{"title":"Household Strategies in Southeast European Societies in the Period of Economic Crisis","authors":"C. Predrag, Lavrič Miran","doi":"10.1515/SOEU-2017-0030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/SOEU-2017-0030","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51954,"journal":{"name":"Sudosteuropa","volume":"65 1","pages":"449-458"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/SOEU-2017-0030","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67297340","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Introducing this special issue on historiographies and debates on the Second World War in Southeastern Europe, the author reflects on the conditionalities of a better balancing of research agendas in terms of the interdependencies between local dynamics and wider scales—be they the regional, national and transnational, or global dimensions of the war. She draws attention to the role the European Union has played in crafting public history, in which processes of ‘internationalizing’ and of ‘nationalizing’ the past have been entangled. She concludes that Southeast Europeanists could greatly enhance international research agendas by taking the lead in fostering a bottom-up, multiscale, and multiperspective history of postimperial, nationalizing societies at war.
{"title":"The Second World War in Southeastern Europe. Historiographies and Debates","authors":"S. Rutar","doi":"10.1515/soeu-2017-0015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2017-0015","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introducing this special issue on historiographies and debates on the Second World War in Southeastern Europe, the author reflects on the conditionalities of a better balancing of research agendas in terms of the interdependencies between local dynamics and wider scales—be they the regional, national and transnational, or global dimensions of the war. She draws attention to the role the European Union has played in crafting public history, in which processes of ‘internationalizing’ and of ‘nationalizing’ the past have been entangled. She concludes that Southeast Europeanists could greatly enhance international research agendas by taking the lead in fostering a bottom-up, multiscale, and multiperspective history of postimperial, nationalizing societies at war.","PeriodicalId":51954,"journal":{"name":"Sudosteuropa","volume":"65 1","pages":"195 - 220"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/soeu-2017-0015","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42573138","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Our paper takes as its starting point the premise that elections are central moments in the life of polities: these are the times when individual citizens demonstrate support or otherwise of political institutions and regimes, assess their accountability and set agendas for the next government. In short, elections allow us to observe whether and how political regimes live up to society’s expectations. This issue has particular resonance in deeply divided societies that have experienced ethnic conflict in the past. In the deeply divided society of Kosovo, local and national elections in 2013 and 2014 presented an opportunity to analyze voter choices and elite agendas, with the presence of ethnopolitical issues under scrutiny. Our paper concludes that the normalization of electoral politics, within the context of European aspirations, has not yet taken place in Kosovo, and that the options available to the electorate continue to be dominated by identity politicking.
{"title":"European style electoral politics in an ethnically divided society. The case of Kosovo","authors":"L. Wise, Timofey Agarin","doi":"10.1515/soeu-2017-0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2017-0006","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Our paper takes as its starting point the premise that elections are central moments in the life of polities: these are the times when individual citizens demonstrate support or otherwise of political institutions and regimes, assess their accountability and set agendas for the next government. In short, elections allow us to observe whether and how political regimes live up to society’s expectations. This issue has particular resonance in deeply divided societies that have experienced ethnic conflict in the past. In the deeply divided society of Kosovo, local and national elections in 2013 and 2014 presented an opportunity to analyze voter choices and elite agendas, with the presence of ethnopolitical issues under scrutiny. Our paper concludes that the normalization of electoral politics, within the context of European aspirations, has not yet taken place in Kosovo, and that the options available to the electorate continue to be dominated by identity politicking.","PeriodicalId":51954,"journal":{"name":"Sudosteuropa","volume":"65 1","pages":"124 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/soeu-2017-0006","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47355407","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Over the past two decades, there has been a growing interest in Europeanization, both within and beyond the European Union (EU). The impact of Eastern enlargement in 2004 on candidate and neighbourhood countries has attracted scholarly attention, and a consensus currently exists on the success of the EU’s transformative power through the employment of a conditionality mechanism. However, the limits of EU conditionality upon candidate countries and neighbourhood Europeanization, in addition to the problems experienced by the EU itself, have brought into question whether the end of Europeanization research is in sight. Considering this, we critically evaluate the issues discussed in the scholarship on Europeanization and review several points of interest in relation to EU candidate countries in the Western Balkans as well as Turkey.
{"title":"Talk the talk, or walk the walk? Changing narratives in Europeanization research","authors":"Timofey Agarin, G. Yılmaz","doi":"10.1515/soeu-2017-0008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2017-0008","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Over the past two decades, there has been a growing interest in Europeanization, both within and beyond the European Union (EU). The impact of Eastern enlargement in 2004 on candidate and neighbourhood countries has attracted scholarly attention, and a consensus currently exists on the success of the EU’s transformative power through the employment of a conditionality mechanism. However, the limits of EU conditionality upon candidate countries and neighbourhood Europeanization, in addition to the problems experienced by the EU itself, have brought into question whether the end of Europeanization research is in sight. Considering this, we critically evaluate the issues discussed in the scholarship on Europeanization and review several points of interest in relation to EU candidate countries in the Western Balkans as well as Turkey.","PeriodicalId":51954,"journal":{"name":"Sudosteuropa","volume":"65 1","pages":"149 - 169"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/soeu-2017-0008","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49166168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The original idea for this special issue of Südosteuropa was mooted back in the summer of 2014, when the fi rst fi ssures began to appear in the approach of the European Union (EU) towards its candidate countries in the Balkans. Over the time we have been soliciting, then working on the papers and going through the revision process, many events took place in the EU, its candidate countries, and in the neighbourhood. The political crisis in Ukraine has turned into fullscale civil war; anxieties over the prospect of entry into the European Union have given space to pessimism about the general prospects of the once indivisible EU; talk of new rounds of accession has gradually become more and more muted. Also, the referendum on the UK’s membership in the EU has raised the spectre of other member-states turning their backs on the EU’s closer geopolitical and economic integration. And, most recently, the foiled coup d’état in Turkey has been taken as a mandate for a top-down reshaping of domestic institutions in that country, with consequences that remain uncertain. All these political developments question the role and indeed the ability of the EU to bring about change in its member, candidate, and neighbouring states that would meet the expectations of these countries’ citizenries. What is more, these changes in the political dynamics across the wider Europe urge us to rethink our expectations of the Europeanization process, about its implications for its member and candidate states, and not least about the very basis of the normative framework undergirding the EU. Two years ago, my fellow authors and I were already pessimistic about the timeline for the Western Balkan states’ accession to the EU. At that time, JeanClaude Juncker had just spelt out that there would be no further enlargement during his term as the head of the EU Commission, and it seemed to many of our critics that we were simply toeing the line of European bureaucrats too Südosteuropa 65 (2017), no. 1, pp. 1-9
{"title":"Changes in the narratives of Europeanization. Reviewing the impact of the union before the crisis","authors":"Timofey Agarin","doi":"10.1515/soeu-2017-0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2017-0001","url":null,"abstract":"The original idea for this special issue of Südosteuropa was mooted back in the summer of 2014, when the fi rst fi ssures began to appear in the approach of the European Union (EU) towards its candidate countries in the Balkans. Over the time we have been soliciting, then working on the papers and going through the revision process, many events took place in the EU, its candidate countries, and in the neighbourhood. The political crisis in Ukraine has turned into fullscale civil war; anxieties over the prospect of entry into the European Union have given space to pessimism about the general prospects of the once indivisible EU; talk of new rounds of accession has gradually become more and more muted. Also, the referendum on the UK’s membership in the EU has raised the spectre of other member-states turning their backs on the EU’s closer geopolitical and economic integration. And, most recently, the foiled coup d’état in Turkey has been taken as a mandate for a top-down reshaping of domestic institutions in that country, with consequences that remain uncertain. All these political developments question the role and indeed the ability of the EU to bring about change in its member, candidate, and neighbouring states that would meet the expectations of these countries’ citizenries. What is more, these changes in the political dynamics across the wider Europe urge us to rethink our expectations of the Europeanization process, about its implications for its member and candidate states, and not least about the very basis of the normative framework undergirding the EU. Two years ago, my fellow authors and I were already pessimistic about the timeline for the Western Balkan states’ accession to the EU. At that time, JeanClaude Juncker had just spelt out that there would be no further enlargement during his term as the head of the EU Commission, and it seemed to many of our critics that we were simply toeing the line of European bureaucrats too Südosteuropa 65 (2017), no. 1, pp. 1-9","PeriodicalId":51954,"journal":{"name":"Sudosteuropa","volume":"58 9","pages":"1 - 9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/soeu-2017-0001","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41249832","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The Western Balkan countries are on the long road to European Union (EU) membership. One aspect of the accession process is the requirement for a population census, which falls under the acquis communautaire chapter covering the statistics needed. In the Western Balkans, censuses have included questions on ethnicity, language, and religion. The collection of data on ethnic and cultural characteristics raises an unresolved paradox: such questions are highly sensitive, but, in order to be able to protect minorities through, for example, antidiscrimination laws, the authorities need to know that these minorities exist. This article uses the additional coverage model mixed methods approach to illustrate the effects of including ethnic and cultural characteristics in the census questionnaires in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Macedonia, where population numbers are used to determine group rights and/or proportional representation. The article argues that, although taking a census forms part of the EU conditions, it is not possible to speak of Europeanization in this area, since there is no coherent European approach on how to collect ethnic and cultural data. However, as what appears in the censuses is linked to rights, the census processes can be highly politicized, and this is being overlooked in the general process of Europeanization.
{"title":"Counting for what purpose? The paradox of including ethnic and cultural questions in the censuses of Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Macedonia","authors":"A. Hoh","doi":"10.1515/soeu-2017-0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2017-0007","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Western Balkan countries are on the long road to European Union (EU) membership. One aspect of the accession process is the requirement for a population census, which falls under the acquis communautaire chapter covering the statistics needed. In the Western Balkans, censuses have included questions on ethnicity, language, and religion. The collection of data on ethnic and cultural characteristics raises an unresolved paradox: such questions are highly sensitive, but, in order to be able to protect minorities through, for example, antidiscrimination laws, the authorities need to know that these minorities exist. This article uses the additional coverage model mixed methods approach to illustrate the effects of including ethnic and cultural characteristics in the census questionnaires in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Macedonia, where population numbers are used to determine group rights and/or proportional representation. The article argues that, although taking a census forms part of the EU conditions, it is not possible to speak of Europeanization in this area, since there is no coherent European approach on how to collect ethnic and cultural data. However, as what appears in the censuses is linked to rights, the census processes can be highly politicized, and this is being overlooked in the general process of Europeanization.","PeriodicalId":51954,"journal":{"name":"Sudosteuropa","volume":"65 1","pages":"125 - 148"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/soeu-2017-0007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42819330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Through a conceptual framework that combines the English School’s focus on primary institutions in international society with the Copenhagen School’s theory of securitization and desecuritization, this article studies the Europeanization of national minorities. It thus signals a categorical departure from the dominant norms transfer approach to problems of national minorities in the European Union (EU), an approach that has failed to convincingly account for many minority outcomes of European integration. This is particularly true of the continual attachment of national minorities to the state’s security agenda. The article takes Galbreath and McEvoy’s (2012) hypothesis that the EU has a unique potential to desecuritize national minorities, and applies it to one candidate (Macedonia) and one new member state (Bulgaria). It assesses flashpoints of minority/majority tensions across several sectors (the judiciary, the police, public administration, political representation, education, and health care). The investigation ascertains negative outcomes—desecuritization—but points to the crisis of confidence in the primary institution of European integration (supranationality) and the ensuing consolidation of nationalism as the dominant institution of pre-EU European society. The article concludes that improved minority/majority relations are a possible consequence of Europeanization rather than a precondition for it.
{"title":"Securitization reversed. Does Europeanization improve minority/majority relations?","authors":"N. Nancheva","doi":"10.1515/soeu-2017-0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2017-0002","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Through a conceptual framework that combines the English School’s focus on primary institutions in international society with the Copenhagen School’s theory of securitization and desecuritization, this article studies the Europeanization of national minorities. It thus signals a categorical departure from the dominant norms transfer approach to problems of national minorities in the European Union (EU), an approach that has failed to convincingly account for many minority outcomes of European integration. This is particularly true of the continual attachment of national minorities to the state’s security agenda. The article takes Galbreath and McEvoy’s (2012) hypothesis that the EU has a unique potential to desecuritize national minorities, and applies it to one candidate (Macedonia) and one new member state (Bulgaria). It assesses flashpoints of minority/majority tensions across several sectors (the judiciary, the police, public administration, political representation, education, and health care). The investigation ascertains negative outcomes—desecuritization—but points to the crisis of confidence in the primary institution of European integration (supranationality) and the ensuing consolidation of nationalism as the dominant institution of pre-EU European society. The article concludes that improved minority/majority relations are a possible consequence of Europeanization rather than a precondition for it.","PeriodicalId":51954,"journal":{"name":"Sudosteuropa","volume":"65 1","pages":"10 - 34"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/soeu-2017-0002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48647030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
interests as evangelicals during the Yugoslav wars but chose rather to seek ‘biblical responses’ to ‘alleviate the human suff ering of neighbor and enemy alike’ (Politicization of Religion, the Power of State, Nation, and Faith, 111). In their summaries at the ends of the books, the editors are right to underscore once again that the post-Yugoslav situation is a matt er not only of the old and new states in Southeastern Europe but of the whole of Europe which had interfered both actively and passively in the Yugoslav wars. The editors also point out the danger of the self-reproduction of religious symbols by religious institutions which operate as their own judge, jury—and executioner. But according to the editors, that is a ‘constellation [...] always doomed at birth’, especially in the ‘Age of Information’ (Politicization of Religion, the Power of Symbolism, 211-212). At the end of the second book the editors evince deep concern and scepticism concerning solutions they see as ‘too easy’ for a multiethnic environment. In their opinion, the Dayton Agreement especially, signed in 1995 to partition Bosnia into two entities has caused the forces of nationalism to increase. Generally speaking each chapter off ers enough innovative potential and insight into the specifi c and complex social conditions in the Yugoslav ‘successor states’. It is a pity then that some of the articles lack what would have been useful distinctions to give a clearer notion of the actors than does the general use of the term ‘the church’. So it is up to the reader to deduce who is actually in charge of ‘the church’ in question; is it their ‘offi cers,’ the bishops and priests? Or all the believers in a country, its religious institutions and organizations? Or perhaps some combination of all of them? What must however be emphasized is that the authors treat their subjects mostly dispassionately and scholarly. Their ability to stand off from a national viewpoint and their willingness to criticise the failures and short-sightedness of ‘their own’ is a remarkable characteristic of most of the contributions. At the same time, this is real progress in the discussion of the past, present and perhaps even the future of religion in Post-Yugoslavia.
{"title":"From Class to Identity. The Politics of Education Reforms in Former Yugoslavia","authors":"Águstin Cosovschi","doi":"10.1515/soeu-2017-0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2017-0014","url":null,"abstract":"interests as evangelicals during the Yugoslav wars but chose rather to seek ‘biblical responses’ to ‘alleviate the human suff ering of neighbor and enemy alike’ (Politicization of Religion, the Power of State, Nation, and Faith, 111). In their summaries at the ends of the books, the editors are right to underscore once again that the post-Yugoslav situation is a matt er not only of the old and new states in Southeastern Europe but of the whole of Europe which had interfered both actively and passively in the Yugoslav wars. The editors also point out the danger of the self-reproduction of religious symbols by religious institutions which operate as their own judge, jury—and executioner. But according to the editors, that is a ‘constellation [...] always doomed at birth’, especially in the ‘Age of Information’ (Politicization of Religion, the Power of Symbolism, 211-212). At the end of the second book the editors evince deep concern and scepticism concerning solutions they see as ‘too easy’ for a multiethnic environment. In their opinion, the Dayton Agreement especially, signed in 1995 to partition Bosnia into two entities has caused the forces of nationalism to increase. Generally speaking each chapter off ers enough innovative potential and insight into the specifi c and complex social conditions in the Yugoslav ‘successor states’. It is a pity then that some of the articles lack what would have been useful distinctions to give a clearer notion of the actors than does the general use of the term ‘the church’. So it is up to the reader to deduce who is actually in charge of ‘the church’ in question; is it their ‘offi cers,’ the bishops and priests? Or all the believers in a country, its religious institutions and organizations? Or perhaps some combination of all of them? What must however be emphasized is that the authors treat their subjects mostly dispassionately and scholarly. Their ability to stand off from a national viewpoint and their willingness to criticise the failures and short-sightedness of ‘their own’ is a remarkable characteristic of most of the contributions. At the same time, this is real progress in the discussion of the past, present and perhaps even the future of religion in Post-Yugoslavia.","PeriodicalId":51954,"journal":{"name":"Sudosteuropa","volume":"65 1","pages":"191 - 193 - 253"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/soeu-2017-0014","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48997818","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The European Union (EU) developed a state-building strategy for the aspiring member states in the Western Balkans. Demanding full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the EU made transitional justice part of the accession demands. Scholars have recently criticized the EU’s limited focus on retributive justice as opposed to restorative justice. This paper goes beyond such impact-orientated analyses by asking why the EU engaged with retributive transitional justice in the first place. The EU constructed ICTY-conditionality by mirroring its own post-Second World War experiences to the envisioned post-conflict trajectory of the Western Balkans. The EU therefore expected the court to contribute to reconciliation, democratization and the rule of law. Using Serbia as a case study, this article examines the conditionality’s context, specificities and discursive claims. Finally, it relates these findings to the agenda of a promising regional initiative prioritizing restorative justice (RECOM) and sheds new light on the impact of ICTY-conditionality on transitional justice in the Western Balkans.
{"title":"Mirroring transitional justice. Construction and impact of European Union ICTY-conditionality","authors":"Niké Wentholt","doi":"10.1515/soeu-2017-0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2017-0005","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The European Union (EU) developed a state-building strategy for the aspiring member states in the Western Balkans. Demanding full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the EU made transitional justice part of the accession demands. Scholars have recently criticized the EU’s limited focus on retributive justice as opposed to restorative justice. This paper goes beyond such impact-orientated analyses by asking why the EU engaged with retributive transitional justice in the first place. The EU constructed ICTY-conditionality by mirroring its own post-Second World War experiences to the envisioned post-conflict trajectory of the Western Balkans. The EU therefore expected the court to contribute to reconciliation, democratization and the rule of law. Using Serbia as a case study, this article examines the conditionality’s context, specificities and discursive claims. Finally, it relates these findings to the agenda of a promising regional initiative prioritizing restorative justice (RECOM) and sheds new light on the impact of ICTY-conditionality on transitional justice in the Western Balkans.","PeriodicalId":51954,"journal":{"name":"Sudosteuropa","volume":"65 1","pages":"77 - 98"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/soeu-2017-0005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48942402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：