Promotion de la démocratie dans les Balkans: L'efficacité inégale de la conditionnalité et des incitatifs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé. Certains travaux indiquent qu'en matière de promotion de la démocratie, la conditionnalité des élargissements de l'Union européenne (UE) vers l'Europe du Sud et de l'Est s'est avérée plus efficace que les incitatifs employés par diverses organisations internationales. Cet article confirme la validité de ce constat en démontrant que, dans les Balkans, la conditionnalité du Processus de stabilisation et d'association de l'UE a eu des retentissements plus marqués que les incitatifs du Pacte de stabilité pour l'Europe du Sud-Est. En outre, à l'aide des théories des relations internationales, l'article analyse les fondements de l'efficacité de la conditionnalité de l'UE et les raisons pour lesquelles celle-ci a néanmoins des effets inégaux d'un pays à l'autre. Abstract. Various works indicate that, in the matter of democracy promotion, the conditionality of the European Union (EU) enlargements towards Southern and Eastern Europe has proved to be more effective than incentives of many international organizations. This article confirms the validity of this finding. It shows that, in the Balkans, the conditionality of the EU Stabilization and Association Process has had more significative impacts than the incentives of the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe. Furthermore, with the help of international relations theories, it explains the determinants of the EU conditionality efficiency and the reasons why its effects nevertheless vary from one target state to another.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".