Studying the anti-corruption capacity of the local press in Poland

The problem of the anti-corruption role of the local media is under-researched, not only in Poland, but also in international studies. Therefore, the article contributes to the theoretical reflection over the anti-corruption capacity of the local press in Poland by proposing an analytical model for studying it. In the first part, the growing importance of research on the anti-corruption role of the local press in Poland is presented. Secondly, the concepts of local press and corruption are defined in order to clarify the analytical scope of the proposed model. Then, the ambiguous nature of the anti-corruption capacity of the local press is described based on existing literature. The main part is focused on building and elaborating on the analytical model for researching the anti-corruption capacity of the local press. The model integrates three interconnected components of the capacity, which might be grasped by the idea of a trio including determinants, types and impact. Thereby, a multidimensional surrounding and diversified scope of anti-corruption functions of the local press in Poland are demonstrated

O możliwościach zastosowania kategorii granicy w analizie zjawiska korupcji

Since the 90s of XXth century we have observed a significant increase of the interest in the issue of corruption, what was reflected in the scientific investigation over the phenomenon. The last decade of the XX century was also the period when the problem of borders and borderlands has been rediscovered as the central to the processes accompanying human kind at the end of the millennium. It must be noticed that both the higher interest in corruption and the interest in borders are determined by the same conditions of the 90s. A globalization, the another wave of democratization and collapse of the Soviet Union have created new, structural opportunities for corruption and redefinition of political borders, the latter being for a long time frozen within the Cold War order. Despite a similarity of the determinants inspiring to more systematic analysis of corruption and borders, both of these phenomena are usually recognized as a separate researched fields. However, there are some ‘meeting points’ where research on these phenomena are intertwined, clearly embedding corruption in the context of borders. It seems that what these research have in common is the domination of a such framework of thinking about corruption and borders where the nexus between corruption and borders is located, both in institutional and theoretical terms, on a state border. The thesis proposed in this article states that the above presented perspective in the analysis of the nexus between corruption and borders does not cover multidimensional relations between these phenomena, because the diversity of forms of corruption and the variety of ways in which borders are understood within the field of border studies, provide much wider perspective for analyzing relations between these polymorphic categories. The author presents two different approaches to studying these relations and proposes some research questions corresponding with each of these approaches. In the first approach a phenomenon of corruption is constituted by boundaries being constructed in public discourse – they can be changed, negotiated and contested by different actors of given political system. Thereby, corruption is a product of bordering process. According to the second approach a corruption is a phenomenon causing construction of borders, because it can lead to the emergence of the dirty togetherness, with its invisible boundaries of inclusion (corrupt insiders) and exclusion (non-corrupt outsiders). In this case the socially constructed and preserved boundaries are products of corruption.Od lat 90. XX wieku obserwujemy istotny wzrost zainteresowania kwestią korupcji. To również czas ponownego odkrycia problemu granic i pogranicza jako zagadnień centralnych dla procesów towarzyszących człowiekowi pod koniec stulecia. Globalizacja, kolejna fala demokratyzacji oraz upadek ZSRR to zmiany, który stworzyły nowe, strukturalne warunki dla zjawisk korupcyjnych oraz dla przedefiniowania granic politycznych. Pomimo podobieństwa uwarunkowań inspirujących do systematycznej refleksji nad korupcją i granicami, zarówno badania nad korupcją, jak i badania nad granicami zazwyczaj traktowane są jako odrębne obszary badawcze. Możemy jednak wyodrębnić pewne płaszczyzny, na których badania te spotykają się i zjawisko korupcji jest wyraźnie osadzone w kontekście granic. Ich wspólną cechą wydaje się dominacja takiej narracji w myśleniu o korupcji i granicach, w której związek między korupcją a granicami jest zlokalizowany, zarówno w sensie instytucjonalnym, jak i teoretycznym, na granicy państwowej. W artykule postawiono tezę, według której taka perspektywa w analizie relacji między korupcją a granicami nie wyczerpuje wielorakich związków między tymi zjawiskami, ponieważ zarówno różnorodność form korupcji, jak i wielość sposobów rozumienia pojęcia granicy we współczesnych studiach nad granicami, stwarzają znacznie szerszą perspektywę w badaniu zależności między tymi polimorficznymi kategoriami. Autor przedstawia dwa podejścia w badaniu tych zależności i towarzyszące im pytania badawcze. W pierwszym zjawisko korupcji jest ukonstytuowane na granicach, które są konstruowane w dyskursie publicznym – mogą być zmieniane, negocjowane i kontestowane przez podmioty działające w ramach danego systemu politycznego. Korupcja jest tu rezultatem procesu tworzenia granic. W drugim podejściu korupcja jest zjawiskiem, któremu towarzyszy powstawanie granic, ponieważ może doprowadzić do stworzenia tzw. brudnej wspólnoty, której niewidzialne granice włączają jednych, będąc jednocześnie barierami dla niechcianych outsiderów. Tu społecznie konstruowane i podtrzymywane granice są rezultatem korupcji

Podziały i sąsiedztwa w ponowoczesnym świecie. Narracje granic w geografii politycznej

Kwestia granic państwowych stanowi główne zagadnienie w tradycji geografii politycznej. Granice analizowane są przede wszystkim w skali międzynarodowej, ponieważ to granice między państwami dostarczają prawdopodobnie jednej z najbardziej wyraźnych manifestacji makrostrukturalnego związku polityki i geografii. W minionej dekadzie jesteśmy świadkami ponownego zainteresowania granicami, zarówno z perspektywy geograficznej, jak i na szerszym polu teorii społecznej. Geografowie dążą do umieszczenia kategorii granicy i terytoriów w ramy pojęciowe teorii społecznej, natomiast na gruncie nauk społecznych podjęto próbę analizy roli przestrzeni oraz, w niektórych przypadkach, terytorium w rozumieniu personalnych, grupowych oraz narodowych granic i tożsamości. Najnowsze badania w tym zakresie dotyczą ponowoczesnych koncepcji terytorialności i „zanikania” granic, konstruowania socjoprzestrzennych tożsamości oraz narracji socjalizacyjnych, w których granica jest fundamentem podziału „my” – „Oni”, a także różnych skal przestrzennych, w jakich można analizować granice. W przyszłych badaniach nad zjawiskiem granic, ten zestaw oddzielnie podejmowanych zagadnień, może zostać poddany holistycznej analizie w ramach wielowymiarowej, multidyscyplinarnej struktury teoretycznej

Podziały i sąsiedztwa w ponowoczesnym świecie. Narracje granic w geografii politycznej

Kwestia granic państwowych stanowi główne zagadnienie w tradycji geografii politycznej. Granice analizowane są przede wszystkim w skali międzynarodowej, ponieważ to granice między państwami dostarczają prawdopodobnie jednej z najbardziej wyraźnych manifestacji makrostrukturalnego związku polityki i geografii. W minionej dekadzie jesteśmy świadkami ponownego zainteresowania granicami, zarówno z perspektywy geograficznej, jak i na szerszym polu teorii społecznej. Geografowie dążą do umieszczenia kategorii granicy i terytoriów w ramy pojęciowe teorii społecznej, natomiast na gruncie nauk społecznych podjęto próbę analizy roli przestrzeni oraz, w niektórych przypadkach, terytorium w rozumieniu personalnych, grupowych oraz narodowych granic i tożsamości. Najnowsze badania w tym zakresie dotyczą ponowoczesnych koncepcji terytorialności i „zanikania” granic, konstruowania socjoprzestrzennych tożsamości oraz narracji socjalizacyjnych, w których granica jest fundamentem podziału „my” – „Oni”, a także różnych skal przestrzennych, w jakich można analizować granice. W przyszłych badaniach nad zjawiskiem granic, ten zestaw oddzielnie podejmowanych zagadnień, może zostać poddany holistycznej analizie w ramach wielowymiarowej, multidyscyplinarnej struktury teoretycznej

War and politics. The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and refugee crisis on the eastern EU border from the perspective of border studies

Since February 24, 2022, we have been witnessing the next stage of what began in the 2014 Russo-Ukrainian War: a full-scale military invasion of Ukraine. For the first time in the history of the European Union, the intensive armed conflict is now approaching the border of the EU and Schengen Zone. The consequences of war: the refugee crisis, humanitarian aid, and economic problems have affected EU countries both immediately and directly. While keeping in mind the human tragedy and the tragedy of Ukraine, we would like to address a few important questions from the perspective of regional and border scholars. From this perspective, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine is another stage of the new political order in Europe, preceded by the war in Ukraine that started in 2014, the 2015 migration crisis, 2021 Belarus-EU border crisis, which altogether – from the perspective of the border studies – could be described as re-bordering and securitization of borderlands. In this joint editorial, we address four main questions. Firstly, how we can interpret the Russian invasion in the wider, historical context, taking the frontier thesis as an explanatory category developed by Turner (1994). Secondly, the Ukrainian refugee crisis, in the context of the previous Belarusian-EU border crisis, is a multi-layered issue, where religion, gender, geopolitics, and rationales meet. Thirdly, apart from the military and political actions, war and refugee flux could be seen from the perspective of a grassroots movement of aid. Fourthly, the war in Ukraine brings uncertainty and questions about democracy and peace in Western Europe

Związek Radziecki jako państwo skorumpowane

THE SOVIET UNION AS A CORRUPT STATEThe article concerns the process of corruption’s institutionalization in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Corruption is perceived as a permanent and variable pattern of social-and-political actors’ behavior which was generated by centralized structure of governmental system. The author attempts to prove that costs and benefits derived from corruption were not identical during every period of the Soviet Union’s development. This calculation was for the most part the result of political regime’s dynamics and changing degree of its totalitarianism. Legalized corruption, patron–client networks and ordinary bribery – which the author defines as a patterns of corruption typical for the Soviet Union – were structurally connected phenomena. On one hand they were inextricably intertwined with the political system; on the other they were a manifestation of the system’s inefficiency and a lack of its identification with foundational principles. While analyzing corruption in a system such as the Soviet Union, many various doubts appear as far as defining different actions as unequivocally corrupt is concerned. Some of them were not meant to serve as an instrument of personal enrichment but were the only available way to gain access to scarce goods or to face challenges posed by the irrational system of the economy’s management. It can be assumed that these actions were the manifestations of rational adaptation to unpredictable social-and-economic environment and that to some degree they performed functionally useful role. Corruption in the Soviet Union gained a status of informal institution the regulatory potential of which was largely serving as a substitute for regulatory functions which generally should be performed by the legal system.THE SOVIET UNION AS A CORRUPT STATEThe article concerns the process of corruption’s institutionalization in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Corruption is perceived as a permanent and variable pattern of social-and-political actors’ behavior which was generated by centralized structure of governmental system. The author attempts to prove that costs and benefits derived from corruption were not identical during every period of the Soviet Union’s development. This calculation was for the most part the result of political regime’s dynamics and changing degree of its totalitarianism. Legalized corruption, patron–client networks and ordinary bribery – which the author defines as a patterns of corruption typical for the Soviet Union – were structurally connected phenomena. On one hand they were inextricably intertwined with the political system; on the other they were a manifestation of the system’s inefficiency and a lack of its identification with foundational principles. While analyzing corruption in a system such as the Soviet Union, many various doubts appear as far as defining different actions as unequivocally corrupt is concerned. Some of them were not meant to serve as an instrument of personal enrichment but were the only available way to gain access to scarce goods or to face challenges posed by the irrational system of the economy’s management. It can be assumed that these actions were the manifestations of rational adaptation to unpredictable social-and-economic environment and that to some degree they performed functionally useful role. Corruption in the Soviet Union gained a status of informal institution the regulatory potential of which was largely serving as a substitute for regulatory functions which generally should be performed by the legal system

The Functions and Dysfunctions of Corruption

Corruption has become a major global problem. Proponents of the “good corruption” thesis believe that in certain conditions corruption can be conducive to economic and political development. To them, corruption is “grease” that lubricates the rigid wheels of the bureaucratic machine, and is a legitimate mechanizm of political inclusion of the excluded masses. Yet, empirical analysis of the positive functions of corruption in the Soviet Union, the United States of America and certain Asian countries revealed that corruption is first and foremost a symptom of political and economic system dysfunction. One can speak of the positive functions of corruption only in the context of the system’s serious malfunction concerning the fulfillment of the society’s expectations coupled with the lack of prospects for this system’s reform