Magdalena Mouralová, Eva M. Hejzlarová, Rudolf Holík, Miroslav Hubáček and Anna Jeřábková
). Policy analysis in Canada: the state of the art. Buffalo: University of Toronto Press.
Hejzlarová, E. (2010). Policy analysis in the Czech Republic: positivist or postpositivist? Central European Journal of PublicPolicy. 4 (2): 88-107.
Howlett, M., Ramesh, M. & Perl, A. (2009). Studying PublicPolicy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems. New York: Oxford University Press.
Janák, D. (2013). Brněnská versus pražská sociologická škola: mýtus a skutečnost. [The Brno versus the Prague School of Sociology: Myth and Reality
Babbie, E. (2012) The practice of social research, Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.
Bardach, E. (2000) A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis, New York, NY: Chatham House Publishers.
Bovens, M.,’t Hart, P. & Kuipers, S. (2006) ‘The Politics of Policy Evaluation’, in M. Moran, M. Rein and R.E. Goodin (eds) Handbook of PublicPolicy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 319-335.
Cloete, F. & B. Rabie (2008) ‘Overview of tertiary publicpolicy training in South Africa’, Africanus 38(2): 55
. Retrieved from http://iss.fsv.cuni.cz/ISS-191.html
Háva, P., & Čabanová, B. (Eds.). (2008). Spravedlnost a solidarita v oblasti sociálně zdravotních služeb. Praha: Výzkumný ústav bezpečnosti práce.
Hejzlarová, E. M. (2010). Policy analysis in the Czech Republic: Positivist or postpositivist? Central European Journal of PublicPolicy, 4(2), 88-107. Retrieved from http://www.cejpp.eu/index.php/ojs/article/viewFile/52/60.
Hendrych, D. (2003). Správní věda: Teorie veřejné správy. Praha: ASPI.
in Experiments with Public Goods (Doctoral Thesis). 109 pp. Masaryk University. Brno.
Berná, Z., & Špalek, J. (2015). Factors Influencing Compliance Behavior in a Tax Laboratory Experiment. In Matějová, L., & Špalková, D. Proceedings of the 19th international conference Current trends in public sector research. 103-109.
Berná, Z., & Špalek, J. (2014). Can Experimental and Behavioral Economics Inform PublicPolicy? Lesson from a Tax Compliance Experiment. In Lucie Sedmihradská. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference
European PublicPolicy . Vol. 9, No. 6.
Wilke, H. (2007). Tragedia państwa. Prolegomena do teorii państwa i policentrycznego społeczeństwa. In: Zarządzanie publiczne Vol. 1, No. 1. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Scholar.
Brace Paul and Mucciaroni Gary, 1990, ‘The American States and the Shifting Locus of Positive Economic Intervention’, Policy Studies Review, X(1): 151-173.
Clovis Samuel Jr, 2006, ‘Federalism, Homeland Security and National Preparedness: A Study in the Development of PublicPolicy,’ Homeland Security Affairs, II(3): 1-24.
Conlan Timothy J., 2017, ‘The Changing Politics of American Federalism,’ State and Local Government Review, XLIX(3): 170-183.
Conlan Timothy J. and Dinan John, 2007, ‘Federalism, the Bush administration
Petridou, E., & Olausson, P.M (2016). Policy Entrepreneurship and Policy Transfer: Flood Risk Governance in Northern Sweden. Central European Journal on PublicPolicy 2017; 11(1).
Rhinard, M., & Sundelius, B. (2010). The limits of self-reliance: International cooperation as a source of resilience. Designing resilience: Preparing for extreme events , 196-219.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996) The New Governance: Governing without Government in Political Studies, Vol. 44, No 4, pp. 652—667.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997) Understanding Governance
This article elaborates on the issue of recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the Russian Federation. It is common knowledge that foreign companies seeking R&E in Russia suffered damage because of the broad interpretation of Russian public policy in the past decades. However, it is uncertain how the present judicial development appears like and where it will lead in the future. The article specifically considers two basic ideas on the issue at hand: one is slightly critical (Karabelnikov) while the second is rather optimistic in regard with the recent development (Zykov). The main goal is to introduce the issue to the respective readers and to try to inflame a discussion.
Can We Talk about European Public Policy in the Field of Sport?
Despite the continuous deepening, development and enlargement, the members of the European Union still diverge in their policies and have to find a way to diminish this divergence. The social, economical and cultural significance of sport is well known in the whole of Europe. Accordingly, in the recent past, the various institutions of the European Union have come to pay more attention to sport issues. An important milestone of this was the European Commission issuing a White Paper on sport, and the inclusion of sport in the Lisbon Treaty. However the question is raised: Is there a European public policy of sport? The author's objective was to investigate this question. This paper aims to highlight the European sport policy and tries to find the answer to the following question: can we talk about European public policy in the field of sport? The research examines through the analysis of documents whether sport can be regarded as an element of public policy. We can talk about common public policy of a certain area if it corresponds to the following five criteria: content, social competence, coercive factor, normative orientation and programme. In the first part, the content and the social competence are analyzed, and then some critical issues of the definition, namely of the public policy will be discussed. In the opinion of the author, the most problematic criterion is the programme, which presumes at least a mid-term European sport conception. It is especially important that sport could fulfil its community building, identity-forming role to which it is suited in the continuously enlarging Europe. Finally the author draws the conclusion that the European sport policy corresponds partly to the above-mentioned criteria; however, the realization of the Pierre de Coubertin Action Plan included in the White Paper, and the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty can create opportunities for sport to become a public policy of the European Union.
Julizar Idris, Abdul Hakim, Sarwono Sarwono and Bambang Santoso Haryono
, Fakultas Pascasarjana UI Jakarta.
 Dye, Thomas R., (1987). Understanding PublicPolicy. USA: Prentice-Hall, INC., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
 Dunn, William N.; dan Rita Mae Kelly (eds.), (1992). Advances in Policy Studies Since, 1950. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
 Dunn, William N.; 2003. Pengantar Analisis Kebijakan Publik. Yogyakarta: Gajah Mada University Press.
 Howlett, Michael and Ramesh, M., 1995. Studying Puclic Pilicy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystem. New York: Oxford University Press.
 Howlett, Michael and