COVID‐19 and Policy Responses by International Organizations: Crisis of Liberal International Order or Window of Opportunity?

Debre, Maria J.; Dijkstra, Hylke

doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12975

Cited by 31 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, without a change of preferences of, for example, Poland and Hungary, there would have been no application of the Directive. Third, we support the literature that argues that the Commission can use crises to expand its powers (Debre & Dijkstra, 2021; Degner, 2019). Often, the argument is that the Commission can play a long‐term game because it has a longer time horizon than member state governments (Vogt & Pukarinen, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Making EU refugee policy in 2001, applying it in 2022: Directive 2001/55/EC and its use in 2022

Fink,

Kader

2023

Contemporary European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Ukraine crisis brings European Union (EU) refugee policy into the spotlight. Temporary protection for Ukrainian refugees was granted under Directive 2001/55/EC—a directive that had never been applied until 2022. This article seeks to explain why a directive that had not been used for 20 years was now applied. Our argument rests on liberal intergovernmentalism: Conflicts between countries with high and low migration pressure dominated negotiations in the Council of Ministers. These intergovernmental conflicts were not solved but built into the wording of the Directive. Each attempt to apply the Directive triggered a new round of intergovernmental conflict. However, in the Ukraine crisis, the cost–benefit calculation of the countries that had hitherto opposed application of the Directive changed, because they received most of the refugees. Hence, a policy window opened, and the Commission could use old ‘dormant’ legislation to further integration.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Making EU refugee policy in 2001, applying it in 2022: Directive 2001/55/EC and its use in 2022

Fink,

Kader

2023

Contemporary European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After a period of elevated instability, new, or repurposed organizations may emerge signalling a transformation to a new global order. The opposite hypothesis is that the past systemic crises may have already altered the trajectory of societies towards a more resilient path through gradual adaptation (Josepha Debre & Dijkstra, 2021). While governance reforms have been undertaken since the global financial crisis of 2008 and others are underway regarding the COVID‐19 pandemic, this paper suggests that the governance‐issue mismatch has not fundamentally changed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and governing global systemic crises in the 21st century: A complexity perspective

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary globalization has fostered human development but growing interconnectivity between societies has increased systemic risks (Goldin & Mariathasan, 2014;Goldin & Vogel, 2010). Systemic risks are risks associated with large-scale failures or changes of a system (Helbing, 2013). Disruptions originating in one country can quickly spread beyond national borders and affect large parts of the human population. Addressing such threats is considered a global public good, i.e., goods with benefits that extend to all countries (Kaul et al., 1999). In the study of risks with large-scale impacts, research has often focused on wars, natural disasters, and existential risks (Ord, 2020). However, crises affecting human societies are also related to economic and social issues, or the cooccurrence of social and ecological phenomena (Folke et al., 2021). In the early 21st century, the world has experienced several systemic events with global repercussions, including jihadist terrorism and the war on terror (2001), the global financial and economic crisis ( 2008), the COVID-19 pandemic (2020), and the current broader impact of the Russian aggression against Ukraine on energy, food, and security (2022).These events have provided an empirical basis to study systemic crises. This article aims at providing a broader understanding of the nature, causes, mechanisms, and impact of global systemic crises and their implications for global policymaking and governance. Such understanding is essential for the provision of global public goods to prevent, react to, and recover from shocks. The article

show abstract

“…Moreover, there are important comparative analyses of the uses of emergency powers by governments in the Global North (Bolleyer & Salát, 2021; Debre & Dijkstra, 2021; Greene, 2020; Jagannathan & Rai, 2021). Similarly, courts have been at the center of scholarly and political debates during the pandemic (Biehl et al, 2021; Mello & Parmet, 2021, 2022; Parmet, 2021).…”

Section: Law Emergency Powers and Policy Failures In The Covid‐19 Pan...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergency powers, anti‐corruption, and policy failures during the COVID‐19 pandemic in Puerto Rico

Atiles-Osoria

2023

Law & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores how the use of emergency powers by the US and Puerto Rican governments exacerbated the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic and manufactured the conditions for furthering the multilayered economic, legal, political, and humanitarian crisis affecting Puerto Rico since 2006. The paper discusses three cases. First, it examines how the multiple declarations of the state of emergency, and its constant renewals, produced contradictory public health policies. Since the start of the COVID‐19 pandemic in March 2020, the Puerto Rican government has issued over 90 executive orders aimed at addressing the emergency, producing an unclear, contradictory, and unequal emergency management policy. Second, the paper focuses on the impact of the passing of Law 35 on April 5, 2020, which imposed severe penalties on those who disobeyed executive orders. As a result, hundreds of Puerto Ricans were arrested, fined, and incarcerated for violating the issued order. Third, the paper studies how, citing the presence of corruption, the Puerto Rican government implemented anti‐corruption and anti‐fraud policies that made it more difficult for those most in need of it—mainly poor and racialized individuals, as well as immigrants and working women—to access Pandemic Unemployment Assistance. Thus, the paper argues that emergency policies designed to address the pandemic, punitive governance, and anti‐corruption and anti‐fraud policies undermined Puerto Rico's capacity to handle the pandemic, exacerbated its impact, and created an unequal recovery scenario.

show abstract

COVID‐19 and Policy Responses by International Organizations: Crisis of Liberal International Order or Window of Opportunity?

Cited by 31 publications

References 59 publications

Making EU refugee policy in 2001, applying it in 2022: Directive 2001/55/EC and its use in 2022

Making EU refugee policy in 2001, applying it in 2022: Directive 2001/55/EC and its use in 2022

Understanding and governing global systemic crises in the 21st century: A complexity perspective

Emergency powers, anti‐corruption, and policy failures during the COVID‐19 pandemic in Puerto Rico

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About