为什么成功的故事不被复制?东方伙伴关系智库倡导策略的仿效

A. Strelkov, V. Samokhvalov
{"title":"为什么成功的故事不被复制?东方伙伴关系智库倡导策略的仿效","authors":"A. Strelkov, V. Samokhvalov","doi":"10.54648/eerr2022019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article investigates why Georgian and Moldovan think-tanks have not emulated effective forms of advocacy in relations with the EU that their Ukrainian counterparts have established, namely a liaison office in Brussels. The reason is not the cost but rather the presence of alternative communication channels, high-level personal contacts and think-tanks’ focus on organizational survival. Better connectivity and new means of communication make the presence of a Brussels hub less crucial for regional think-tanks. Our research shows that there is often limited collaboration amongst think-tanks at the national level, which negatively affects opportunities for transnational advocacy of Eastern Partnership (EaP) think-tanks in relations with EU institutions.\nEastern Partnership, European Union, think-tanks, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, transnational advocacy","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why Are Success Stories Not Copied? Emulating Advocacy Strategies Amongst Eastern Partnership Think-Tanks\",\"authors\":\"A. Strelkov, V. Samokhvalov\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/eerr2022019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article investigates why Georgian and Moldovan think-tanks have not emulated effective forms of advocacy in relations with the EU that their Ukrainian counterparts have established, namely a liaison office in Brussels. The reason is not the cost but rather the presence of alternative communication channels, high-level personal contacts and think-tanks’ focus on organizational survival. Better connectivity and new means of communication make the presence of a Brussels hub less crucial for regional think-tanks. Our research shows that there is often limited collaboration amongst think-tanks at the national level, which negatively affects opportunities for transnational advocacy of Eastern Partnership (EaP) think-tanks in relations with EU institutions.\\nEastern Partnership, European Union, think-tanks, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, transnational advocacy\",\"PeriodicalId\":84710,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European foreign affairs review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European foreign affairs review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2022019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European foreign affairs review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2022019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章调查了为什么格鲁吉亚和摩尔多瓦智库在与欧盟的关系中没有效仿乌克兰智库在布鲁塞尔设立的联络处等有效的宣传形式。原因不是成本,而是替代沟通渠道的存在、高层个人联系以及智库对组织生存的关注。更好的连通性和新的沟通方式使布鲁塞尔中心的存在对地区智库来说不那么重要。我们的研究表明,智库之间在国家层面的合作往往有限,这对东方伙伴关系(EaP)智库在与欧盟机构的关系中进行跨国宣传的机会产生了负面影响。东方伙伴关系、欧洲联盟、智囊团、格鲁吉亚、摩尔多瓦、乌克兰、跨国宣传
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Why Are Success Stories Not Copied? Emulating Advocacy Strategies Amongst Eastern Partnership Think-Tanks
The article investigates why Georgian and Moldovan think-tanks have not emulated effective forms of advocacy in relations with the EU that their Ukrainian counterparts have established, namely a liaison office in Brussels. The reason is not the cost but rather the presence of alternative communication channels, high-level personal contacts and think-tanks’ focus on organizational survival. Better connectivity and new means of communication make the presence of a Brussels hub less crucial for regional think-tanks. Our research shows that there is often limited collaboration amongst think-tanks at the national level, which negatively affects opportunities for transnational advocacy of Eastern Partnership (EaP) think-tanks in relations with EU institutions. Eastern Partnership, European Union, think-tanks, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, transnational advocacy
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信