Competences for Economic Diplomacy and International Business; Convergence or Divergence?

The article discusses whether competences needed for effective contemporary economic diplomacy are different from or similar to those needed by international businessmen, and whether economic diplomats are capable of responding to the challenges of tectonic changes in the world with the competences they now possess. It concludes that a convergence of competences between economic diplomats and international businessmen is taking place; diplomats are increasingly using competences of international managers, and international manages increasingly need diplomatic skills. Special attention is given to: relations between internal and international economic relations, the need for global mindsets, the business intelligence role of economic diplomats and long-term planning. Competences of economic diplomats from small countries are different from those of their large-country counterparts. One basic competence is flexibility, the readiness to change and to adjust to changes. To adjust to changes, there is also a need for reforms in training of economic diplomats and international businessmen

Kompetence za ekonomsko diplomacijo in mednarodno poslovanje; konvergenca ali divergenca?

Članek ugotavlja ali so kompetence, ki jih potrebuje sodobni ekonomski diplomat, podobne ali različne od tistih, ki jih potrebuje mednarodni poslovnež, ter ali so se ekonomski diplomati z obstoječimi kompetencami sposobni soočati z izzivi tektonsko spreminjajočega se okolja. Priče smo obojestranski konvergenci potrebnih kompetenc; ekonomski diplomati prevzemajo vse več vrlin mednarodnih poslovnežev, ti pa morajo biti vse boljši diplomati. Posebna pozornost je namenjena zvezi med notranjimi in mednarodnimi ekonomskimi odnosi, globalni naravnanosti, vlogi varnosti ter dolgoročnega planiranja ter toleranci do napak. Ugotavlja se, da so kompetence ekonomskih diplomatov malih držav razlikujejo od tistih iz velikih držav in da sta med ključnimi kompetencami radovednost in pripravljenost na spremembe. Da bi zadovoljili potrebe, bi morali tudi spremeniti izobraževanje tako ekonomskih diplomatov kot mednarodnih poslovnežev

Small Countries\u27 EU Council Presidency and the Realisation of their National Interests: The Case of Slovenia

The main goal of the article is to establish how a small country, Slovenia, promoted its national interests when it held the Presidency of the Council of the EU, how this experience fits into the theory of small states and what lessons can be drawn for other small states. Based on a questionnaire administered to key Slovenian actors in the presidency, the analysis confirmed some of the theoretical expectations and revealed certain disparities. Our analysis confirms theoretical predictions that a member state can push through its national interests more easily during its presidency because it possesses certain powers that enable it to set the agenda, which is the most effective way of realising national interests. Especially true in the case of small state presidencies, advocating national interests can also be facilitated by a smaller range of priorities and a greater level of coincidence with the interests of other key actors. We revealed that, besides the country’s size, other factors also limited its ability to fulfil its national interests. In addition to a weak ability for coalition building and lobbying, the two main factors of constraint were the lack of soft knowledge among Slovenian officials and weak coordination among policy agents

Advantages and disadvantages of immediate or postponed membership into the EU

The present article explores the options of future EU member states regarding their accession to the EU. It weighs the benefits of inclusion at the earliest possible convenience on the one side, and their later accession, on the other side. The analysis is conducted in three areas of importance for the timing of EU membership, namely the area of political stability and security, the area of economic development and competitiveness, and the area of maintenance of national sovereignty and cultural identity. The results indicate that benefits of early accession outweigh weaknesses and it is thus imperative for the candidate countries to accede to the EU as soon as possible. This is even more important at these times of financial crisis, since the EU does provide a greater financial and economic stability to its members as opposed to the potential stability they would have were they to remain outside the EU integration

knjigi Pasti globalizacije na rob

A critical assessment of the book Traps of globalization by H.P.Martin and H. Schuman-a is indicates that globalisation is not a zero sum game as authors assume, neglecting law of comparative advantages. It is still very much valid particularly if taken together with the principle of compensation for those who are loosing from international trade or/and globalisation. Benefits of globalisation outrate costs. In spite of all costs it is welfare enhancing. Globalisation is bringing about a convergence among countries if they follow the right policies although it also contributes to the marginalisation of unskilled workers, reduction of their wages, their unemployment and social disintegration. But this is less to be attributed to globalisation and more to technical progress. The idealisation of the role of the government is also criticised. Market failures are still less dangerous that government failures.Governments can not set better exchange rates than market, as is suggested. Alarming the public about the negative consequences of globalisation is welcome although in parts the authors come almost close to the Marxist wrong predictions about the future of capitalism. But the proposals given in the book are not well founded, are not a solution to the problem. Lack of knowledge and provincialism are indicated as more dangerous traps of globalisation than those indicated by the authors.Kritična ocena knjige Pasti globalizacije, avtorjev H.P. Martina in H. Schumana kaže, da globalizacija ni igra ničelne note kot predvidevata avtorja, ki zanemarjata načelo/zakon primerjalnih prednosti. Slednje še kako velja, še posebej skupaj z načelom kompenzacije za tiste, ki izgubljajo zaradi mednarodne menjave in/ali globalizacije. Koristi globalizacije presegajo njene stroške, globalizacijo dvigajo k blaginji. Globalizacija krepi konvergenco med državami, če le-te vodijo pravilno ekonomsko politiko, čeprav hkrati tudi marginalizira nekvalificirano delovno silo in vpliva na zniževanje njihovih plač, nezaposlenost in socialno dizintegracijo. Vendar temu ni kriva toliko globalizacija, pač pa bolj tehnološki napredek. Kritika je izrečena tudi na račun idealiziranja vloge vlad. Pomanjkljivosti trga so manj nevarne od napak vlad. Slednje ne morejo vzpostaviti boljših tečajev kot jih sam trg, na kar avtorja namigujeta. Opozorjati javnost na negativne posledice globalizacije je dobrodošlo, čeprav sta avtorja v nekaterih delih knjige zelo blizu Marxovim zmotnim predvidevanjem o prihodnosti kapitalizma. Predlogi, ki ju avtorja ponujata, niso niti dovolj trdni niti blizu rešitvi problema. Neznanje in ozkost sta mnogo bolj nevarni pasti globalizacije od tistih, ki ju avtorja navajata v knjigi