You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items

  • Author or Editor: Charles Parker x
Clear All Modify Search
You do not have access to this content

Charles F. Parker and Christer Karlsson

After the ambiguous outcome of the 2009 climate summit in Copenhagen, the countries of the world, under the auspices of the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action, are now negotiating to reach a new international climate agreement by the 2015 summit in Paris. The EU, China, and the US are the most influential actors in this process. Utilizing a leadership perspective, this contribution focuses on the interplay of leadership forms, leadership visions, and leadership recognition with regards to the three greenhouse gas giants vying to mobilize support and shape the evolving global climate regime. The chapter analyses recent outcomes and developments in the UNFCCC negotiating process and considers the prospects for a new climate agreement that would be applicable to all parties and enter into force by 2020.

You do not have access to this content

Sten Widmalm, Thomas Persson and Charles Parker

In recent years the European Union (EU) has explicitly embraced the goal of protecting all its citizens. The expression of this goal can be found in the solidarity clause of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, which establishes a legal obligation that the EU and its Member States should assist each other when one of them is the object of a terrorist attack or a natural or human-made disaster. As a result of this aspiration, the EU has increasingly assumed a central role as a crisis manager. In this chapter we present the capacities that the EU has developed to deliver on these commitments and analyse the obstacles that impede these efforts. We also examine, with the help of survey data from the European Commission’s Eurobarometer, the expectations of citizens of EU Member States of the EU’s crisis management capacity. Finally, drawing on interviews with top officials from eighteen European civil protection services, we outline the challenges facing Europe’s crisis management capacity in light of the differences in trust and common norms among the EU’s crisis management authorities and the many different administrative cultures represented in these agencies. The chapter concludes with some reflections on the wider implications that should be taken into consideration as the EU works on further developing its crisis management capabilities.