Ongoing Grants

Funding source: • budget – NCN

Program: OPUS 19

Manager: Anna Kurowska

Project period: January 11, 2021 – December 10, 2026

Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, some families have been directly affected by the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Many people have fallen ill, and some of them have died. However, indirectly, the pandemic has affected almost all families, as most countries in the world have implemented far-reaching social distancing policies, restricting the possibility of traveling abroad, closing schools, kindergartens, nurseries, some workplaces, parks, or other public spaces, and limiting access to shops or places offering various types of services. The aim of our project is to assess the various short- and long-term consequences of policies introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic on the division of domestic and professional responsibilities between partners and their situation in the labor market (type of employment contract, job stability, earnings, position held) in Poland and in an international comparative perspective.

Funding source: • budget – NCN

Program: OPUS 19

Manager: Patrycja Grzebyk

Project period: January 22, 2021 – October 21, 2027

The aim of the project is to prove that the following hypotheses are true: • The current advisory opinion procedure at the International Court of Justice is not an effective tool for resolving legal disputes between states or other entities involved in international relations • The limitations of the advisory opinion procedure affect the value of the opinions themselves, even in other (obviously less contentious) matters • Advisory opinions are disregarded by states in their practice and thus have little impact on the development of positive (treaty-based and customary) international law • A narrow interpretation of requests for advisory opinions and the avoidance of clear answers to the legal issues underlying vaguely formulated requests for legal clarification result in abuses, such as the interpretation of these opinions in bad faith, and thus do not serve the purposeof the states/organizations • The shortcomings identified explain the relatively low interest of states in the advisory opinion procedure • Practice shows that individual UN bodies do not have a consistent approach regarding the usefulness of advisory opinions. As a result of this project, the effectiveness of the advisory opinion procedure will be assessed in light of the objectives of the state or organization that initiated the request for an advisory opinion, as well as the objectives of the ICJ. Attempts to request an advisory opinion that were unsuccessful will also be evaluated. Understanding the very concept of the advisory opinion procedure and its shortcomings will allow states and international organizations to assess whether requesting an advisory opinion is a useful form of dispute resolution. The project will also address the question of how advisory opinions shape international law and how they influence the process of amending that law. The project will also clarify the main obstacles to achieving the full effectiveness of the advisory procedure, which will make it possible to identify the necessary changes that should be introduced into the currently applicable regulations.

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: OPUS 20

Manager: Andrzej Szeptycki

Project period: October 1, 2021 – September 30, 2026

The project aims to analyze armed conflicts in which the Russian Federation has been involved in the post-Cold War period. The main objectives of the project are as follows: assessment of the role of the use of force in contemporary Russian foreign policy; assessment of the specificity of contemporary Russian military actions at the strategic and tactical level; assessment of the adequacy of strategies and means chosen during these conflicts to the objectives pursued and justifying values; assessment of the level of compliance of Russia’s behavior and actions in military operations with relevant norms of international law (including humanitarian law); comparison of Russian and Western ways of conducting wars.

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: OPUS 21

Manager: Marek Madej

Project period: January 18, 2022 – January 17, 2027

This project examines the impact on the functioning of alliances—that is, collective defense organizations—of the development and use of unmanned and autonomous technologies, including unmanned and autonomous weapons, in the course of military operations; these relationships will be analyzed using the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Rapid advances in information technology, automation, robotics, and, more recently, artificial intelligence are bringing about profound changes in the functioning of states and societies. This also applies to the military sphere, where these developments are further compounded—especially in highly developed countries (including NATO members)—by a focus on building the capability to strike the enemy “safely” and “from a distance,” i.e., without the need to deploy significant forces in the theater of operations, which helps minimize costs and the risk of friendly casualties. Unmanned technologies (already in use) and autonomous technologies (currently in the advanced research phase) align well with these trends. Their development and use by NATO member states will, however—if only because of the likely uneven progress in this work among members—affect relations within the organization. Given NATO’s unprecedented potential in world history and its significance for European and global security, this will have serious consequences in the military sphere, for the stability of the international order, but above all for the security of the allies themselves—including Poland, which views NATO as the primary instrument of its security —Poland. All of this underscores the importance of studying the connections between the development of unmanned and autonomous technologies and the functioning of NATO, both for scientific reasons (as an opportunity to better understand the mechanisms of NATO itself, as well as alliances in general) and in the context of Polish security policy. Importantly, despite growing interest among researchers today in both NATO and—even more so—unmanned and autonomous weapons, little attention is currently paid to the connections between these issues. The project will therefore serve three interrelated objectives: 1) to determine the current state of the art in military unmanned and autonomous technologies and their use in combat operations, along with an assessment of the international legal status of such weapons and their use; 2) to comprehensively examine the implications of NATO member states (or their potential rivals) acquiring and using such weapons for the functioning of the Alliance, the ways in which NATO conducts military operations, relations among members, and the international standing of the organization; 3) an assessment of the awareness, among the Alliance’s administration and the authorities of selected member states, of the challenges posed by the development of unmanned and autonomous technologies to NATO and international security.

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: SONATA BIS 11

Manager: Anna Wojciuk

Project period: March 17, 2022 – March 16, 2027

The aim of this project is to examine populists from semi-peripheral countries as foreign policy decision-makers. Our analysis will focus, first, on the ideas put forward by populists regarding how international politics functions, and second, on their diplomatic practices. We understand populism as an ideology that describes society as divided into two groups: “the people” and “corrupt elites.” Both of these groups are described as homogeneous and, at the same time, in conflict with one another. Scholars sometimes describe populism as a so-called “thin-core ideology,” meaning that populism can be combined with other, more elaborate ideologies, such as socialism or nationalism. Populism, however, has its own distinctive characteristics, which we aim to examine in this project. Historically, populists have typically been part of the opposition. An exception to this is Latin America, which has a long and rich history of populists in power. However, over the past decade, this situation has been changing, and in an increasing number of countries, populists are winning elections and becoming decision-makers in key state institutions. The core elements of populist ideology contain relatively little information about international affairs. The populists’ message focuses primarily on domestic issues. However, when populists come to power and must also make decisions regarding foreign policy, it becomes necessary to expand their ideology and broaden it to include international issues. Populists also manage diplomatic affairs and must either adapt to or choose to challenge existing diplomatic practices. We decided to study populists in power rather than in opposition because, first, holding power prompts populists to become more involved in international affairs. And second, because experts sometimes claim that holding high-level office puts certain populist statements to the test. We want to see how this plays out in reality. This fundamental choice leads us to focus our study on so-called semi-peripheral states, since in the so-called “center” of the current international order there are relatively few instances of populists in power. Our research approach assumes that the ideas characterizing political decision-makers influence their behavior, including in critical situations—that is, when key national security interests are at stake. We will use a qualitative methodology to answer two research questions: a) What ideas do populists in power in semi-peripheral states hold regarding the functioning of international relations? b/ What characterizes the diplomatic practices of populists from semi-peripheral states? Our research team will conduct 100 in-depth individual interviews with experts on populism and foreign policy. The interviews will be conducted in five languages. We will also select and analyze hundreds of documents and statements by leaders and government agencies in five languages. Given that there are very few studies in the international literature on populists in power—and, in particular, on their foreign policy—this project will make a significant contribution to the existing body of knowledge on international relations, foreign policy, and populism.

Funding source: budget—NCN

Program: OPUS 22

Manager: Piotr Sosnowski

Project Period: June 27, 2022 – June 26, 2027

Contemporary Iraqi Kurdistan can be described as a de facto state. It functions as an autonomous, internally sovereign entity due to its ability to maintain a monopoly on the use of force within its own territory. Since Iraq adopted its new constitution in 2005, it has attained the status of a legal entity—a federal region—operating officially within the scope defined by that document. Thus, it has de jure legalized the political institutions built up over the years, even though their actual scope of activities and powers clearly extends beyond the framework defined by the letter of the law. Because it has refrained from declaring secession, it is not isolated by the international community, which distinguishes it from other de facto states (such as Transnistria or Somaliland). As a result, it maintains various types of relations with numerous international actors. This enables it to fulfill a range of international roles, such as a partner in the fight against terrorism, a trading partner, a mediator, or a provider of security. More than 150 years later, the Kurds in Iraq have regained the political autonomy they lost in the mid-19th century due to the centralization of the Ottoman Empire. For most of the 19th century and nearly the entire 20th century, the population of Kurdistan failed to reestablish a lasting territorial autonomy even to a degree comparable to that of the Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq. For nearly two hundred years, various Kurdish political entities, in their efforts to achieve territorial autonomy, agreed to act as agents (clients) carrying out the strategic interests of states (patrons) involved in various regional conflicts—such as on the Ottoman-Persian border or, later, in the Iraqi-Iranian rivalry. It was only the role of client during the U.S.-led international interventions in Iraq that proved to be a turning point. The literature on the subject does not explain to what extent Iraqi Kurdistan’s contemporary international roles and practices of interaction with other actors are linked to its experience of asymmetric interactions in the past. It is also difficult to find convincing explanations regarding the motives and benefits that guided states in establishing relations with Kurdish political actors. Nor does it provide a precise answer regarding the specific motives and benefits that guided Kurdish political actors in entering into such asymmetric relationships, or what strategies both the patron and the client employed to ensure the achievement of their intended goals of cooperation. Nor do we know how the population of Iraqi Kurdistan today perceives the motivations and benefits of the asymmetric relationship between Iraqi Kurdistan and Turkey and the United States. These fundamental questions have not yet been answered based on a coherent theoretical and methodological framework. This project aims to fill a significant gap in scholarship by proposing a new approach to understanding and explaining the transformation of the role of an international community aspiring to self-determination. It moves away from narrow definitions of de facto states, which qualify only entities isolated by the international community and thus overlook Iraqi Kurdistan. The study proposes an innovative, coherent theoretical framework that takes into account the key factors initiating a change in the international role and offers a conceptualization of the cause-and-effect mechanism. As part of this project, a qualitative analysis of source materials will be conducted, focused on reconstructing the motivations, benefits, circumstances, and process of fulfilling the role of a stand-in. Based on this, a theoretical model will be developed and verified through the triangulation of qualitative (interviews) and quantitative (questionnaire survey) research. The theoretical and methodological framework developed as part of this project will draw on the theory of asymmetry in international relations, the theory of international roles, and the latest research in the field of de facto states and proxy wars.

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: SONATA 17

Manager: Kamil Ławniczak

Project period: July 7, 2022 – July 6, 2027

The Council of the European Union plays a key role in the EU’s decision-making process and consists of numerous bodies in which representatives of the member states—ranging from civil servants and diplomats to ministers—meet. The focus of this project is the consensual nature of decision-making in the Council—the fact that, in most cases, no dissenting votes are recorded, despite the formal possibility of deciding by a majority rather than unanimously. The prevalence of consensus in the Council is unexpected and surprisingly stable. A weakness of previous approaches is their insufficient consideration of the practical aspects of officials’ work within the Council. It is essential to adopt new approaches that will allow for a better understanding of what happens within this institution with regard to consensus. The aim of this project is to determine how negotiators understand the meaning of their actions leading to a situation in which none of them openly opposes the solution under discussion, including whether there is a tension between the duty to represent the government and the practice of consensus. The approach proposed in this project is innovative because it focuses on how consensus is understood by the people whose actions actually produce consensual decisions. The project is empirically and problem-oriented and aligns with the so-called “practical turn.” The project adopts an interpretivist methodology, typically combined with qualitative methods, particularly field research, aimed at generating rich and in-depth empirical data. Interpretive social sciences place the construction of meaning—that is, how people understand their lifeworld, including their own actions—at the center of researchers’ attention. The main method of data collection in the project is individual in-depth interviews conducted during fieldwork (in Brussels and Warsaw). The project will deepen our understanding of consensus-based decision-making in the Council and will constitute a substantive contribution to the development of the research field, a methodological and theoretical contribution to the discipline, as well as yield results relevant to society. Consensus can have both a strengthening and a weakening effect on the legitimacy of power at the EU level, depending on what it signifies within the decision-making process. Its meaning can encompass ideas of equality and cooperation, but also asymmetrical relations of power and coercion.

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: OPUS 23

Manager: Alicja Curanović

Project Period: January 27, 2023 – January 26, 2028

Many were surprised that the majority of Russians supported the annexation of Crimea. The annexation of part of a neighboring country’s territory seemed to the West like a relic of the past, as reflected in Angela Merkel’s famous comment that “Putin has lost touch with reality.” It is true that the Russian authorities sought to present the annexation as an act that met certain formal (legal) requirements—hence, among other things, the organization of a referendum. However, for most Russians, these were not the main reason for their (often enthusiastic) acceptance of the decision to annex Crimea. In the popular perception, the annexation of Crimea may not have been entirely legal, but it certainly constituted an act of justice (Russian: не совсем легально, но справедливо). The aim of this project is to analyze how Russia understands (in)justice in international relations. The project will help reconstruct how and why Russia invokes justice (and injustice) in its foreign policy. The goal is to find answers to four questions: (1) What is the content of the discourse on justice in Russian foreign policy?; (2) In what contexts does Russia invoke justice in relation to international relations?; (3) What roles does the discourse on justice play in Russian foreign policy?; (4) What are the implications of the Russian understanding of justice for Russia’s vision of the international order, for the legitimization of its actions on the international stage, and for its attitude toward the ongoing shift in the global balance of power? The research focuses on the role of ideas in foreign policy, analyzed through the lens of official Russian discourse. The study will cover discourse from 2012 to 2022. Undertaking this research is important given the current geopolitical situation. As the material foundations of the West’s position have weakened, so too has its ability to uphold liberal ideas. While China is growing stronger and tensions between it and the West are rising, Russia appears to be a key element in any future balance of power. For this reason, it is important to examine why Russia criticizes the current order and what kind of new order it would be willing to support. In the field of international relations, the prevailing view is that states prioritize the importance of order over considerations of justice. This is true, though it should be remembered that any order must satisfy at least minimal notions of what is just in order to be perceived as legitimate and to be sustainable. Describing how Russia approaches justice (and injustice) helps us understand Moscow’s actions on the international stage. Moreover, it provides insight into what kind of future world order Russia would consider just. The findings of the research conducted as part of this project will allow us to better understand—and thus respond appropriately to—another potential “Crimean scenario”—“not entirely legal, but just.” This is particularly important in light of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In light of Russian aggression, questions about the role of justice—or, more broadly, of ideals—in foreign policy may seem trivial and irrelevant. Paradoxically, however, they are more important today than ever before. Relying solely on the logic of force to explain Russia’s actions will not lead to a lasting peaceful solution in Europe. To the best of my knowledge, there are no scholarly studies dedicated to an in-depth analysis of how Russia understands (in)justice in international relations. This project aims to fill that gap. Furthermore, it will strengthen our understanding of Russia’s process of self-identification and its connections to Russian foreign policy. The project’s findings will make a significant contribution to the discussion on the role of justice and, more broadly, ideas in foreign policy.

Funding institution: budget – NCN

Program: PRELUDIUM BIS 4

Manager: Maria Theiss

Project period: October 1, 2023 – September 30, 2027

Political science research to date shows that social benefits and services influence the political attitudes and behaviors of beneficiaries and those around them. Mechanisms referred to as the “resource effect” and the “symbolic effect” mean that, thanks in part to the money received, the skills acquired, social contacts formed, and symbolic messages accompanying benefits and services, people often change the way they think about whether they themselves or others are “full-fledged citizens” of the state and whether they “deserve” assistance; they also change their political preferences or feel more or less inclined than before to participate in elections. As a result, certain social policy programs become entrenched or are modified relatively quickly—a phenomenon known as the policy feedback mechanism. The planned project aims to take an innovative look at this mechanism of policy feedback in social policy by attempting to determine the significance of the places and spaces where social benefits and services are provided. Using the example of services and benefits for two groups at risk of social exclusion—refugees and youth from families living in poverty—the project team will seek to determine how the spatial characteristics of these locations and the ways they are managed can produce the aforementioned effects: resource-related and symbolic. The study will thus help determine how, for example, the location of a community center, the space where street outreach takes place, the accessibility of a location where counseling services are provided, the management of overnight shelters for refugees (whether it is managed by local government or, for example, a nongovernmental organization, and how various actors collaborate within it), and other factors translate into the political identities, beliefs, attitudes, and political actions of three groups of actors: service recipients, aid providers, and the local community. The project posits that these spatial characteristics of the sites and the ways they are managed are decisive for the implementation of inclusive social policy at the local level. The research will primarily consist of comparative case studies in two or three cities, including several service delivery sites in each. It will involve observation at selected sites, conducting individual in-depth interviews with service providers and recipients, and analyzing local discourse (including beliefs expressed in official and social media regarding whether beneficiaries “deserve” assistance). The selection of study sites will be preceded by an analysis of legal regulations and a survey of representatives from social welfare services and local civil society organizations in 50 cities.

Funding source: budget—Ministry of Science and Higher Education

Program: NPRH – National Heritage

Manager: Elżbieta Kossewska

Project period: April 3, 2024 – April 2, 2029

The goal of the project is to prepare for publication a selection of documents, materials, and correspondence concerning the lives and works of Jewish refugees associated with the biweekly newspaper *Nasza Trybuna*, published in New York from 1939 to 1950. After Poland regained its independence, a small but active group of assimilated Jewish intellectuals entered a phase of developing a magnificent modern secular culture, which was interrupted by the outbreak of World War II. This culture found its continuation in Jewish refugee communities, one of which was the community of Jewish refugees organized around *Nasza Trybuna* in New York. This study will demonstrate the significance of the publication in cultural, political, and informational terms. The materials demonstrate the importance of Polish culture and national heritage in the lives of the Polish-influenced Jewish community that settled in the United States during World War II and after its end. The project will document the achievements of Jewish refugees in the fields of literature, journalism, and culture, as well as their efforts to preserve the Polish language. The project will also present the relationships of Jewish refugees with major Jewish centers around the world, as well as international relations—primarily with the Polish Government-in-Exile in London and the representative body of the Jewish community in Palestine. The political issues presented in the project illustrate matters related to cultural and national identity. The subject of the research encompasses the Jewish refugee community centered primarily around the Representation of Polish Jews in America and the Association of Jewish Refugees from Poland, both associated with the biweekly “Nasza Trybuna,” a popular publication aimed at Jewish communities worldwide between 1939 and 1950. The legacy of this community is evidence of a profound attachment to Polish culture and undoubtedly represents a magnificent chapter in the history of Polish Jews. This research will seek to document Polish-Jewish relations and their shared cultural heritage.

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: SONATA 19

Manager: Olga Lavrinenko

Project period: November 4, 2024 – November 3, 2027

The project aims to expand on existing theory, analytical tools, and empirical foundations for studying the impact of gender equality at the national level, individual attitudes toward gender roles, and the relationship between these factors on gender gaps in political participation. Gender gaps in political participation refer to differences in the extent and ways in which women and men engage in political activities (Abendschön & Steinmetz, 2014; Quaranta & Dotti Sani, 2018). According to the literature, women are more likely to participate in politics in non-institutional rather than institutional forms, and in individual rather than collective forms (Coffé & Bolzendahl, 2010; Lorenzini & Bassoli, 2015). These gaps are most often attributed to three main factors: (1) differences in available resources (Burns et al., 2018; Liu, 2022); (2) differing attitudes toward gender roles (Morales & Giugni, 2016; Fakih & Sleiman, 2022); and (3) the level of gender equality at the national level (Fraile & Gomez, 2017; Quaranta & Dotti Sani, 2018). Despite the existence of extensive comparative research on gender gaps in political participation, the literature contains significant gaps that require attention. These include: Insufficient research on various forms of political participation (e.g., voting, signing petitions, participating in strikes). Insufficient analysis of the impact of attitudes toward gender roles and gender equality at the national level on these gaps. A lack of in-depth understanding of the relationship between attitudes toward gender roles and gender equality. The predominance of a one-dimensional approach to attitudes toward gender roles. The absence of a robust, conceptually and empirically grounded indicator measuring gender equality in Europe. Accordingly, the project is based on three key research questions: How and to what extent do individual attitudes toward gender roles and gender equality at the national level influence gender gaps in various forms of political participation? How do individual attitudes toward gender roles and gender equality at the national level interact with one another, and how does this influence gender gaps in political participation? How are aggregated attitudes toward gender roles and gender equality at the macro level interrelated, and how do they influence each other over time? Based on these questions, three sets of working hypotheses were formulated to test the impact of gender equality, individual attitudes, and their interrelationships on gender gaps in various forms of political participation. The project is based on the ex-post harmonization of secondary cross-sectional data from the European Values Study (EVS) and the European Social Survey (ESS) as well as administrative sources (e.g., the Maddison Project Database, Polity V, and Varieties of Democracy). All data planned for use are publicly available with no restrictions on their use. The main source of microdata on political participation, attitudes toward gender roles, and control variables is the EVS, covering the years 1999–2021 (third wave: 1999–2001, fourth: 2008–2010, fifth: 2017–2021). Additionally, these data will be linked with the ESS to include questions about contacting politicians as a form of political participation. The synchronization of the two surveys is based on the ESS rounds from 2002, 2010, and 2020. In total, the analysis will cover 35 countries (primarily in the European Union and the European Economic Area), and the cumulative micro-level sample will include approximately 200,000 respondents. The data will be analyzed using advanced statistical methods, such as two-level polynomial regression and seemingly unrelated regression (SUR).

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: OPUS 25

Manager: Jakub Zajączkowski

Project period: August 12, 2024 – August 11, 2028

The aim of the project is to examine the reactions of five emerging powers of the Global South (Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa) to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in the context of their perceptions of the international order, whose roots stem from concepts developed in the countries of the Global North. This analysis will make it possible to examine their stance toward the current international order and its main tenets in a broader sense than just Russia’s aggression and war. The project’s main hypothesis posits that the emerging powers of the Global South have used Russian aggression to strengthen their strategic autonomy and improve their position in the contemporary world order, rather than attempting to reform it. Given the tradition of commitment among these Global South states to the norms of international law and the principles of the international community—including the principle of state sovereignty, the prohibition of aggression, and the protection of civilians from international crimes, one would expect their response to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine to be consistent with that of the Global North. However, it has become apparent that there is a clear divide between the Global South and the Global North regarding the perception and interpretation of the contemporary international order and the ways to respond to challenges. Given the growing role of Global South countries, this divergence poses a significant challenge to the implementation of the principles of the contemporary international order, as well as to the leadership and role of Western powers within that order. The scale of the problem is illustrated by the Global South’s failure to comply with Western-imposed sanctions against Russia, which has consequently significantly weakened the effectiveness of this instrument of pressure on the aggressor. It is therefore worth examining how countries of the Global South perceive and interpret the war in Ukraine and—in a broader context—how they relate to the main principles and foundations of the existing international order.Their growing role in international relations will, in fact, be significant for future modifications to the international order, both globally and regionally. The project will be carried out through an analysis of the reactions and positions of key emerging powers in the Global South regarding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This, in turn, will allow for an empirical verification of the Global South’s approach to the contemporary international order and an assessment of whether these states are striving for its fundamental reform or, as the project’s hypothesis posits, are more determined.

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: PRELUDE 23

Manager: Emil Chról

Project period: January 17, 2025 – January 16, 2028

Ukraine is currently experiencing a cultural renaissance, redefining its identity and distancing itself from Russian influence. This transformation is key to understanding the dynamics of national identity in the context of conflict and the post-conflict period. The project addresses a significant research gap by analyzing how the ongoing war and migration processes influence the formation of identity. The innovative aspect of this research lies in its combination of discourse analysis, everyday social practices, and national identity in the context of recent sociopolitical changes. The findings will contribute to the academic debate on national identity, providing important insights for shaping policies and social practices that support integration and stabilization in the region. The TheseusUA project aims to examine the social practices and identity transformations of contemporary Ukrainians in the context of dynamic sociopolitical changes (such as war, migration, and integration with the European Union). The main research question concerns the mechanisms of identity and self-identification. The goal is to understand how contemporary events influence national identity and the everyday practices of Ukrainians. An analysis of discourse and practices will also allow us to examine how national identity and distinctiveness from Russia are represented in various cultural domains, such as literature, film, art, and music. The research data will also reveal the mechanisms through which new national symbols of Ukraine are taking shape. In light of the above, it is reasonable to divide the chronological progression of events in Ukraine into two phases: 1991–2014 and 2014–2022 and the period thereafter.

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: OPUS 27

Manager: Saroj Kumar Aryal

Project period: February 10, 2025 – February 9, 2028

This project delves into the multifaceted aspects of security cooperation between South Korea and the European Union, with the aim of strengthening cooperation and strategic alignment. It analyzes South Korea’s growing role as a global defense actor, focusing on its deepening defense diplomacy with the EU. It identifies Poland as a key player in facilitating a broader Korea-EU security partnership-EU security partnership, given South Korea’s recent major defense contracts with Poland and growing military cooperation, which could serve as a springboard for broader EU engagement. The project focuses on three key areas: uncovering multidimensional security cooperation, developing policy recommendations for stronger ties, and analyzing the domestic policies of European countries to understand the challenges associated with South Korean arms exports to the EU. It seeks to unravel the future trajectory of the transcontinental security architecture by analyzing the interconnections between South Korea, Europe, and transatlantic security structures, such as NATO. Through a comprehensive analysis, the project aims to develop policy recommendations that strengthen Korea-EU security ties, contributing to peace and stability in the region, and to assess the implications of a potential transcontinental security partnership between the EU and South Korea. By fostering a deeper understanding of the strategic motivations of both sides, the project seeks to enrich the discourse on global security and international defense cooperation.

Funding agency: FERS

Manager: Paweł Hut

Project period: December 1, 2024 – December 31, 2027

The Social Development project aims to comprehensively modernize the operational system of the Voluntary Labor Corps (OHP) as a labor market institution. The project leader is the OHP Headquarters, and the partners are: the University of Warsaw, the Korczak University—Academy of Applied Sciences, the Young Science Foundation, and the Active Rehabilitation Foundation “FAR.” The main objective of the project is to develop, test, and implement a uniform quality standard for services provided by the OHP, one that takes into account both the needs of young people—particularly those at risk of social exclusion—and the expectations of employers. The new standard will be based on the principles of universal design and will include a support module for people with disabilities, as well as a functional description of an IT tool for monitoring it. The project consists of five main tasks: analyzing and researching the needs of young people and OHP institutions; developing the standard; piloting it in selected units; fully implementing it; and carrying out management and administrative activities. Plans also include the creation of training programs and e-learning courses for 520 OHP employees to prepare staff to apply the new solutions. Particular attention has been paid to ensuring the accessibility of services and eliminating geographical, organizational, and health-related barriers. The new standard will include, among other things: educational procedures and methods, career support pathways, descriptions of labor market services and instruments, job position guidelines, infrastructure elements adapted to the needs of people with disabilities, and legislative recommendations. The project will contribute to strengthening the OHP institutionally, increasing the effectiveness of its youth-focused activities, and building the OHP’s image as a modern, open, and professional labor market institution.

Funding Agency: Ministry of Science and Higher Education (commissioned work)

Manager: Jacek Męcina

Project period: February 6, 2025 – October 31, 2026

The project aims to implement measures to support anti-bullying and anti-discrimination policies at Polish universities. Issues related to workplace harassment, inappropriate behavior, and mistreatment in the workplace and academic settings are among the most significant challenges today, and the academic community must be prepared to address them. Therefore, as part of the project, an analysis will be conducted of the activities carried out to date by individual universities in the area of preventing and stopping inappropriate practices. The measures taken in this regard will be identified through qualitative research, a self-assessment survey, and audits. We will focus on public and private universities from across the country, with various academic profiles. The audits will identify best practices in anti-bullying and anti-discrimination, which will be recognized during the conference concluding the project. At the same time, these practices will be described in a publication summarizing the project’s implementation. This will lead to the development of recommendations for improving working and learning conditions so that, in the future, higher education institutions in Poland can foster an atmosphere conducive to cooperation and relationships based on respect, free from undesirable behavior.

Funding Agency: Ministry of Science and Higher Education (Pearls of Science)

Manager: Jakub Chustecki

Project period: April 14, 2025 – April 13, 2027

The goal of the project titled “Posttotalitarianism—An Attempt at Reconceptualization” is to redefine the concept of posttotalitarianism and to highlight the exceptionally broad denotative scope of this concept. In order to define post-totalitarianism as precisely as possible, it is necessary to analyze all the components of classical totalitarian regimes in relation to the present day. Researchers of classical totalitarian regimes, in addition to the psychological characteristics of totalitarian societies mentioned above, have also highlighted the significant importance of systemic factors (Friedrich and Brzeziński, Hertz, Scruton). Analyses of post-totalitarianism must therefore also take into account institutional and systemic elements.

Funding Agency: Ministry of Science and Higher Education (commissioned work)

Manager: Zbigniew Lasocik

Project period: June 10, 2025 – December 31, 2027

The goal of the project is to create a database on human trafficking and forced labor in Poland, based on an analysis of criminal cases involving these crimes. The research plan includes an analysis of 100 criminal cases from 2011 to 2023. The research will address key questions from the perspective of state policy on eliminating human trafficking and forced labor: what is the profile of the victims of these crimes, who are the perpetrators, what is the modus operandi of criminal groups, and what is the initial response to the crime. The empirical data will also help answer questions regarding the types of spaces where human trafficking occurs, their social and economic characteristics, their boundaries, their environment, and whether they differ in terms of the victims’ gender. A qualitative analysis of selected criminal cases aims to reflect their social distribution, which will allow us to view the phenomenon of human trafficking as a social problem that is not evenly distributed across our social landscape. The result of these analyses will be the creation of a database model of human trafficking in Poland.

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: PRELUDE 24

Manager: Julia Dobrowolska

Project period: January 20, 2026 – January 19, 2027

The goal of the project is to analyze methods for combating disinformation in Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. The project aims to provide practical recommendations for Poland and other EU countries on building resilience against disinformation. Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia are the only countries that were part of the former Soviet Union and are currently members of both the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which makes their information space particularly vulnerable to Russian influence. In these Baltic countries, the victims of disinformation are mainly Russian-speaking minorities, whom Russia uses as a tool to advance its interests in the region. The Baltic states possess valuable experience and practical knowledge regarding effective methods for countering disinformation and minimizing its consequences for the affected societies. In addition to analyzing legal regulations and strategic documents, the project involves conducting interviews with representatives of government, the media, civil society, researchers, and experts actively involved in efforts to combat disinformation in the aforementioned countries. This will enable the identification of best practices in combating disinformation, media literacy, and cooperation both within national frameworks and within international structures.

Funding source: budget – NCN

Program: PRELUDE 24

Manager: Eugeniusz Kuznicow-Wyszyński

Project period: February 2, 2026 – February 1, 2027

The Polish Card is a special document issued by the Polish government to people of Polish descent living abroad. Its purpose is to strengthen ties with Poland and affirm membership in the national community. Cardholders gain not only symbolic recognition but also concrete privileges, ranging from assistance with settling in, through access to education, to the possibility of obtaining citizenship. Although the Polish Card appears to be a technical document, it actually serves a complex function: it shapes identity, emotions, life choices, and transnational relationships. The aim of this research project is an in-depth analysis of the Polish Card as a tool of state policy toward the diaspora. The study focuses on its impact in three selected countries: Ukraine, Belarus, and the Czech Republic—countries with diverse approaches to national minorities, varying relationships with Poland, and different models of social integration. This selection allows for a comparison of the Polish Card’s impact in both post-Soviet and EU contexts, as well as consideration of different types of diaspora: migrants, descendants of former settlers, and indigenous communities. The project is interdisciplinary in nature and is based on qualitative research: interviews with holders of the Polish Card, representatives of institutions (e.g., the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, consulates, Polish diaspora organizations), an analysis of legal documents and state strategies, as well as media discourse in Poland and the countries of residence. The researchers will pay particular attention to the motivations of those who decided to obtain the Polish Card, as well as those who, despite being formally eligible, consciously chose not to apply for the document. This approach will help us understand not only the effects but also the limits of the state’s influence. The project addresses important questions: • What are the main motivations and barriers associated with the decision to apply for (or not apply for) the Polish Card in Ukraine, Belarus, and the Czech Republic, and how do they differ depending on the sociopolitical context of each country? • What are the experiences of Polish Card holders in symbolic (identity-related) and practical (legal, social) terms, and how do these experiences influence their daily lives and their migration, educational, or career choices? • How are the Polish Card and Poland’s broader policy toward the diaspora perceived by institutions and societies in the countries of residence; what factors influence these perceptions; and what tensions and challenges arise in relations between Poland, countries of residence, and communities of Polish descent? The research will result in Poland’s first empirical and comparative analysis of the Polish Card from the perspective of its users—holders and potential holders of the document—rather than solely from the perspective of the state institutions that issue it. The project introduces an innovative bottom-up perspective to the discussion about the Polish Card, which has thus far been dominated by legal and political approaches. This will make it possible to capture real-life experiences, emotions, motivations, and barriers that are not apparent in official documents. The uniqueness of the project also lies in its comparative nature—that is, in examining how the Polish Card functions in three countries with different political systems, legal cultures, and approaches to national minorities. For the first time, the post-Soviet realities of Belarus and Ukraine will be compared with the EU’s policy toward minorities in the Czech Republic. This approach will reveal not only the universal mechanisms underlying the Polish Card, but also the differences arising from the sociopolitical context. The research findings will be published as peer-reviewed academic articles in Poland and abroad, and will also be made available in a way that is understandable and useful to those directly concerned—communities of Polish descent. The project will contribute to strengthening public and academic debate on diaspora policy, integration strategies, and challenges related to transnational identity in contemporary Central and Eastern Europe. Its findings will also help improve the migration policies implemented by government institutions.

Funding Agency: Ministry of Science and Higher Education (commissioned project)

Manager: Jacek Męcina

Project period: July 28, 2026 – September 30, 2027

The project aims to implement measures that support the development of systematic and sustainable cooperation between the scientific community, the business sector, and public institutions. In response to labor market challenges, rapid technological changes (robotization, automation, artificial intelligence) and the needs of a knowledge-based economy, the project aims to identify best practices in science-business collaboration, foster an environment conducive to forming partnerships, and develop practical recommendations regarding models for universities’ collaboration with the socio-economic environment. The project has been designed to complement the activities carried out by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education and institutions within the innovation support system. Project activities will be structured around three pillars: I) Cooperation Ecosystem – identifying the entrepreneurial and academic communities, analyzing existing forms of university-socioeconomic environment collaboration, and organizing networking events to facilitate the exchange of experiences and the initiation of new science-business partnerships; II) Research and Best Practices – preparation and implementation of qualitative research, analysis of best practices in university-business collaboration, including existing Stakeholder Councils. As part of this pillar, a series of expert seminars will also be organized to discuss recommendations regarding cooperation models; III) Technological transformation as a key area of development – analysis of the impact of digitization, robotization, automation, and artificial intelligence on the economy, the labor market, and the higher education system.