LEADER 04353 am 22006613u 450 001 9910293140303321 005 20230125190213.0 010 $a3-319-77824-2 024 7 $a10.1007/978-3-319-77824-2 035 $a(CKB)4100000003359557 035 $a(DE-He213)978-3-319-77824-2 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC5579428 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL5579428 035 $a(OCoLC)1033641519 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC6422700 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL6422700 035 $a(OCoLC)1159387141 035 $a(oapen)https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/51743 035 $a(PPN)259463272 035 $a(EXLCZ)994100000003359557 100 $a20180417d2018 u| 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurnn|008mamaa 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aLimits to the European Union?s Normative Power in a Post-conflict Society$b[electronic resource] $eEULEX and Peacebuilding in Kosovo /$fby Rok Zupan?i?, Nina Peji? 205 $a1st ed. 2018. 210 $cSpringer Nature$d2018 210 1$aCham :$cSpringer International Publishing :$cImprint: Springer,$d2018. 215 $a1 online resource (XIV, 124 p. 2 illus. in color.) 225 1 $aSpringerBriefs in Population Studies,$x2211-3215 311 $a3-319-77823-4 327 $aCh. 1 ? Introduction -- Ch. 2 ? Assessing normative power in peacebuilding: A theoretical framework -- Ch. 3 ? The EU's affair with Kosovo -- Ch. 4 ? EULEX Kosovo: Projecting the EU's normative power via a rule-of-law mission -- Ch. 5 ? Conclusion. 330 $aBy shedding light on EULEX - the EU mission to Kosovo ? this open access book investigates the EU?s peacebuilding activities in that country, in the light of the normative power theory in the post-conflict setting and peacebuilding theory. Ten years after the massive engagement of the EU in the country torn by war, the authors critically assess the effects of the EU projecting its normative power ? the enforcement of its standards, ?good? or ?bad? ? through the EULEX mission, taking into consideration also the local aspects, so far neglected in this field of research. Inspecting thoroughly the EULEX activities in the police, customs and judiciary sector, the authors reveal that the mission can contribute to a positive change, but only in those cases which do not request a heavy political involvement and broad leverage by other international players (for example in improving standards of work in police and customs). When it comes to the most serious cases of organized crime, corruption and war crimes, EULEX, however, has not been able to address them effectively due to several internal mission?s deficiencies and external factors; the perceived ineffectiveness of EULEX among the local population led to the lowering of trust not only in this CSDP mission, but also in the EU in general. This open access book offers a comprehensive assessment of the EULEX mission, based on two Horizon2020 research projects: IECEU - Improving the Effectiveness of Capabilities in EU Conflict Prevention, and KOSNORTH ? The European Union and its Normative Power in a Post-conflict Society: A Case Study of Northern Kosovo (Marie Sklodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship). As such it is an invaluable resource for scholars, students and policymakers interested in security questions in South Eastern Europe and EU external action. 410 0$aSpringerBriefs in Population Studies,$x2211-3215 606 $aPeace 606 $aConflict Studies$3https://scigraph.springernature.com/ontologies/product-market-codes/912060 610 $aPeacebuilding 610 $aConflict prevention 610 $aIECEU 610 $aKosovo 610 $aEuropean Union 610 $aNormative power 610 $aEULEX 610 $aPost-conflict 615 0$aPeace. 615 14$aConflict Studies. 676 $a327.16 700 $aZupan?i?$b Rok$4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut$0856705 702 $aPeji?$b Nina$4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910293140303321 996 $aLimits to the European Union?s Normative Power in a Post-conflict Society$91913348 997 $aUNINA LEADER 06751nam 2200433 450 001 9910647265203321 005 20230703234144.0 010 $a3-8325-5488-2 035 $a(CKB)5580000000508129 035 $a(NjHacI)995580000000508129 035 $a(EXLCZ)995580000000508129 100 $a20230324d2022 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur||||||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aAccountability Relations in Social Housing Programs $eA Comparative Legal Analysis of Brazilian and Chilean Case Studies /$fMariana Vilmondes 210 1$aBerlin, Germany :$cLogos Verlag Berlin GmbH,$d2022. 215 $a1 online resource (529 pages) $cillustrations 225 1 $aUA Ruhr studies on development and global governance 327 $aList of Abbreviations and Translation . xi -- List of Annexes viii -- List of Tables . ix -- List of Figures x -- 1. Introduction . xvi -- 1.1 The State of the Research3 -- 1.2 The Analytical Framework 11 -- 1.3 The Aims, Methods and Justification 14 -- 1.4 The Research Questions . 17 -- 1.5 Limitations to this Research . 19 -- 1.6 Overview of the Structure 21 -- 2 Theoretical Framework 27 -- 2.1 Accountability as a Concept 27 -- 2.1.1 Understanding accountability 28 -- 2.1.2 Subjects of the relation 31 -- 2.1.3 Issues with translation 35 -- 2.2 The Rights-Based Approach 37 -- 2.2.1 Understanding this rights-based perspective . 37 -- 2.2.2 Goals and operations 38 -- 2.3 The Right to Adequate Housing 40 -- 2.3.1 Understanding the right to adequate housing 41 -- 2.3.2 Legal guarantees to the most marginalized groups . 46 -- 2.3.3 Social housing programs as a mechanism to combat human rights violations 49 -- 2.3.4 Economic growth and costs . 50 -- 2.4 Accountability Relations in Social Housing Programs . 52 -- 2.4.1 Responsibility 52 -- 2.4.2 Answerability . 53 -- 2.4.3 Enforcement . 54 -- 2.5 Summary 62 -- 3 A Review: historical, political, socio-economic, legal and policy backgrounds 63 -- 3.1 Historical, Political and Socio-economic Background 63 -- 3.1.1 A historical look. 63 -- 3.1.2 Latest political developments 64 -- 3.1.3 Socio-economic trends . 67 -- 3.2 Administrative Law Review 70 -- 3.2.1 Administrative and public procurement procedures 70 -- 3.2.2 Principles of Administrative Law in Brazil and Chile 72 -- 3.2.3 Rights-based principles 75 -- 3.2.4 Theories of responsibility of the State . 77 -- 3.3 Housing Policy Review 80 -- 3.3.1 Chilean Housing Policy Review 82 -- 3.3.2 Brazilian Housing Policy Review 88 -- 3.4 Summary 95 -- 4 Dimension 1: Responsibility in social housing programs 97 -- 4.1 Beneficiaries . 97 -- 4.1.1 Legal definitions 98 -- 4.1.2 Vulnerable categories: FAR, FDS, D.S. 19 and D.S. 49 . 101 -- 4.1.3 Emergent categories: FGTS (1.5, 2 and 3), D.S. 1 and D.S. 19104 -- 4.2 Service Providers . 109 -- 4.2.1 Financial institutions 109 -- 4.2.2 Firms and business enterprises of the private construction sector 114 -- 4.2.3 Supporting entities . 116 -- 4.2.4 Other supporting agents . 122 -- 4.2.5 Frontline professionals . 124 -- 4.3 Government 125 -- 4.3.1 Ministries . 126 -- 4.3.2 Funds 127 -- 4.3.3 Coordination bodies . 130 -- 4.3.4 Local public entities . 133 -- 4.3.5 Decentralization and coordination . 134 -- 4.4 Others . 137 -- 4.4.1 Courts . 137 -- 4.4.2 Internal control organs . 137 -- 4.4.3 Internal participatory mechanisms . 138 -- 4.4.4 External control 139 -- 4.4.5 Quasi-judicial agencies 139 -- 4.4.6 Financial Councils . 140 -- 4.4.7 Ombudspersons 140 -- 4.4.8 Superintendencies 141 -- 4.4.9 National participatory councils 142 -- 4.4.10 Local consultative bodies 144 -- 4.4.11 Grass-root movements . 145 -- 4.4.12 Academy and research institutes . 147 -- 4.4.13 Media . 148 -- 4.5 Summary 148 -- 5 Dimension 2: Answerability in social housing programs 151 -- 5.1 Beneficiaries . 153 -- 5.1.1 Eligibility . 153 -- 5.1.2 Application . 166 -- 5.1.3 Selection . 174 -- 5.1.4 Rights-based critics 183 -- 5.2 Service Providers . 214 -- 5.2.1 Eligibility, Application and Selection . 214 -- 5.2.2 Rights-based critics 229 -- 5.3 Government 255 -- 5.3.1 Informing, responding and justifying 256v 5.4 Summary 259 -- 6 Dimension 3: Enforcement in social housing programs 265 -- 6.1 Beneficiaries . 266 -- 6.1.1 Exit and Sanctions . 266 -- 6.1.2 Access to grievance and redress by vulnerable groups . 277 -- 6.1.3 Control and Remediation . 286 -- 6.2 Service Providers . 303 -- 6.2.1 Exit and Sanctions . 304 -- 6.2.2 Control and Remediation . 309 -- 6.3 Government 316 -- 6.3.1 Exit and Sanctions . 316 -- 6.3.2 Control and Remediation . 320 -- 6.4 Summary 337 -- 7 Synthesis and Discussion . 341 -- 7.1 Responsibility in focus . 343 -- 7.2 Answerability in focus . 352 -- 7.3 Enforcement in focus . 372 -- 8 Conclusion 381 -- References . 387 -- Annexes 429 -- 7 Guiding Rights-based Principles . 518. 330 $aInstitutional crises have been continuously imbedded in weak accountability. In Latin America, human rights' violations catalyze the outcomes of such crises. In the aim of understanding the housing crisis, this research evidenced a vicious cycle in Brazil and Chile: despite the creation of massive social housing programs, the lack of adequate housing particularly affects the most-poor due to weak accountability. The comparison of legal accountability relations in the urban social housing ownership models Minha Casa, Minha Vida, from Brazil, and D.S. 49, D.S. 1, and D.S. 19, from Chile, revealed several of those inconsistencies, but also advised on concrete solutions to their accountability relations inspired by the rights-based approach. Policies fall short on the organization of responsibilities to duty-bearers, whose weak obligations to inform, justify or respond neutralize concrete chances of enforcing redress or grievance. In such a scenario, this research showed that the most-vulnerable remain hindered from accessing the minimum existential and, particularly, adequate housing. The solution is obvious: the respect, protection and fulfillment of human rights must be used as means and goals of those or any other policies and institutional structures. 410 0$aUA Ruhr studies on development and global governance. 517 $aAccountability Relations in Social Housing Programs 606 $aPoor 606 $aHousing 607 $aChile 607 $aBrazil 615 0$aPoor. 615 0$aHousing. 676 $a320 700 $aVilmondes$b Mariana$01348382 801 0$bNjHacI 801 1$bNjHacl 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910647265203321 996 $aAccountability Relations in Social Housing Programs$93085851 997 $aUNINA