Publications of Andrew Cartwright

Different Horizons: Aid, Trade and Official Development Assistance in Hungary

State development assistance is constantly changing. There are new countries involved such as Turkey, Brazil and Venezuela and the central and eastern members of the European Union. Not so long ago, some of these new donors were themselves recipients of grant, cheap loans and technical assistance. Their status as emerging democracies or transition countries gives them an alternative perspective on development co-operation and external support, and for some of the more established international development organizations, this can translate into a different kind of solidarity, less tinged with ambivalent post-colonial relations. Non-state development assistance is also changing in size and importance; in some fields, private philanthropy outspends state programs tenfold; in other cases, lines between business and development are blurred as more and more companies participate in actions that are part profit making but also with a clear social agenda. Although the stress is on partnerships, there are still those involved in development that stress more political agendas, for example, cross border democracy promotion and the different colour revolutions. In this context, it is worthwhile having a clearer idea of just who are these new development actors and how far are they working to traditional models of development assistance and support? What is the actual meaning of partnership within countries and between countries? How does one country get to be a priority partner and what does the general public think of all these efforts to improve living standards abroad? This report represents the Hungarian chapter of a nine country inventory of current development practices in central and eastern Europe. Led by the Center for Economic Development in Sofia, it is the first systematic attempt to provide detailed information and analysis on Official Development Assistance in these countries and the respective roles of the civic and private sector in both policy and practice. We hope that it can make a useful contribution to debates on the future of this emerging sector.

Cartwright A. None of Us Could Have Been Against Consolidation in Principle. A Short History of Market and Policy Failure in Central Eastern Europe. In: Dawson AC, Laura Zanotti, Vaccaro I, editors. Negotiating Territoriality: Spatial Dialogues Between State and Tradition . New York: Routledge; 2014. p. 65-79. (Routledge Studies in Anthropology).

Monitoring Committees in Cohesion Policy: Overseeing the Distribution of Structural Funds in Hungary and Slovakia

Under European Union (EU) law, Monitoring Committees (MCs) are charged with overseeing the implementation of Operational Programmes. Despite their potential to influence the process of fund disbursement, relatively little is known about the Committees’ operation and their impact in the new member states. This article is an empirical study of how three MCs actually work in Hungary and Slovakia. We find that whilst these bodies have relatively limited oversight capacities and are characterised by a primary concern with procedural compliance with EU requirements, nevertheless, they have an important role in providing significant opportunities for learning, information exchange, expert input and networking.

Re-visiting the Partnership Principle in Cohesion Policy: The Role of Civil Society Organisations in Structural Funds Monitoring

This article investigates the horizontal dimension of partnership arrangements in cohesion policy in three EU Member States: Austria, Hungary and Slovakia. The focus is on the practice of the monitoring committees (MCs), the primary institutional expression of partnership in the distribution of Structural Funds. The main findings are that in each country NGO participation in the MCs remained contentious, the working of the committees was rather formalistic, and the bodies' purpose and role conceptions were ambiguous. The implication is that partnership as currently practised does not live up either to normative expectations suggested by the EU regulation of the committees or to the expectations of civil society partner organizations themselves.

Cartwright A. Is the Village Dying? Development and Transition. 2009;(14).
Cartwright A. The integration of rural areas through regional development institutions. In: Goymen K, editor. Bolgesel Kalkinma Ajanslari. Istanbul: Istanbul Policy Centre; 2007.
Cartwright A. Story of the land. Vol 77.; 2004. (Anthropology Quarterly; vol 77; no 4).
Cartwright A. Private Farming in Romania or What Are the Old People Going to Do with Their Land?’. In: Hann CM, editor. The Postsocialist Agrarian Question. Munster: LIT Verlag ; 2003. p. 171-88. (Halle Studies in the Ethnography of Eurasia).
Cartwright A. Reforming property law in Eastern and Central Europe. In: L.Cooke, editor. Modern Studies in Property Law, Vol. I: Property 2000. Oxford: Hart Publishing; 2001. p. 341-57.
Cartwright A. Land, legality and rural development. In: Bartkowiak P, Nowak C, editors. Management in Diversification of Rural Areas. Warsaw: Wyydawnictwa Naukowo-Techniczne; 2001. p. 14-22.

Compact relations – Charities and the New Deal

Charities are playing a significant role in the implementation of the government’s New Deal programme. From providing advice on local employment issues to administrative services to work placements, the voluntary sector has been working in public/private partnerships throughout England and Wales. However, despite the government’s commitments in the Compact between it and the voluntary sector to support the independence and creativity of the sector, the New Deal for 18–24 year olds reinforces many of the negative sides to the ‘contract culture’. This article will examine working relations between charities and the State post compact, using charities’ participation in New Deal as a case study. We will argue that participating charities face a series of potential legal pitfalls. They might also find that, instead of being fully funded through State funds, their participation in the delivery of New Deal is partially funded through their own charitable resources.

Cartwright A. Reconstructing the past in the village: Land reform in Transylvania 1990-91. In: Cipăianu G, Ţârâu V, editors. Romanian and British Historians on the Contemporary History of Romania. Cluj-Napoca: Cluj-Napoca University Press; 2000. p. 167-86.
Cartwright A. Knowing land – problems in reconstructing private property in post-Communist Romania. In: Light D, Phinnemore D, editors. Post-Communist Romania – Geographical Perspectives. Liverpool: Liverpool Hope Press; 2000. p. 43-54.