This study investigates the structural evolution and projected trajectory of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across the EU27 from 1990 to 2030, with a particular focus on their implications for the effectiveness of European climate policy. Drawing on official sectoral data and employing a multi-method framework combining time series modelling (ARIMA), machine learning (Random Forest), regime-switching analysis, and segmented linear regression, we assess past dynamics, detect structural shifts, and forecast future trends. Empirical findings, based on Markov-switching models and segmented regression analysis, indicate a statistically significant regime change around 2014, marking a transition to a new emissions pattern characterised by a deceleration in reduction rates. While the energy sector experienced the most significant decline, agriculture and industry have gained relative prominence, underscoring their growing strategic importance as targets for policy interventions. Hybrid ARIMA–ML forecasts indicate that, under current trajectories, the EU is unlikely to meet its 2030 Fit for 55 targets without adaptive and sector-specific interventions, with a projected shortfall of 12–15 percentage points relative to 1990 levels, excluding LULUCF. The results underscore critical weaknesses in the EU’s climate policy architecture and reveal a clear need for transformative recalibration. Without accelerated action and strengthened governance mechanisms, the post-2014 regime risks entrenching a plateau in emissions reductions, jeopardising long-term climate objectives.

Evaluating national climate policy performance requires frameworks that integrate multiple dimensions while accommodating diverse development pathways. This study develops a Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) framework to construct a Climate Policy Performance Index (CPPI) for 187 countries. The index integrates four dimensions—mitigation, adaptation, economic capacity, and governance—using explicit utility functions and policy-aligned weights derived from climate policy priorities. Data are drawn from the Global Carbon Project, ND-GAIN Country Index, and World Bank indicators. Results reveal substantial cross-national heterogeneity, with CPPI scores ranging from 33.67 (Turkmenistan) to 78.46 (Norway). Nordic countries lead with balanced excellence across dimensions, while alternative high-performance pathways emerge through mitigation leadership (Uruguay, Costa Rica) or governance-economy strength (Singapore). Regional analysis identifies Europe as the top-performing region (mean = 59.92), whereas Sub-Saharan Africa achieves unexpectedly high rankings despite low emissions, owing to weak institutional capacity. The relationship between income and climate performance is non-monotonic: lower-middle-income countries achieve comparable aggregate scores to high-income nations, with near-perfect mitigation performance compensating for weaker governance. Sensitivity analysis shows that ranking robustness is comparable across equal, adaptation-focused, and multiplicative weighting schemes (Spearman's ρ > 0.83), whereas mitigation-focused weights yield substantially different orderings (ρ = 0.47). The CPPI correlates moderately with ND-GAIN (r = 0.40) and weakly negatively with CO₂ per capita (r = −0.28), indicating the framework captures distinct aspects of climate policy performance. The proposed methodology advances beyond existing indices by providing axiomatic foundations, transparent utility specifications, and comprehensive sensitivity analysis, offering a theoretically grounded tool for cross-national climate policy evaluation.

Evaluating national climate policy performance requires frameworks that integrate multiple dimensions while accommodating diverse development pathways. This study develops a Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) framework to construct a Climate Policy Performance Index (CPPI) for 187 countries. The index integrates four dimensions—mitigation, adaptation, economic capacity, and governance—using explicit utility functions and policy-aligned weights derived from climate policy priorities. Results reveal substantial cross-national heterogeneity, with CPPI scores ranging from 33.67 (Turkmenistan) to 78.46 (Norway). Nordic countries lead with balanced excellence across dimensions, while alternative high-performance pathways emerge through mitigation leadership (Uruguay and Costa Rica) or governance–economy strength (Singapore). Regional analysis identifies Europe as the top-performing region, whereas Sub-Saharan Africa achieves unexpectedly high rankings despite low emissions owing to weak institutional capacity. The relationship between income and climate performance is non-monotonic: lower-middle-income countries achieve aggregate scores comparable to those of high-income nations, with near-perfect mitigation performance compensating for weaker governance. Sensitivity analysis shows that ranking robustness is comparable across equal, adaptation-focused, and multiplicative weighting schemes, whereas mitigation-focused weights yield substantially different orderings (ρ = 0.47). The CPPI correlates moderately with ND-GAIN (r = 0.40) and weakly and negatively with CO₂ per capita (r = −0.28), indicating that the framework captures distinct aspects of climate policy performance. The proposed methodology advances beyond existing indices by providing axiomatic foundations, transparent utility specifications, and comprehensive sensitivity analysis, offering a theoretically grounded tool for cross-national climate policy evaluation.

Стаття зосереджується на дослідженні того, як міжнародні організації сприяють вирішенню сучасних глобальних конфліктів. Значення дослідження полягає у необхідності створення надійного механізму вирішення конфліктів та сприяння миру, що дозволяє розвивати інноваційні підходи до міжнародного співробітництва. Основними викликами є відсутність співпраці між організаціями, бюрократичний характер процедур, слабкі інститути в певних регіонах та відсутність ефективних механізмів профілактичної дипломатії. Мета полягає в тому, щоб визнати роль міжнародних організацій у вирішенні сучасних міжнародних конфліктів, оцінити їх ефективність у виконанні миротворчих, гуманітарних та функцій безпеки та запропонувати підвищення їх ефективності у вирішенні сучасних глобальних проблем. У дослідженні використовується цілий ряд дослідницьких методів, таких як порівняльний та історичний аналіз, синтез та систематичний підхід. Представлений всебічний аналіз глобальних організацій, що беруть участь у вирішенні сучасних конфліктів, підкреслюючи вагомий внесок кожної організації у підтримку миру та стабільності. Визнано, що міжнародні організації мають суттєвий вплив на вирішення конфліктів за допомогою різних механізмів впливу. Досліджуються юридичні основи участі міжнародних організацій у миротворчих місіях. Зазначається, що залучення міжнародних організацій до миротворчих процесів спирається на набір юридичних механізмів, які регулюють їхню діяльність в умовах збройного конфлікту та в постконфліктному періоді: міжнародні договори, резолюції, конвенції, а також статути організацій, які визначають їх повноваження та умови. Зазначено основні напрями впливу міжнародних організацій, що дає зрозуміти, як глобальна спільнота вирішує конфлікти, визначивши найефективніші інструменти та ситуації, коли їх використання має вирішальне значення. Обґрунтовано роль провідних міжнародних організацій у сучасних конфліктах. Визначено проблеми та перспективи глобальних організацій. Обговорені ключові напрями прогресу та інноваційні стратегії вдосконалення роботи міжнародних організацій у контексті сучасних конфліктів. У висновках зазначено, що визначення ролі міжнародних організацій у контексті сучасних міжнародних конфліктів дозволяє оцінити ефективність існуючих механізмів реагування на міжнародні кризи та збройні конфлікти, що дає змогу визначити ключові сфери діяльності, посилити здатність окремих держав, зокрема України, ефективно співпрацювати з міжнародними структурами.

Achieving environmental Sustainable Development Goals is a central priority of global climate policy, yet whether ambitious regulatory frameworks translate into measurable acceleration of environmental progress remains empirically underexplored due to the lack of causal identification designs. The purpose of this study was to assess the causal impact of the European Green Deal on the trajectories of four environmental SDGs in EU-27 member states relative to non-EU European countries. A quasi-experimental difference-in-differences framework was applied to a balanced panel of 39 European countries over the period 2010-2023, incorporating two-way country and year fixed effects, country-clustered standard errors, and a set of time-varying controls. It was established that during 2020-2023 the European Green Deal did not generate statistically significant improvements in SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), or SDG 13 (Climate Action) relative to the control group. A marginally significant deterioration was identified for SDG 15 (Life on Land), indicating a relative short-run decline in biodiversity indicators within the EU. Heterogeneity analysis revealed that newer member states and lower-income countries experienced significantly worse climate-action outcomes. The robustness of the findings was confirmed through placebo tests, alternative control-group specifications, and COVID-19 sensitivity analysis. The results can inform climatepolicy practitioners and public administrators seeking to strengthen implementation mechanisms and financing for the biodiversity and land-use components of EU policy.

Addressing the global imperative of sustainable development requires a comprehensive, data- driven understanding of how individuals make consumption decisions when personal economic incentives conflict with broader collective ecological interests. This study investigates the behavioural mechanisms underpinning responsible consumer choices by integrating social preference theory with decision- framing effects. The research employs the Quantal Response Equilibrium (QRE) framework, accommodating bounded rationality and probabilistic strategic behaviour, to model the dynamic interaction between private utility and environmental responsibility. A behavioural experiment involving 215 participants was conducted using the oTree experimental platform. The study incorporated the Social Value Orientation (SVO) Slider Measure to elicit individual prosocial preferences and a ten- round interactive “Green Consumer Game,” in which participants chose among strategies differing in personal payoff levels and ecological consequences, under either gain (reward) or loss (penalty) framing conditions. QRE- based choice probabilities were calibrated using maximum likelihood estimation of the rationality parameter within logit models implemented in Python. The empirical findings demonstrate that individuals with stronger social preferences are significantly more likely to choose environmentally responsible strategies. Framing has a robust effect: reward- based framing was considerably more effective in promoting pro- social decision- making than penalty- based framing. The QRE model achieved superior predictive accuracy compared to the classical Nash Equilibrium (RMSE 0. 069 vs. 0. 079), validating its empirical utility in ethically constrained decision contexts. This study' s novelty and theoretical value lie in applying QRE to ecologically motivated dilemmas, offering a quantitative assessment of how moral preferences and framing jointly shape consumer choice under uncertainty. Its practical contribution provides policymakers and sustainability practitioners with actionable insights for designing behavioural interventions, incentive schemes, and strategic messaging to encourage sustainable consumption across diverse socioeconomic environments.