No abstract

Together with 6 universities in Germany, we organised a seminar on the inter-relations between crises in Europe and their effects on European foreign affairs. The seminar was conceptualised with regard to two dimensions: (1) weekly live-interaction between more than 150 students with a clear schedule for discussions and presentations, and (2) an e-learning portal that constituted the main reference for various elements of learning and information exchange. Within this framework, students in working groups across different universities critically developed problem-based assumptions and arguments on EU foreign affairs both live and through the e-learning portal. The projects thus included both synchronous teaching and blended-learning elements. Our aim was to particularly link students from different disciplinary and knowledge backgrounds who discussed current issues of EU studies/ EU foreign affairs. In this paper, we interrogate and reflect on this teaching experience by elaborating on its technical and didactical aspects, presenting its innovative character, outlining its strengths and weaknesses, and providing recommendations for colleagues.

The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis has led to shutdowns of the cultural, associational, and economic life in many parts of the world and had a severe impact on gender relations in many societies. This study engages with gender differences in public support of severe infringements of personal and economic freedoms. Methods: We use data from an original survey conducted by CINT in the United States and Germany in June 2020. Descriptive statistics both aggregated for the two countries and then split by country as well as multinomial logistic regression analyses gauge gender differences in support of COVID-19 related confinement measures. Results: Men and women rather converge on the level of risk COVID-19 might cause to their health and economic situation, but the two sexes still differ in their assessment of their preferred government reaction to the disease. Women are approximately one-third more likely to advocate stricter infringements, compared to men. This finding illustrates that while both sexes share similar risk evaluations, women are more prudent for their health than men. Conclusion: With this study, we add to the literature on risk aversion and gender differences. In a pandemic situation, women appear to be more risk averse than men.

This article explores the empirical relevance of researching outside‐in politicization processes in European studies. To this end, it examines to what extent and how civil society organizations (CSOs) have contributed to the politicization of EU policies towards Western Africa in two cases: the negotiation of Economic Partnership Agreements and the EU's engagement with the G5 Sahel. CSOs were strongly engaged in the trade negotiations, while they were largely excluded from the G5 Sahel process. In both cases this was due to CSOs' own initiatives, or the absence thereof, with these strongly linked to being either invited or discouraged by official actors. The article argues that authority transfer and the domestic context – including state fragility and state–society relations – are relevant to explaining the (non‐)involvement of CSOs in outside‐in politicization.

No abstract