Jakub M. Godzimirski

EU gas supply security – the power of the importer

The chapter examines how the European Union can exert its market and regulatory power in its relations with key external energy suppliers. The focus is on the EU instrument toolbox and how various policy instruments have been used in relations with the main suppliers of gas to the Union. Due to the centrality of Russia and Norway to the EU’s gas supply and their different ways of relating to the Union in formal and regulatory terms, the chapter focuses on the impact EU market and regulatory power has had on the operations of these two actors. The chapter also presents some general conclusions on the effectiveness of the EU’s use of various policy instruments in relations with external suppliers of energy.

Polen – fra europeisk suksesshistorie til Europas problembarn?

The article examines recent developments in Poland, focusing on the 2015 presidential and parliamentary elections, and their impact on the process of reshaping the political landscape in Poland and its relations with partners. Current developments are situated in the broader historical context, and the 2015 election results are analysed, followed by a discussion of the ongoing political processes. The article concludes with a review of old and new political divisions in the country and how these influence internal political developments and Poland’s relations with the outside world.

Can the Polish shale gas dog still bark? Politics and policy of unconventional hydrocarbons in Poland

Report: GoodGov: Work Together, Govern Better: Polish and Norwegian Cooperation towards More Efficient Security, Energy and Migration Policies

This report presents the main findings of the research project conducted between 2013 and 2016 by the Polish Institute of International Affairs (PISM) and the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI), with support from the Institute for Political Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences (ISP PAN). It also maps the project’s achievements, examines its policy relevance and identifies various knowledge gaps revealed during the study that should be addressed by new research. The GoodGov project has revealed important governance-related differences between Poland and Norway. These result from the interaction of various internal and external factors, including historical experience and path dependence, geographical location and the challenges it poses, various types of resources and access to them, institutional solutions and membership in various international organisations and frameworks. The latter, such as the EU and the EEA, are of special note as they set their own governance-related priorities, rules and solutions that have both a direct and indirect bearing on national governance in Poland and Norway. Based on the analysis of available data, this research project found that the governance system in Norway is perceived as more efficient than in Poland. In addition to the factors mentioned above, this may also be linked to the application of domestic learning mechanisms in Norway, where review of governance and learning play an important role and the apparent lack of such mechanisms in Poland. Since Norway ranks systematically higher than Poland in all six key categories assessed within the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) project, one could expect the transfer of governance-related knowledge between Norway and Poland to be a possible means of improving governance in Poland, including in the three fields in focus in this study—security, energy and migration. However, the potential for governance learning seems to be hampered by structural differences between Norway and Poland, by the fact that Poland and Norway are in different categories in at least two of the examined fields (energy and migration), and because Norway has decided to remain outside of the EU while Poland is a fully-fledged member. What complicates the picture even more is that the experimentalist approach to governance learning works better in some fields, such as energy and migration, and is much less present and efficient in other governance fields, such as security. Another factor limiting governance transfer is a visible preference for the application of hierarchical, international means of learning instead of nonhierarchical transnational learning practices among professional equals, which is considered to be far more efficient. All the governance-related challenges and differences notwithstanding, Poland and Norway should seek to closely work together for the sake of governance-related improvements.