This study examines and analyzes anti-competitive agreements in Kosovo, North Macedonia and Albania. Also, it examines in some aspects the similarities and differences of the competition laws of the countries in question, with the competition law of the EU. It aims to achieve these basic objectives: to analyze the evolution of competition law in Kosovo, North Macedonia and Albania; to provide a clear analysis of the competition law of the countries included in the study, in terms of the prohibition of anti-competitive agreements; and compare it with the EU competition law; to analyze the behaviors of undertakings that constitute prohibited agreements in the sense of competition law; to analyze important decisions of the Competition Authorities, regarding the prohibition and punishment of anti-competitive agreements; and to consider punitive measures (fines) for violation of rules related to anti-competitive agreements. The analysis shows that there is a high alignment of the competition laws of the countries included in the study with the EU acquis, and that the challenge for the Competition Authorities remains the low number of imposed fines and their non-execution.

All these Regulations are published by the Official Gazette of R.M. no. 91/05.

Mankind often seeks solutions to climate change and environmental crises, but rarely considers the feasibility of outer space to overcome such critical issues. Among many solar geoengineering approaches is stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) whose concept suggests artificial control of the global temperature by spreading tones of sulfur dioxide into Earth’s stratosphere. Given that the classic ‘technology control dilemma’ represents the central problem of solar geoengineering governance, however, this paper adopts a VenusEarth comparative planetology method by addressing volcanology and atmospheric circulation aspects. An international regulatory framework engaging space law in solar geoengineering governance is consequently presented, which classifies two separate legislations: (1) research-based legislation (comparative planetology and Earth science) and (2) non-research-based legislation (national and international governance, ethical issues, economic factors, military utilization). Further highlighting climate change issues, SAI manifests the Anthropocene and regards Earth’s stratosphere as an “inner environment”, while comparative planetology manifests the Anthropocosmos and regards space as an “outer environment”. This polymorphous consideration of atmospheric and space elements identifies a new approach of climate change techniques. Human relations that concern both environments should examine how social scientists would regard these separate boundaries or perceive them as a mergence between the two major epochs.

No abstract

No abstract