Collaborative research projects
Six collaborative research projects have been selected for funding in the second call for research proposals launched by CIVICA – The European University of Social Sciences in 2022. The call aimed to jumpstart innovative research and create new ties between CIVICA’s member universities. Faculty and postdoctoral researchers from the alliance were encouraged to team up and submit new research ideas aligned with, but not necessarily limited to, CIVICA’s focus areas: societal and environmental crises, democracy, Europe, and data science.
- A Pilot Study on Mapping the Attitudes Towards Covid-19 Vaccination in Online Communities (ROHUVax)
- Contestations of Citizenship in Contexts of Democratic Backsliding: Lessons from Post-communist Europe (CITDEM)
- Counterterrorism and Safeguarding in Response to Islamic State (CASIS)
- Local Mobilization Against the EU. Territorial Dimensions of Populist Euroscepticism (EULOC)
- Protecting Academics at Risk: A Survey of European and EU Practice (PROAC)
- The Long Shadow of Educational, Skills, and Professional Inequities in Time and in Space: Implications for Polarisation and Support for Populism in Europe
Lead institution: National University of Political Studies and Public Administration (SNSPA)
Other CIVICA members involved: Central European University (CEU)
Focus area: Data-driven Technologies for the Social Sciences
Overview: In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, public conversation on vaccination issues has gained more and more visibility. The media take over and amplify the announcements made by the pharmaceutical companies racing to make a COVID-19 vaccine, while vaccination-related topics reverberate both among pro-vaccination groups and among those vehemently opposing it. The debates around COVID-19 vaccination were rapidly moving around other public issues such as energy, climate change, and culture wars in education. We propose a pilot-study to create a methodology to understand the public conversation on social media about the COVID-19 vaccination in the European Union, with a particular focus on disinformation and misinformation narratives. Our proposal falls under the thematic area of “Data-Driven Technologies for Social Sciences”, as we will pilot the use of digital technologies (i.e., CrowdTangle, network mapping tools, and sentiment analysis software) for mapping and studying how the public issue of COVID-19 vaccination is debated and framed in online Facebook communities, with emphasis on disinformation narratives. The aim of our pilot study is to create, test and validate a scalable, interdisciplinary, mixed-method methodological framework which we test by mapping and analysing the public conversation on COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination on Facebook in a cross-national research project (Romania and Hungary). In doing so, we employ a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, using sentiment analysis, netnography, as well as critical discourse analysis on a subset of Facebook data. The pilot study showcases the feasibility of the framework with the different sets of conclusions, underpins key cultural and national aspects that characterize the public conversation online, as well as urges researchers to ponder upon the limitations of digital tools. Thus, this project is an invitation for researchers to consider the critical usage of digital methods mixed with qualitative methods in their work.
The overview of the Romanian dataset indicates that although the entities generating most content were news companies, the most engagement was attracted by politicians and political commentators. Indeed, in Romania, the COVID crisis was not discussed as a health issue, but rather the social media attention was turned by the far-right party towards a critique of the political system aimed at gaining political support. Therefore, instead of a discussion focused on providing information, the social media discourse was rather characterized by an attempt to spark outrage and instigate distrust, led by far-right representatives instead of specialized public institutions. The opposition against the EU Digital COVID Certificate was the main discontent used by the rising far right-wing political party and adjacent politicians as a means to request citizens’ political support in order to spare them of the mandatory nature of the document. Oftentimes, the certificate was associated with the rest of the restrictions, as well as with the action of imposing vaccination. Therefore, the anti-certificate stance is often characterized by anti-vax adepts and far-right politicians. The spread of disinformation was also highly apparent, with consistent aggressive conspiratorial content garnering high engagement rates.
In the Hungarian online discussion on COVID-19 vaccinations, two key differences from Romania stand out. Firstly, Hungary mandated COVID-19 vaccines for specific occupational groups, shifting the conversation towards mandatory vaccinations rather than the vaccines themselves. Secondly, Hungary's 2022 general elections prompted early campaigning. Two vaccination narratives emerged in Hungary: societal responsibility and self-protection, with the latter dominating. Media companies were the most active in discussing COVID-19, gaining substantial engagement. Initially, the government generated the highest interactions, but later, a far-right politician took the lead. Misinformation spread, with anti-vaccination communities and politicians like Dúró generating high engagement. Facebook Groups played a significant role in spreading misinformation, with six disinformation/conspiracy theory groups in the top 10 content posters. Surprisingly, the top 100 engaged posts had few conspiracy theories or misinformation. Interestingly, mainstream far-right politicians, notably the Mi Hazánk party and Dóra Dúró, focused on opposing the "COVID dictatorship" while framing vaccine mandates as a violation of personal liberty.
- Joint output: SNSPA-CEU workshop to present the results of the CIVICA project “A pilot study on mapping the attitudes towards Covid-19 vaccination in online communities (ROHUVax)” (https://www.civica.eu/news-events/news/detail/snspa-ceu-joint-workshop-to-present-the-preliminary-results-of-the-civica-project-a-pilot-study-on-mapping-the-attitudes-towards-covid-19-vaccination-in-online-communities-rohuvax/)
- Output produced by part of the SNSPA team with the Romanian results: ECREA Political Communication Section Conference (https://ecreapolcomm2023.ecreapoliticalcommunication.com/); presentation name: “Constructing COVID-19 Disinformation Narratives: The Weaponization Of Public Discontent As Populist Political Communication Strategy”
Project coordinator: Alina Bârgăoanu (SNSPA)
Lead institutions: European University Institute, The London School of Economics and Political Science, Central European University
Focus area: Democracy in the 21st Century
Overview: While post-Communist European countries have been the site of stalling democratization and rising backsliding, this is the first project to explore the consequences of backsliding on the evolution of citizenship regimes. CITDEM begins by identifying and studying three mechanisms—identity politics, electoral politics, and judicial constraints—that connect citizenship regime stability and change with political regime transformation ‘away from democracy’. It offers a novel account of (1) how the institutionalisation of citizenship regimes reconstructs ‘spaces of identity’, both as attachments and political practice; (2) how the political conception of citizenship as the lifeblood of democracy is constructed, contested, to serve the political objectives of illiberal political elites (e.g., electoral constituency manipulation); and (3) how the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion become filtered through institutional dynamics (e.g., court rulings).
The CITDEM project identifies the key variables and determinants of citizenship policy reforms under undemocratic regimes. Using mixed methods, the project first charts an analytical framework for understanding the linkages between democratic backsliding and citizenship regimes. This framework will be the springboard for a larger project, where we will explore the mechanisms that have contributed to contestations of citizenship in Hungary, Montenegro and Moldova, case studies representative of variation in the timing, nature, and context of backsliding. By integrating these cases with a broader comparative and quantitative regional approach, the empirical results of CITDEM will have broader implications within and beyond Europe for understanding and studying how citizenship changes when democratic governance becomes a façade veiling populist and authoritarian political objectives. Through a combination of academic output and synthetic information for wide dissemination, our objective is to make not only a cross-disciplinary contribution to scholarship but also to inform policy communities and the broader public.
The core result of this project is the lasting collaboration of the research team investigating the linkages between citizenship and struggles for democracy. CITDEM has provided essential insights in the trajectories of selective exclusion and inclusion of groups of individuals during periods of democratisation and democratic backsliding. This knowledge, and the analytical framework developed within the project will inform our multiannual research agenda. The project PIs have already secured the publication of a special issue based on CITDEM results, and are discussing the organization of a Summer School at CEU. A further workshop is planned in 2024 to expand the scope of the research and examine the applicability of the CITDEM findings to a global context, in particular on the Global South.
- CIVICA conference and book presentation “Contestations of citizenship in contexts of democratic backsliding: lessons from post-communist Europe”
- Citizenship and the Democratic Pendulum (working paper, in preparation for publication)
- Special issue of a top-tier journal in the area of citizenship and migration (in preparation)
- Citizenship in Eastern Europe dataset (to be released in open access upon publication of outputs)
- Dzankic, Jelena. “Regulation against weaponization: a double-edged sword?” Globalcit Forum debate contribution: https://globalcit.eu/weaponized-citizenship-should-international-law-restrict-oppressive-nationality-attribution/2/
- Knott, Eleanor. “The Weaponization of More than Citizenship” Globalcit Forum debate contribution: https://globalcit.eu/weaponized-citizenship-should-international-law-restrict-oppressive-nationality-attribution/3/
Lead institution: European University Institute
Other CIVICA members involved: The London School of Economics and Political Science
Focus area: Europe Revisited
Overview: The ‘Counterterrorism and Safeguarding in response to Islamic State’ (CASIS) project aims to critically analyse and map states’ responses to young returnees from Islamic State, to understand differing state responses. It explores how states have acted towards minors seeking return from Iraq and Syria, with particular focus on repatriation and citizenship deprivation, as well as considering the wider impact this has on European solidarity and polarisation towards migration, and the challenge that counterterrorism policy poses to democracy and human rights. The CIVICA grant will enable CASIS researchers to develop two grant submissions: a European Research Council Synergy Grant, and a Jean Monnet Network grant. This will enable greater project research and the building of a relevant interdisciplinary expert network. In preparation for this grant, CIVICA funding will support the conducting of early-stage research and interviews into policy, to determine how and why states have responded to the issue of young returnees differently. The findings will be developed into an interactive online mapping, enabling international researchers and stakeholders to access this information. A workshop will be held during the CIVICA funding period, to refine core research questions and build new networks between CIVICA institutions and stakeholders. Finally, the CIVICA funding will result in the writing of a policy brief – to be disseminated amongst EU and European policymakers – and the submission of a research handbook proposal on ‘Responses to Returnees from Islamic State’, to be submitted to the publisher Routledge. The CASIS project will explore the issue of returnees through the lens of multilevel governance of migration, as well as consider the resilience of European democratic and rights norms in relation to expanding counterterror approaches.
The CASIS project developed several key results. First, it detailed different securitised and counter-terror approaches taken by European and other Western states towards young returnees, providing an overview of national approaches and documenting them in one, centralised report. Second, it explored non-Western approaches to young returnees, examining case studies in the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia through empirical research interviews and analysis. This helped us to develop findings demonstrating that many non-Western countries had not used counter-terror approaches against young returnees, instead relying on repatriation and reintegration schemes that often prioritised the welfare of the child over the judicial punishment or citizenship deprivation favoured by Western countries. Third, we detailed the different factors or indicators that help to shape state responses to repatriation of young returnees, including the role of the media, polarisation and securitisation in society, existing counterterror measures and civil society mobilisations around young returnees. Fourth and finally, we worked to develop alternative approaches that can be adopted by European Member States and the European Union that desecuritised the issue of returnees and emphasised approaches grounded in child rights. These findings were drawn from a dataset of national approaches to young returnees, as well as indicators of that shape state responses. The dataset was used to develop research findings and publications, as well as to track national and international trends around youth repatriation.
Three articles and handbook proposal were produced as part of the CASIS project. One article has been accepted for publication at a major academic journal, entitled: Beyond the Security-Safeguarding Nexus: Alternative Methods for Responding to Young Returnees from Islamic State. Drawing on findings from the project, it explores new theoretical and policy approaches to youth and Islamic State returnees. Two other publications were also written, published on the website, which explore different regional approaches in Islamic State. The first report explores how Turkey has responded to young Islamic State returnees; the second looks at how the European Union has attempted to develop responses and interventions at a supra-state level. The fund helped to inform the development of a handbook proposal, which details different national approaches to Islamic State returnees – particularly looking at non-Western perspectives and approaches which go beyond responses grounded in counter-terror and security policy. This will contribute to sharing new approaches to security and safeguarding, and support gaps in both the literature and policy.
Two events were held as part of the CASIS project. One two-day workshop was held at the European University Institute, bringing together experts, academics and practitioners from the fields of child welfare, counterterrorism, migration and citizenship. This workshop helped to guide the development of the findings, share the on-going research and support the development of an interdisciplinary network around child repatriation from the former Islamic State. Another event was held at the University of Lisbon and was run as part of the Council of European Studies. A workshop and a roundtable event were held within academics from across Europe and North America, to support new publications, explore findings from the projects and develop new avenues for research.
Two research grants were developed as part of the project. One involved the development of a Marie Curie Fellowship, led by Dr Caitlin Procter, based at the Graduate Institute Geneva and the European University Institute, which focussed on child repatriation and reintegration from conflict zones such as Syria and Iraq. The second was a European Research Council Grant, led by Dr Richard McNeil-Willson, based at the University of Leiden and the European University Institute, which explored counterterror approaches towards young people following the collapse of Islamic State in Western Europe and beyond.
As a result of the publications, the international events and the follow-on grant applications, new and existing partnerships were built and developed - both between CIVICA institutions and other leading academic institutions across Europe. All researchers have greatly benefitted from the development of new interdisciplinary networks of academics, partitioners and policymakers in this field. Ties between the EUI, LSE and other leading institutions have been strengthened. New knowledge has been created, advancing new approaches towards a difficult, contentious and highly relevant problem in European societies. This knowledge has been shared through open source publications and reports, the website, and workshop events, ensuring researchers have been able to disseminate findings as widely as possible and create greater impact. Research is also available on the website, ensuring the project has a long-lasting impact. The book proposal also ensures that the findings create long-term impact, supporting engagement with academics working in this field. The subsequent follow-on funding grants also increase the impact of CASIS beyond the lifespan of the CIVICA funding. As such, the CIVICA funding has helped to develop new findings and new knowledge, as well as ensure long-lasting impacts in policy and academia.
Project coordinator: Jeffrey Checkel (EUI)
- Inés Bolaños Somoano (EUI)
- Anna Rajkowska İnal (EUI)
- Émilien Fargues (EUI and Sciences Po)
- Sophia Fehrenbach (EUI and CES)
- Youssef Mnaili (EUI)
Lead institution: The London School of Economics and Political Science
Other CIVICA members involved: Central European University, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration
Focus area: Democracy in the 21st Century, Europe Revisited
Overview: The project aims at developing a policy-relevant research agenda on the territorial dimension of populist Euroscepticism. Faced with numerous and overlapping European crises, we need a better understanding on how populist Eurosceptic dynamics and mobilization take place in local arenas of power and government. The project will map the anti-European mobilizations, from direct actions against the EU and its policies to contestation of EU core values like democracy, rule of law, equality and fundamental rights protection.
An important target audience for our work are the European institutions and associated specialists and influencers within the EU policy sphere. The conclusions of the project will provide this audience with evidence-based perspectives on how EU, national, regional and local institutions aimed at improving democracy, human right protection and inclusiveness of local communities.
The overall goals of this project are to:
- Connect researchers from partner universities working on populist / Eurosceptic/ right-wing networks, groups, organizations and parties.
- Develop the research agenda on local aspects of populist Euroscepticism.
- Provide a framework for future collaborative work.
- Increase CIVICA’s visibility in the area of populism / Euroscepticism / right-wing studies.
- Provide actionable knowledge on populist Euroscepticism and inform EU-level, national and local policies with relevant research and insights
Results: This project delved into the intricate relationship between populism and Euroscepticism, shedding light on the multifaceted factors contributing to their coexistence within the European context. Firstly, it found that Euroscepticism has evolved into a political identity rooted in opposition to a perceived elite, aligning with the tenets of populist ideology. Secondly, the project's results suggest that the traditional dichotomy between economic and symbolic explanations of populism is increasingly viewed as oversimplified, especially in the diverse European context. Contrary to expectations, the most pronounced populist tendencies are observed in core countries like Germany and Austria, rather than in those most severely affected by the financial crisis. Additionally, Central-Eastern Europe has witnessed populist mobilization despite differing economic trajectories and nationalistic ideologies, highlighting the complexity of this phenomenon. Thirdly, the project emphasizes the importance of analysing specific localities to fully comprehend populist Euroscepticism. Populist Euroscepticism extends beyond individual sentiments and elite discourses; it acts as a shaping force in society regarding collective identity formation. The project's findings stress that the substantial political diversity at the local and regional levels is often overlooked in national analyses. A focus on localities allows for a more comprehensive understanding of populist mobilization, emphasizing its emotional dimension, described as the 'politics of resentment.' This aligns with the importance of collective consciousness and the human need for these identities to be politically leveraged. Lastly, the project’s results underscore the role of social dynamics, including population shifts due to migration, in the rise of populism, particularly in Central-Eastern Europe.
Notable Outputs: The first output of the project was the “Populist Euroscepticism at the local level. State of research and future research agenda” workshop that took place at the Central European University (Vienna) in May 2022. The workshop examined existing research on the local drivers and manifestations of populism and Euroscepticism. The contributions ranged from studies on parties, movements, local government and social networks, through the examination of nationalist narratives and the study of alternative media production and consumption, to analyses of local economic and cultural drivers of demand for populism. The workshop’s main analytical contributions are as follows: realisation that in the European context, populism and Euroscepticism are inextricably linked and need to be studied jointly; that studying the demand side of populism requires new tools and approaches; a call for joint examination of the political dynamics and socioeconomic trajectories of specific places to better understand populist Euroscepticism.
The second output of the project is an upcoming special issue in Political Studies Review (to be followed by a launch event). The issue comprises texts analysing insights from national case studies and texts examining methodological approaches. This set of contributions establishes the link between populism and Euroscepticism and argues that research on populist Euroscepticism should focus on the places that are 'left behind' and the types of collective identities and actions that emerge there. This approach can help bridge the divide between structural and actor-oriented explanations of populism. Furthermore, it is suggested that examining local articulations of populist Euroscepticism, in a comparative manner, can prevent us from formulating reductionist arguments along national lines. Ultimately, the contributions in the issue underscore the need for a joint examination of the political dynamics and socioeconomic trajectories of specific places to better understand populist Euroscepticism. They point out that in many cases, ethnonationalism, nativist, and anti-EU discourses were key components of the respective electoral successes of populist forces. In a few instances, the governing elite had entrenched Euroscepticism as the foundation of their rule, while in others, its use was driven by bottom-up demand. Populist Euroscepticism then has functioned as a structuring force in society with respect to collective identity. These contributions also highlight that a great deal of political diversity at the local and regional level is not reflected in national analyses and hence reinforce the need to focus on the place as a subject of analysis.
Project coordinator: Mary Kaldor (LSE)
Lead institutions: Central European University, The London School of Economics and Political Science, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration
Focus area: Democracy in the 21st Century
Overview: The aim of this project is to map from a critical and comparative perspective how scholars in exile are currently being integrated into the existing European research infrastructure. The research team will cover three pilot countries ranging from older to newer EU members to a non-EU member state (HUNG, ROM, UK), as well as EU-level organisations. Through a combination of desk research and in-depth interviews with key position holders, we hope to gain a granular and multi-perspectival understanding of the challenges involved, creative solutions found, and dilemmas encountered by many actors involved. The first objective is to develop a questionnaire approved by the ethics teams of CIVICA, and to identify three interviewees per country as well as three for the EU to trial this questionnaire in qualitative interviews. The second objective is to conduct these pilot interviews with people ranging from university administrators, NGOs and managers of risk programmes to the exiled scholars themselves. At EU level, we will be looking at DG Education, EUA, ENQA European infrastructure, with the aim to draw conclusions about the way existing European infrastructure is tested by recent scholarly (and wider) migration crises following the conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan, academic repression and rising authoritarianism in Turkey, Russia, Belorussia, as well as democratic erosion within EU states such as Hungary and Poland. In the interviews themselves, we shall be interested in different levels of integration experience, from individual careers and family fortunes to the self-organisation of expelled scholars in the form of ad hoc institutions such as exile universities. We will be looking both at the content of academic work in the period of integration, such as the question of changing patterns of productivity, joint teaching programmes and syllabi represented in existing tandem teaching and individual research agendas, and at the administrative aspects of the transition of at-risk academics in new environments. At the end of the project, our third objective is to evaluate the pilot interviews and contextual data. Our long-term goal is to use the insights gained to prepare a larger grant application and an academic analysis to be submitted to peer reviewed interdisciplinary journals. Deliverables will include the questionnaire itself, an archive of in-depth qualitative interviews with administrative agents and at-risk academics in exile, with a focus on those coming from within the continent, especially of Hungarian, Romanian, Russian, Belorussian, Georgian, Chechen, Azerbaijani and Ukrainian nationalities, a policy paper, and a peer-reviewed academic publication.
The Protecting Academics at Risk: A Survey of European and EU Practice (PROAC) project examined the difficulties faced by at-risk scholars seeking refuge in two EU countries (Hungary and Romania) and the United Kingdom, as well as the strategies used at the EU level to deal with academic displacement. The study identified examples of effective academic integration of at-risk scholars and highlighted the shortcomings of current methods of dealing with such cases. The review of legal provisions and institutional frameworks for dealing with forced academic migration revealed that higher education institutions (HEI) are mostly the ones handling cases of at-risk scholars, often without external support, resulting in fragmentation and heterogeneity of outcomes. Interviews with administrators from HEI in the three countries revealed that (1) the specific risks faced by academics fleeing war and conflict or states experiencing democratic erosion are poorly understood, and (2) significant risks faced by at-risk academics are related to the precarious situation of their families, who may have difficulty obtaining the necessary administrative and visa support. An important conclusion of the project is that existing systems for integrating at-risk academics are primarily designed for times of peace and democratic stability and the institutional framework, both at the national and the EU level, requires a comprehensive overhaul.
- (under review) Protecting Galilei: Towards a Policy Agenda Supporting Academics at Risk, Dina Gusejnova, Alina Dragolea, Andrea Petö, Andrei-Vlăduț Terteleac, Artemis Photiadou Rebeka Bakos, submitted to Comparative Migration Studies
- (forthcoming) Rebeka Bakos, Andrea Peto, Selective academic freedom: the case of Hungary, in Maria Slowey and Richard Taylor (editors), For Academic freedom: core value or elite privilege?
- Results of the project were presented by PI Andrea Petö and PA Vlad Terteleac at the CIVICA Research Conference, 1-2 September 2022, Budapest
- Results on the project were presented by PI Alina Dragolea and PA Vlad Terteleac at the following conferences:
- September 2023: Migration, Dialogues, Engaging Research, Policy and Civil Society, The 4th conference of the Romanian Network of Migration Studies (RoMig), Bucharest. Presentation by Alina Dragolea and Vlad Terteleac: Democratic Erosion, Illiberalism and Universities: An Argument for Academic Refugees
- June 2023 - Normative and Conceptual Perspectives on Democratic Resilience, New Europe College, Bucharest.
- Rebeka Bakos (CEU)
- Artemis Photiadou (LSE)
- Vlad Terteleac (SNSPA)
Lead institution: The London School of Economics and Political Science
Other CIVICA members involved: Bocconi University
Focus area: Democracy in the 21st Century
Overview: The project brings together an interdisciplinary team of political scientists, economists, and economic historians to examine the historical drivers of inequality and implications for contemporary rise in populism and polarisation in Europe. Our team will analyse the long-term drivers of regional and social heterogeneity in inequalities and human capital engendered at the juncture of the transition of feudal societies into modern skills-intensive and organizationally incorporated professional workforces in present-day Europe, East and West.
We will look at the ways in which European states build upon institutions and human capital legacies engendered under past orders (during a period spanning the XVIII-XX centuries). We will also discern spatial variations in how modern states have tried to address the inequities resulting from these historically conditioned patterns. Then, we will analyse the consequences for inequality and political polarisation of interaction of institutions developed over a long period of time with historical shocks like famines and epidemics.
The project team held brainstorming webinars and a highly productive workshop.
The workshop was titled “Crises, Inequality and Political Change in Eastern and Western European History” and held 22 September 2022 at Bocconi University in Milan. Workshop participants included an interdisciplinary team of collaborators and invited scholars and discussants representing disciplines of history, historical political economy, political science, and economics, as well as PhD students.
The project allowed researchers to gather historical/ archival data. These data were analysed and draft papers presented within a comparative framework. Tomila Lankina and Alexander Libman then went on to present a revised paper draft titled “Social Structure and Resilience to Economic Shocks: The Russian meshchane and the Volga Famine of 1891-1892” at the University of Chicago Center in Paris, Summer Workshop in the Economic History and Historical Political Economy of Eurasia, May 2023. They are now finalising this paper for submission to the Journal of Historical Political Economy. The paper was also discussed at the Annual National Convention and Exhibition of the American Political Science Association conference in Los Angeles, in September 2023.
Guido Alfani and Matia Fochesato gathered data for the paper "The determinants of wealth inequality in the Republic of Venice (1400-1800)," which they presented at the joint CIVICA Bocconi workshop with LSE scholars, and which is now under evaluation at the Journal of Economic History.
Presently, the project participants are discussing putting together a multi-institutional research project bid.
Project coordinator: Tomila Lankina (LSE)
These six collaborative research projects were funded by the European Union’s Erasmus+ programme, under CIVICA - The European University of Social Sciences.
Additionally, projects receive financing from national funding sources and partners' own resources.
Credit photo: namtipStudio Shutterstock