A Collaborative Initiative to Promote Democratic Resilience
Consortium:
Drawing on decades of research on the longer-term effects of EU enlargement and mobilizing the transnational research networks of the two leading regional research centers in Europe and the Kyiv School of Economics, this initiative aims to maximize the longer-term social, economic, and political benefits of the interlinked integration and reconstructions processes, with a view to reducing their negative externalities.
This collaborative initiative aims to
Complementing the work of expert groups like the Nordic-Baltic High Level Advisory Group that help making progress in the accession process, this initiative aims at helping to manage in time the longer term economic and political effects of meeting the accession criteria. The urgency of managing early on these aspects of integration is given by the post-accession experience of the decay of democratic institutions and the rule of law in countries like Croatia, Hungary and Poland, the highly uneven economic outcomes after the last wave of enlargement and the stalled processes of integration in the Western Balkans.
The post-war reconstruction in Ukraine, involving a massive transfer of resources, will coincide with the ongoing integration process involving the transfer of institutions in close to 40 policy fields. The way these simultaneous processes are governed will largely shape Ukraine’s political and economic future. These resource, policy and norm transfers might yield responsive and resilient democratic institutions supported by a broad-based coalition of winners, or they might undermine the conditions for democracy and development. Preparing the EU and Ukraine for the governance challenges of these processes is key to their success.
To facilitate Ukraine’s accession to the European Union, this project aims to establish a robust academic and policy-oriented framework supporting knowledge transfer. This framework will support both Ukraine and the EU in navigating the complexities of ongoing accession and reconstruction processes, leveraging lessons learned from past enlargements, and addressing the unique challenges posed by Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction. The project fosters three parallel efforts: research, advocacy and knowledge transfer.
focusing on lessons learned and best practices from past and ongoing enlargements and exploring their applicability in Ukraine in key policy areas and sectors, on diverse territorial levels during reconstruction, academic and policy research will support co-designing AGENDA 2030, an innovative roadmap for accession addressing key challenges and offering applicable solutions.
based on AGENDA 2030, aiming to alter EU’s current approach to integration.
bringing together key actors and stakeholders from Ukraine and EU to reflect on research findings and participate in peer-to-peer knowledge transfer. Help Ukrainian policymakers to formulate negotiation and implementation strategies that enable Ukraine to meet EU membership requirements, while also managing the externalities of policy and norm transfers.
Through mobilization of researchers from Ukraine and across Europe, the project will create a framework for collaborative research informing Agenda 2030 to assist negotiators from the EU and Ukraine to adjust and align integration strategy with post-war reconstruction.
Conduct a detailed mapping of policy areas, opportunities, risks, and key actors involved in Ukraine’s EU accession process and identify policy priorities for the integration process in close cooperation with Ukrainian stakeholders on the national, regional and local level, across the public and private sector.
Conduct a detailed sectoral map of opportunities, risks, and key actors involved in Ukraine’s EU accession process and identify sectoral priorities for the integration process in close cooperation with Ukrainian stakeholders on the national, regional and local level, across the public and private sector.
develop actionable policy recommendations for both Ukrainian and EU policymakers to ensure a smooth, and sustainable accession process progressing at optimal pace (Agenda 2032).
Develop and implement a range of capacity building modalities addressing the needs of diverse Ukrainian policymakers, civil society, and other stakeholders, as well as of officers at EU’s DG NEAR and other relevant stakeholders in the supra-national level.
How can the EU effectively offer security guarantees to deter Russian aggression while ensuring necessary internal reforms in candidate countries?
What are the potential conflicts between fast-track membership and the establishment of stable democratic institutions? What are the lessons of the previous waves of enlargement and the incomplete processes of integration? How did the EU’s integration strategy in Western Balkans contribute to state capture and weakening of democratic institutions and practices?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Copenhagen Criteria? How could these criteria and upgraded based on the lessons of the longer-term effects of previous waves of integration?
How can post-war reconstruction funds be strategically used to foster long-term stability of transferred institutions that help economic prosperity and democratic consolidation in Ukraine? What innovative approaches can be developed to ensure equitable distribution of resources and minimize the risk of economic marginalization?
How can the capacity of Ukrainian institutions be bolstered to absorb a large-scale transfer of resources, policy and norms during post-war reconstruction and EU integration? How can Ukraine improve the capacity of its constitutional and public sector institutions to enjoy the benefits of EU membership in a responsive yet resilient manner?
What are the legal/institutional /attitudinal safeguards of Rule of Law and Democracy?
How could the accession process and the post-war reconstruction foster anti-patronal transformation in Ukraine?
How can the EU encourage the development of stable domestic coalitions that champion democratic values, stability of EU mandated institutions and EU integration within candidate countries? What could be the way of including political parties and civil society in the shaping of the enlargement process? lessons can be learned from past enlargements regarding successful strategies for building broad public support for EU membership?
How could the external transfer of financial resources help building broad based coalitions, prevent corruption and the concentration of economic and political power. How can the accountability of DG NEAR and the European Investment Bank increased in these processes?
How to build administrative, regulatory and developmental state capacities allowing for getting in synch the potentially conflicting requirements of playing by and maximizing gains from EU rules? How to build stable developmental coalitions allowing to capitalize on the opportunities of integration at the level of strategic sectors, key policy areas and different territorial units? What role can be played by diverse non-state actors in upgrading state capacities and how can the state increase the capacities of non-state actors?
What are the key state capacities that could allow for inserting and positioning the Ukrainian economy in the Single Market? What are the key steps and the right sequencing for building EU conform administrative, regulatory and developmental capacities, what is the politics of state building during and after the accession.
What are different patterns of regional and sectoral developmental alliances; how could the EU and the Ukrainian state help their coming about and their empowering; what are their roles in implementing and capitalizing from EU rules; how can they contribute to the better positioning of key sectors and territorial units in the Single Market and what role can be played by them in upgrading state capacities
What are the different ways of developing state capacities to design and implement policies to insert firms and sectors into EU markets, with the capacity to withstand competition, improve their competitiveness? What is the politics of industrial upgrading, inserting (groups of) firms in transnational values chains and improving their position within them?
12.A. Developmental states in action – Case studies in selected strategic sectors
12.B. FDI, Industrial policy and the politics of industrial upgrading
12.C. Designing and financing transnational production linkages
what role can be played by diverse types of domestic and EU level financial institutions in implementing EU mandated economic and political rules and institutions and building around them supporting coalitions of social and economic actors gaining from these institutions? How to promote the financing of the beneficial insertion of domestic economic actors in transnational value chains?
12.A The role of EU level and domestic development banks
12.B. The role of domestic and foreign banks
Upgrading EU’s integration capacity
What changes are needed in the governance of EU, and especially in the Single Market to manage in time the potential negative externalities of enlargement and increase the probability of outcomes that are beneficial both to the member states and accession countries that meet the accession criteria?
What internal reforms are necessary within the EU to facilitate a smooth and successful enlargement process, particularly regarding decision-making mechanisms and resource allocation? How can the EU manage the potential strain on existing institutions and internal cohesion caused by enlargement?
What could be alternative ways to use EU’s network of investment banks and the evolving practices of EU’s networked developmental state to use enlargement for increasing the competitiveness of the European economy?