluation Report of the European Research Council
Via dei Roccettini, 9I-50014 San Domenico, Italywww.eui.eu/Research/EUIPublications/CorporatePublications/EUIReview.aspx
© EUI, 2009
PublisherEuropean University InstitutePublications Officers: Barbara Ciomei, Jackie GordonA selection of photos by Niccolò Tognarini
ContributorsUladzislau Belavusau, Fabian Breuer, Daria Bocharnikova, Veerle Deckmyn, Beatrijs De Hartogh, Georges Fahmi, Valentina Falco, Andreas Frijdal, Edwin Antonio Goñi Pacchioni, Roch Hannecart, Ólafur Ísberg Hannesson, Alex Howarth, Ken Hulley, Rozeta Karova, Peter Kennealy, Markus Kitzmüller, Conor Little, Kathryn Dominique Lum, Peter Mair, Valérie Mathevon, Ruth Nirere-Gbikpi, Sergi Pardos-Prado, Gabriela Popa, Mi Ah Schoyen, Amy Strecker, Lotta Svantesson, Michiel Tegelaars, Françoise Thauvin, Pierre Thielbörger, Chien-Huei Wu.
Editors’ NoteViews expressed in articles published reflect the opinions of individual authors and not those of the Institute.
The European Commission supports the EUI through the European Union budget. This publication reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
Printed in Italy by Tipografia Giuntina – FirenzeSeptember 2009
The con
struction of m
ore researcher resid
ences fin
ally starts! Foreseen en
d of w
orks: May 2011
Related Documents
![Sistema Eui[1]](https://static.cupdf.com/doc/110x72/55cf982d550346d033960ed3/sistema-eui1.jpg)
