Email · kontakt@ine.org.pl
Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe
  • About
  • Publications
      • Publications

        The primary categories of materials published by the Institute as part of its research and analytical activities.

      • SEE ALL PUBLICATIONS

      • Analyses
        Daily commentary and analysis on international issues provided by our experts and analysts
      • Reports
        Comprehensive thematic studies on international relations and socio-political issues
      • Video
        Recordings of expert debates and series of video podcasts created by our team and experts
      • Maps
        Selection of maps depicting international alliances and foreign visits of key politicians
  • Programmes
      • Programmes

        The main areas of research and publication activities at the Institute with separate teams of experts, functioning under the supervision of the head of a particular programme.

      • WEBSITE OF THE THREE SEAS PROJECT

      • Europe
        Analyses and commentaries on European integration and the place of Europe on the political and economic map of the world
      • Security
        Studies in the field of international and internal security of individual states, with particular emphasis on the role of NATO
      • Indo-Pacific
        An overview of the political and economic situation in the region, the status of the U.S.-China rivalry, and the EU’s policy towards China
      • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
        Analyses and studies of the Three Seas Initiative, taking into account the perspectives of the participating states
  • People
  • Contact-Careers
  • Polish-Czech Forum
  • Polski
Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe
  • About
  • Publications
      • Publications

        The primary categories of materials published by the Institute as part of its research and analytical activities.

      • SEE ALL PUBLICATIONS

      • Analyses
        Daily commentary and analysis on international issues provided by our experts and analysts
      • Reports
        Comprehensive thematic studies on international relations and socio-political issues
      • Video
        Recordings of expert debates and series of video podcasts created by our team and experts
      • Maps
        Selection of maps depicting international alliances and foreign visits of key politicians
  • Programmes
      • Programmes

        The main areas of research and publication activities at the Institute with separate teams of experts, functioning under the supervision of the head of a particular programme.

      • WEBSITE OF THE THREE SEAS PROJECT

      • Europe
        Analyses and commentaries on European integration and the place of Europe on the political and economic map of the world
      • Security
        Studies in the field of international and internal security of individual states, with particular emphasis on the role of NATO
      • Indo-Pacific
        An overview of the political and economic situation in the region, the status of the U.S.-China rivalry, and the EU’s policy towards China
      • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
        Analyses and studies of the Three Seas Initiative, taking into account the perspectives of the participating states
  • People
  • Contact-Careers
  • Polish-Czech Forum
  • Polski
Aug 30
Analysis, European Union, International Politics, New technologies, Publications

Electric scooters – who has done and who can do it better?

August 30, 2021
Electric scooters – who has done and who can do it better?Download

The below text is an analysis of electric scooter regulations in selected EU Member States and comment on a possible EU initiative

Main points:

– Electric scooters (e-scooters) are a technological novelty that has quickly become popular worldwide. Being somewhat of a hybrid between a motor scooter and a bicycle, they have puzzled users and legislators alike –  it is hard to define, in the known terms for law, what e-scooters are;

– some Member States have utilised already existing laws, e.g. bike laws, adjusting them a little to encompass e-scooters; some created special legal regimes for the devices. Electric scooters tend to be treated like bikes or motorcycles. The conclusion is, however, uniform – e-scooters need to be regulated;

– there is a gap in the Community law regarding e-scooters. A regulation or directive on e-scooter design safety could be produced, together with a set of guidelines for road use.

Introduction

Electric scooters, or e-scooters, appeared in the streets suddenly. And not only that – they immediately caught on, becoming a popular choice among city dwellers and tourists alike. Capable of going with the speed of, on average, 25-50 km/h, they render to be a convenient commuting means, additionally promoted as the answer to city traffic. Most, if not all, countries were rather unprepared for the technical advancement, struggling with the classification of e-scooters as vehicles, bicycles or anything else familiar to the legislatures. E-scooters are micro-mobility devices,[1] which places them closer to bicycles than cars if the effortlessness or capacity for transportation is considered; nonetheless, if one takes into account the fact that they run on small engines, again, capable of reaching even around 50 kilometres per hour, it is difficult not to associate them with regular, motor scooters.

The disagreement arises in, for example, whether a driver’s license should be required to ride a scooter; or whether there should be age restrictions for the users. Some could think the devices should have unique license plates, just like cars or motorcycles, whereas some could take the entire matter as too trivial to be of interest to law. Each EU Member State may answer to these dilemmas differently, and from the perspective of technology law, or just mere curiosity about the complexity of legislative processes, it is interesting to check which solution ought to be deemed the most pragmatic. The issue is serious enough, considering that e-scooters turned out to be often misused, even to the point of rendering them a threat to pedestrian safety. To give an example: in 2019, in Austria, around 1200 e-scooter users were hospitalised. The statistics in other countries do not look up. And if they do, it is rather because many national registries lack a special system for registering e-scooter-related accidents, consequently making those untraceable.[2]

Laws from selected Member States[3]

The obvious lack of contention about what e-scooters should be is what makes the topic interesting legislatively. For example, in France, electric scooters are to be driven only on roads outside of the cities, bringing them closer to cars likewise never allowed on sidewalks. Bike lanes are to be used in the cities; this, nevertheless, is conditioned.[4]Interestingly, however, the lower age boundary for using the devices is 12 years, which might make some wonder whether this combination of laws is a wise choice. Poland or Germany allow e-scooters on bike lanes. Not to make it too uniform, however, the Polish legislator envisioned the possibility of driving on a pavement where there are no bike lanes and no pedestrians (under certain speed limits),[5] and the German one, in an event of no bike path available, instructs to use the road. German laws state that the users of electric scooters must be above 12 years of age to legally operate e-scooters, and set one of the lowest thresholds for speed limits ranging from 12-20 km/h.[6] Poland on one hand allows scooters on the pavement, which is rather unusual considering that it could facilitate accidents involving pedestrians, but simultaneously requires minors between 10-18 years of age to hold a driver’s licence in categories AM, A1, B1 or T, or, a cycling proficiency certificate to ride an e-scooter. Adults are not obliged to have any of these. Such requirements stand out among many European laws making the Polish e-scooter laws an intriguing hybrid of a bike and regular, as it seems, scooter laws. E-scooters have become a separate type of vehicle under the Polish law. 

Moving further, Spain has not only set speed limits (up to 25 km/h with a minimum of 6 km/h) but also set regulations that forbid wearing earphones or headphones while riding an e-scooter. Moreover, the state is expected to impose the obligation to wear reflective vests and take out insurance for the scooter; as of now, these actions are only advised. In the past, shortly, Spanish e-scooters were also to be registered similarly to cars; however, this obligation was abolished. Spain moved away from treating electric scooters car-like, banning them from streets in favour of bike lanes.[7]Undoubtedly, the Spanish legislator has been one of the most engaged in creating a detailed safety regime for e-scooters. 

Before the subsequent discussion can commence, one should notice that the Member States, despite their diverging approaches, rather agree in one aspect – that e-scooters are to be legalised in one way or another. A prominent exception to the rule is the Netherlands’ decision to ban e-scooters. Instead, the Dutch legislator approved a new type of micro-mobility design which began trials in the city of Roermond in 2020. The vehicle resembles a regular scooter but is equipped with bicycle-like tyres and larger handlebars.[8]  The design is to ensure more safety.[9]

As established, Germany primarily utilises bicycle laws. This approach is often a starting point for many countries, as it seems, but deviations appear gradually. On the other hand, French or Spanish laws can be traced first and foremost to vehicle restrictions. Scarce addition to the known system, following Germany’s example, might be beneficial for simplifying the already intricate national legislatures and potentially an option to opt for in case of the need for a swift reaction to a new phenomenon. Indeed, Germany introduced laws covering e-scooters as one of the first European states, already in June 2019.

Conversely, some countries, like Poland, created something self-contained, possibly tackling the problem in a pragmatic manner – taking a new phenomenon without forcing it into a known box. This decision is particularly interesting to all fields of law, resurfacing the question of whether multiplying actors or objects is a good idea. Logically, it might seem so, understanding that micro-mobility devices, especially those of novel types, are not anything that had to be regulated before. Acknowledging the nuances allows for more precise tackling of the possible dangers, which may be the ultimate goal behind the regulation as such. 

Neighbour examples show slightly divergent regulatory approaches, and these are worth remarking upon. For instance, Great Britain somewhat inhibits the use of e-scooters by imposing significant hurdles for the users. First of all, privately owned electric scooters are illegal to be ridden in public spaces. Officially licenced e-scooters are to be used only in selected cities and areas by people holding driver’s licences of type Q, which is included in those of categories AM, A or B. These criteria significantly narrow the possibility of use. The official message, as implemented by the powers, however, is that e-scooters might just be the solution for swift, economic and ecological transportation within cities.[10]

The aforementioned national laws mostly regulate the use of e-scooters. Yet, many Member States also introduced product-specific criteria, obliging the producers to equip the devices with a light, noise-making device, etc. These function as an addition to what may be overseen by, for example, the Safety Product Directive (mentioned below). Furthermore, the e-scooter producers themselves aid in guaranteeing safety, sometimes beyond what is required by law; this, in some sense, halts the necessity of a regulation of a particular aspect or element. This, certainly, is also a smart competition move especially in those Member States that limit the influx of new e-scooter companies entering their markets. An example of such an initiative may be the ‘drunk’ puzzle, added by Bird, one of the most popular e-scooter companies alongside Lime. To start the scooter, one must type a requested word and approve it.[11] This is what some deem code regulation – influencing the behaviour not through laws but code, directly preventing the undesirable behaviour of riding drunk. Nevertheless, such regulation has its limits and no matter the efforts, official control is desirable.

Applicable EU rules

When it comes to EU rules, presently, e-scooters fall under the jurisdiction of some legal acts. First and foremost, e-scooters, as products when manufactured for the public, are regulated by the provisions of the Product Safety Directive.[12] Besides that, e-scooters may be governed by Regulation No 168/2013 on the approval and market surveillance of two- or three-wheel vehicles and quadricycles;[13] but only in countries where they are to be used on roads. This particular condition might prevent the applicability of the legal document seeing that e-scooters are, overall, permitted to be driven on bike lanes, roads, or pavements, depending on the situation. On the other hand, clearly, they do not fall under the Machinery Directive, having been listed among the exceptions in Article 1(2)(e).[14]

When considering if the EU should be interested in proposing any specific laws on e-scooters, one needs to establish what rules one has in mind. As already noted, the quality and handling of a scooter produced to the public as a product is somewhat regulated by the Product Safety Directive. The aforementioned Regulation[15] deals with the approval of vehicles only, if it is even applicable. Hence, what is missing, and what has been the problematic aspect of the e-scooter exploitation, is the rules governing the actual consumer use. And these fall under transportation. Certainly, on top of this, the EU could consider some specific laws on the creation of e-scooters that could ensure more safety as well, taking that the Machinery Directive is not applicable. 

The Union’s legislative capabilities

The EU’s capabilities are based on the conferral of powers, which means that the EU has the right to intervene only when the Treaties allow it to. The Member States agreed to dilute their sovereignty in some situations, and this may not be circumvented by the Community. Articles 3-6 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)[16]outline which areas of interest are to be exclusively regulated by the Union, which by the Member States, and in which the competencies are shared. 

Relevantly, Article 4(2) TFEU states that a legislative initiative is granted to the Union together with the Members States in the areas of:

‘(a) internal market;

(b) social policy, for the aspects defined in this Treaty;

(c) economic, social and territorial cohesion;

(d) agriculture and fisheries, excluding the conservation of marine biological resources;

(e) environment;

(f) consumer protection;

(g) transport;

(h) trans-European networks;

(i) energy;

(j) area of freedom, security and justice;

(k) common safety concerns in public health matters, for the aspects defined in this Treaty.’[17]

Here, there is the underlying permission to initiate laws, be it in the form of a regulation, directive or another legal act. The character of the intervention is, however, further concretised. Article 169(1-2) TFEU speaks of the Union’s obligation to promote consumers’ well-being and interests; however, if not done directly for the benefit of the internal market, as the action is permitted by the famous Article 114 TFEU, these ought to be only ‘measures which support, supplement and monitor’ the policy pursued by the Member States.[18] This prevents the legislative intervention of the Union and points in the direction of supporting national laws. When it comes to the legal ground under the head of transport, regulation for the purposes of transport safety ‘measures to improve transport safety’ are permitted under Article 91(1)(c) TFEU. 

Possible – yet is it desirable?

Hence, in principle, EU’s legal intervention is possible here; but the question is whether the EU should intervene – overall, the granted competence is shared. Therefore, it must be assessed whether a Community action is needed and due. The EU, besides the limits set by the Treaties, is restricted by the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, two of the fundamental rules underlying the entire existence of the Union. The principles are laid out in Article 5 of the Treaty on the European Union.[19] The former speaks of the action of the EU being limited to what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties. The latter aims to ensure that decisions within the Community are taken as closely as possible to the citizen, which translates into taking action on the Union’s level only when it would render to be more effective than on the national or local level. Putting it succinctly, the EU will act as minimally as possible, if necessary at all. But how to assess whether the action is in fact necessary or redundant? This is a matter deserving a lengthy, rich deliberation of its own, which in this article will be reduced only to delineate the possible legal routes. There are no set-in-stone tests to be used but rather guidelines and widely-used criteria to be considered. ‘Would action at EU level produce clear benefits because of its scale or effects, compared with action by the Member States? Does the subject matter have trans-national aspects that cannot be regulated by the Member States acting separately?’ to take from some already-used formulas.[20] An interesting aspect to consider, having examined the contemporary national environment in this analysis, is whether what has been done is insufficient in a wider perspective. 

Seemingly, the aforementioned questions should be answered in the negative. Even when a law is lacking, the national legislators are quick to amend the situation, utilising the known and novel solutions. The only major issue could be the divergence of laws across the Union. But is that a hurdle the Community should be concerned about? Clarity and unity of laws are a comfort any EU citizen likes to enjoy. Having one’s qualifications or identity recognised without a hinge is a convenience that is not granted in all areas, however, some examples being car speed limits, which one must check before crossing the internal borders. And all in all, an inconvenience does not equal a problem. 

Yet, to ensure safety, laws on comprehensive, product-specific design could be introduced, just to fill in the gap which the exceptions to the Motor Directive create. This, as said, is in principle not possible for the Union, as barred by the criteria of Article 169(1-2) TFEU. Nevertheless, leaving it to the gesture of the countries may also create product discrepancies, which may even hinder the internal market through impaired sales or transport-related exchanges. This the Community can and ought to prevent, per Article 4(2)(a) TFEU, e.g. via the creation of legislation using the legal ground granted by the aforementioned Articles (Article 169(1-2) TFEU and 114 TFEU). This legislative route simply renders to be the most straightforward, answering the principle of subsidiarity. And, relevantly, this channel allows to answer the aforesaid questions affirmatively.

When it comes to the other types of rules, any direct road regulations from the Union’s level seem to be undue, in light of the principle of subsidiarity. There is no precedent for employing strict road rules on the Member States, and with the other laws serving as a safety buffer, it could just appear excessive or redundant. Importantly, nonetheless, the European Commission has engaged in assisting the promotion of good practices, which includes legislative advice.[21] Hence, intervention, yet subtle, is possible; a set of non-binding road safety guidelines or recommendations could be produced, inspired by the contemporary national legislative initiative, to facilitate transnational knowledge exchange.

Conclusion

Taking all of this into consideration, it seems that the EU could be interested in having a closer look at the e-scooter regulations, providing the Member States with legislative relief or guidance. What has been achieved already nationally ought to be scrutinised, especially because the regulations were issued even in 2019, giving some time to allow for an appropriate and fairly reliable overview. Product-detailed safety directive or regulation is desirable (being a topic for another conversation), just to ensure that citizens across the Union are safe, even from e-scooters.


[1] OECD. 2020. “OECD Urban Studies Improving Transport Planning for Accessible Cities”. OECD Publishing: 28. 

[2] Kamphuis, Kas and van Schagen, Ingrid. 2020. “E-scooters in Europe: legal status, usage and safety”. FERSI paper: 15. https://www.sicurstrada.it/Risorse/FERSI-report-scooter-survey.pdf accessed 16 July 2021.

[3] The selection was based on the character of the introduced laws, as well as the states’ regional influence. The linguistic abilities of the author were also considered. 

[4] “Décret n° 2019-1082 du 23 octobre 2019 relatif à la réglementation des engins de déplacement personnel”. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000039272656/ accessed 16 July 2021.

[5] “USTAWA z dnia 30 marca 2021 r. o zmianie ustawy – Prawo o ruchu drogowym oraz niektórych innych ustaw”. Dziennik Ustaw Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20210000720/O/D20210720.pdf accessed 16 July 2021.

[6] “Verordnung über die Teilnahme von Elektrokleinstfahrzeugen am Straßenverkehr 1(Elektrokleinstfahrzeuge-Verordnung – eKFV) § 1 Anwendungsbereich”. Gesetze im Internet. http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/ekfv/__1.html accessed 16 July 2021. 

[7] “New rules for electric scooters on Spain’s roads”. Think Spain. https://www.thinkspain.com/news-spain/32617/new-rules-for-electric-scooters-on-spain-s-roads accessed 16 July 2021; “Electric scooters in Spain”. Car Insurance Spain. https://carinsurancespain.es/electric-scooters-in-spain/accessed 16 July 2021.

[8] The scooter can be seen in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=10&v=yxzpg05-Ai8&feature=emb_logo accessed 17 July 2021.

[9] “UK and Netherlands go in different directions on e-scooters”. European Transport Safety Council. https://etsc.eu/uk-and-netherlands-go-in-different-directions-on-e-scooters/ accessed 17 July 2021. 

[10] Department for Transport. 13 July 2020. “E-scooter trials: guidance for users”. Gov UK. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/e-scooter-trials-guidance-for-users accessed 17 July 2021; 2021. “Regulating electric scooters (e-scooters)”. House of Commons Library. 

[11] Toll, Micah. 15 July 2021. “Bird is adding a puzzle to its electric scooters to keep drunk riders off”. Electrek. https://electrek.co/2021/07/15/bird-is-adding-a-puzzle-to-its-electric-scooters-to-keep-drunk-riders-off/ accessed 18 July 2021.

[12] Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 December 2001 on general product safety (Text with EEA relevance) Official Journal L 011 , 15/01/2002 P. 0004 – 001.

[13] Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of two- or three-wheel vehicles and quadricycles Text with EEA relevance OJ L 60, 2.3.2013, p. 52–128.

[14] Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on machinery, and amending Directive 95/16/EC (recast) (Text with EEA relevance) OJ L 157, 9.6.2006, p. 24–86.

[15] Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of two- or three-wheel vehicles and quadricycles Text with EEA relevance OJ L 60, 2.3.2013, p. 52–128.

[16] Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Protocols – Annexes – Declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007 – Tables of equivalences. Official Journal C 326 , 26/10/2012 P. 0001 – 0390.

[17] Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Protocols – Annexes – Declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007 – Tables of equivalences. Official Journal C 326 , 26/10/2012 P. 0001 – 0390, Article 4(2).

[18] Article 169(2)(b) of Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Protocols – Annexes – Declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007 – Tables of equivalences. Official Journal C 326 , 26/10/2012 P. 0001 – 0390.

[19] Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union – Protocols – Declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007 – Tables of equivalences.Official Journal C 326 , 26/10/2012 P. 0001 – 0390.

[20] Thomas, Mike. November 2009. “Subsidiarity: Assessing an EU Proposal”. House of Lords. https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/lords-committees/eu-select/subsidiarity/apply-subsidiarity.pdf accessed 19 July 2021.

[21] For example: “Road safety: Policy orientations on road safety 2011-20”. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=legissum%3Atr0036 accessed 19 July 2021.

IF YOU VALUE THE INSTITUTE OF NEW EUROPE’S WORK, BECOME ONE OF ITS DONORS!

Funds received will allow us to finance further publications.

You can contribute by making donations to INE’s bank account:

95 2530 0008 2090 1053 7214 0001

with the following payment title: „darowizna na cele statutowe”

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Tumblr
  • Pinterest
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • E-Mail
Lena Anna Kuklińska Lena Anna Kuklińska. Cum Laude Honours graduate of LLB Global Law at Tilburg University, student of IT and IP law at the University of Goettingen. Editor for Dublin Law and Politics Review. She is involved socially. Lena is interested in comparative law, in particular the interconnection of animal rights, environmental law and the law of new technologies. She is also fond of politics, history, marketing, language learning, travelling and art.

Related Posts

See All Publications
  • Analysis, Iran, Israel, Military and army, Publications

Iran–Israel Conflict Long-Distance Rivalry, Strategies, Toolkits, and Struggle for Penetrating Rival’s Strategic Depth

Introduction It has now been seven days since the outbreak of open conflict between Iran and Israel, triggered by an…
  • Mehran Atashjameh
  • June 24, 2025
  • Analysis, Military and army, Publications

Ballistic Missiles, Asymmetric Warfare, and Law of Armed Conflict: A Technical Approach to Ensuring Compliance with the Distinction Principle

Introduction: In armed conflict, one of the enduring challenges is the risk of targeting civilians instead of military objectives, which…
  • Mehran Atashjameh
  • June 16, 2025
  • Europe, Publications, Russia

Russia Affairs Review May 2025

Ksawery Stawiński, Adam Jankowski 08.05.25 - Mineral Deal On May 8th, the Ukrainian parliament ratified the so-called Mineral Deal. The…
  • Adam Jankowski
  • June 15, 2025
See All Publications

Comments are closed.

Lena Anna Kuklińska Lena Anna Kuklińska. Cum Laude Honours graduate of LLB Global Law at Tilburg University, student of IT and IP law at the University of Goettingen. Editor for Dublin Law and Politics Review. She is involved socially. Lena is interested in comparative law, in particular the interconnection of animal rights, environmental law and the law of new technologies. She is also fond of politics, history, marketing, language learning, travelling and art.
Program Europa tworzą:

Marcin Chruściel

Dyrektor programu. Absolwent studiów doktoranckich z zakresu nauk o polityce na Uniwersytecie Wrocławskim, magister stosunków międzynarodowych i europeistyki Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prezes Zarządu Instytutu Nowej Europy.

dr Artur Bartoszewicz

Przewodniczący Rady Programowej Instytutu Nowej Europy. Doktor nauk ekonomicznych Szkoły Głównej Handlowej. Ekspert w dziedzinie polityki publicznej, w tym m. in. strategii państwa i gospodarki.

Michał Banasiak

Specjalizuje się w relacjach sportu i polityki. Autor analiz, komentarzy i wywiadów z zakresu dyplomacji sportowej i polityki międzynarodowej. Były dziennikarz Polsat News i wysłannik redakcji zagranicznej Telewizji Polskiej.

Maciej Pawłowski

Ekspert ds. migracji, gospodarki i polityki państw basenu Morza Śródziemnego. W latach 2018-2020 Analityk PISM ds. Południowej Europy. Autor publikacji w polskiej i zagranicznej prasie na temat Hiszpanii, Włoch, Grecji, Egiptu i państw Magrebu. Od września 2020 r. mieszka w północnej Afryce (Egipt, Algieria).

Jędrzej Błaszczak

Absolwent studiów prawniczych Uniwersytetu Śląskiego w Katowicach. Jego zainteresowania badawcze koncentrują się na Inicjatywie Trójmorza i polityce w Bułgarii. Doświadczenie zdobywał w European Foundation of Human Rights w Wilnie, Center for the Study of Democracy w Sofii i polskich placówkach dyplomatycznych w Teheranie i Tbilisi.

Program Bezpieczeństwo tworzą:

dr Aleksander Olech

Dyrektor programu. Wykładowca na Baltic Defence College, absolwent Europejskiej Akademii Dyplomacji oraz Akademii Sztuki Wojennej. Jego główne zainteresowania badawcze to terroryzm, bezpieczeństwo w Europie Środkowo-Wschodniej oraz rola NATO i UE w środowisku zagrożeń hybrydowych.

dr Agnieszka Rogozińska

Członek Rady Programowej Instytutu Nowej Europy. Doktor nauk społecznych w dyscyplinie nauki o polityce. Zainteresowania badawcze koncentruje na problematyce bezpieczeństwa euroatlantyckiego, instytucjonalnym wymiarze bezpieczeństwa i współczesnych zagrożeniach.

Aleksy Borówka

Doktorant na Wydziale Nauk Społecznych Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Przewodniczący Krajowej Reprezentacji Doktorantów w kadencji 2020. Autor kilkunastu prac naukowych, poświęconych naukom o bezpieczeństwie, naukom o polityce i administracji oraz stosunkom międzynarodowym. Laureat I, II oraz III Międzynarodowej Olimpiady Geopolitycznej.

Karolina Siekierka

Absolwentka Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego na kierunku stosunki międzynarodowe, specjalizacji Bezpieczeństwo i Studia Strategiczne. Jej zainteresowania badawcze obejmują politykę zagraniczną i wewnętrzną Francji, prawa człowieka oraz konflikty zbrojne.

Stanisław Waszczykowski

Podoficer rezerwy, student studiów magisterskich na kierunku Bezpieczeństwo Międzynarodowe i Dyplomacja na Akademii Sztuki Wojennej, były praktykant w BBN. Jego zainteresowania badawcze obejmują m.in. operacje pokojowe ONZ oraz bezpieczeństwo Ukrainy.

Leon Pińczak

Student studiów drugiego stopnia na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim na kierunku stosunki międzynarodowe. Dziennikarz polskojęzycznej redakcji Biełsatu. Zawodowo zajmuje się obszarem postsowieckim, rosyjską polityką wewnętrzną i doktrynami FR. Biegle włada językiem rosyjskim.

Program Indo-Pacyfik tworzą:

Łukasz Kobierski

Dyrektor programu. Współzałożyciel INE oraz prezes zarządu w latach 2019-2021. Stypendysta szkoleń z zakresu bezpieczeństwa na Daniel Morgan Graduate School of National Security w Waszyngtonie, ekspert od stosunków międzynarodowych. Absolwent Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego oraz Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika. Wiceprezes Zarządu INE.

dr Joanna Siekiera

Prawnik międzynarodowy, doktor nauk społecznych, adiunkt na Wydziale Prawa Uniwersytetu w Bergen w Norwegii. Była stypendystką rządu Nowej Zelandii na Uniwersytecie Victorii w Wellington, niemieckiego Institute of Cultural Diplomacy, a także francuskiego Institut de relations internationales et stratégiques.

Paweł Paszak

Absolwent stosunków międzynarodowych (spec. Wschodnioazjatycka) na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim oraz stypendysta University of Kent (W. Brytania) i Hainan University (ChRL). Doktorant UW i Akademii Sztuki Wojennej. Jego zainteresowania badawcze obejmują politykę zagraniczną ChRL oraz strategiczną rywalizację Chiny-USA.

Jakub Graca

Magister stosunków międzynarodowych na Uniwersytecie Jagiellońskim; studiował także filologię orientalną (specjalność: arabistyka). Analityk Centrum Inicjatyw Międzynarodowych (Warszawa) oraz Instytutu Nowej Europy. Zainteresowania badawcze: Stany Zjednoczone (z naciskiem na politykę zagraniczną), relacje transatlantyckie.

Patryk Szczotka

Absolwent filologii dalekowschodniej ze specjalnością chińską na Uniwersytecie Wrocławskim oraz student kierunku double degree China and International Relations na Aalborg University oraz University of International Relations (国际关系学院) w Pekinie. Jego zainteresowania naukowe to relacje polityczne i gospodarcze UE-ChRL oraz dyplomacja.

The programme's team:

Marcin Chruściel

Programme director. Graduate of PhD studies in Political Science at the University of Wroclaw and Master studies in International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. President of the Management Board at the Institute of New Europe.

PhD Artur Bartoszewicz

Chairman of the Institute's Programme Board. Doctor of Economic Sciences at the SGH Warsaw School of Economics. Expert in the field of public policy, including state and economic strategies. Expert at the National Centre for Research and Development and the Digital Poland Projects Centre.

Michał Banasiak

He specializes in relationship of sports and politics. Author of analysis, comments and interviews in the field of sports diplomacy and international politics. Former Polsat News and Polish Television’s foreign desk journalist.

Maciej Pawłowski

Expert on migration, economics and politics of Mediterranean countries. In the period of 2018-2020 PISM Analyst on Southern Europe. Author of various articles in Polish and foreign press about Spain, Italy, Greece, Egypt and Maghreb countries. Since September 2020 lives in North Africa (Egypt, Algeria).

Jędrzej Błaszczak

Graduate of Law at the University of Silesia. His research interests focus on the Three Seas Initiative and politics in Bulgaria. He acquired experience at the European Foundation of Human Rights in Vilnius, the Center for the Study of Democracy in Sofia, and in Polish embassies in Tehran and Tbilisi.

PhD Aleksander Olech

Programme director. Visiting lecturer at the Baltic Defence College, graduate of the European Academy of Diplomacy and War Studies University. His main research interests include terrorism, international cooperation for security in Eastern Europe and the role of NATO and the EU with regard to hybrid threats.

PhD Agnieszka Rogozińska

Member of the Institute's Programme Board. Doctor of Social Sciences in the discipline of Political Science. Editorial secretary of the academic journals "Politics & Security" and "Independence: journal devoted to Poland's recent history". Her research interests focus on security issues.

Aleksy Borówka

PhD candidate at the Faculty of Social Sciences in the University of Wroclaw, the President of the Polish National Associations of PhD Candidates in 2020. The author of dozen of scientific papers, concerning security studies, political science, administration, international relations. Laureate of the I, II and III International Geopolitical Olympiad.

Karolina Siekierka

Graduate of International Relations specializing in Security and Strategic Studies at University of Warsaw. Erasmus student at the Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1) and the Institut d’Etudes Politique de Paris (Sciences Po Paris). Her research areas include human rights, climate change and armed conflicts.

Stanisław Waszczykowski

Reserve non-commissioned officer. Master's degree student in International Security and Diplomacy at the War Studies University in Warsaw, former trainee at the National Security Bureau. His research interests include issues related to UN peacekeeping operations and the security of Ukraine.

Leon Pińczak

A second-degree student at the University of Warsaw, majoring in international relations. A journalist of the Polish language edition of Belsat. Interested in the post-Soviet area, with a particular focus on Russian internal politics and Russian doctrines - foreign, defense and information-cybernetic.

Łukasz Kobierski

Programme director. Deputy President of the Management Board. Scholarship holder at the Daniel Morgan Graduate School of National Security in Washington and an expert in the field of international relations. Graduate of the University of Warsaw and the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń

PhD Joanna Siekiera

International lawyer, Doctor of social sciences, postdoctor at the Faculty of Law, University of Bergen, Norway. She was a scholarship holder of the New Zealand government at the Victoria University of Wellington, Institute of Cultural Diplomacy in Germany, Institut de relations internationales et stratégiques in France.

Paweł Paszak

Graduate of International Relations (specialisation in East Asian Studies) from the University of Warsaw and scholarship holder at the University of Kent (UK) and Hainan University (China). PhD candidate at the University of Warsaw and the War Studies University. His research areas include the foreign policy of China and the strategic rivalry between China and the US in the Indo-Pacific.

Jakub Graca

Master of International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. He also studied Arabic therein. An analyst at the Center for International Initiatives (Warsaw) and the Institute of New Europe. Research interests: United States (mainly foreign policy), transatlantic relations.

Patryk Szczotka

A graduate of Far Eastern Philology with a specialization in China Studies at the University of Wroclaw and a student of a double degree “China and International Relations” at Aalborg University and University of International Relations (国际关系学院) in Beijing. His research interests include EU-China political and economic relations, as well as diplomacy.

Three Seas Think Tanks Hub is a platform of cooperation among different think tanks based in 3SI member countries. Their common goal is to strengthen public debate and understanding of the Three Seas region seen from the political, economic and security perspective. The project aims at exchanging ideas, research and publications on the region’s potential and challenges.

Members

The Baltic Security Foundation (Latvia)

The BSF promotes the security and defense of the Baltic Sea region. It gathers security experts from the region and beyond, provides a platform for discussion and research, promotes solutions that lead to stronger regional security in the military and other areas.

The Institute for Politics and Society (Czech Republic)

The Institute analyses important economic, political, and social areas that affect today’s society. The mission of the Institute is to cultivate the Czech political and public sphere through professional and open discussion.

Nézöpont Institute (Hungary)

The Institute aims at improving Hungarian public life and public discourse by providing real data, facts and opinions based on those. Its primary focus points are Hungarian youth, media policy and Central European cooperation.

The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (Austria)

The wiiw is one of the principal centres for research on Central, East and Southeast Europe with 50 years of experience. Over the years, the Institute has broadened its expertise, increasing its regional coverage – to European integration, the countries of Wider Europe and selected issues of the global economy.

The International Institute for Peace (Austria)

The Institute strives to address the most topical issues of the day and promote dialogue, public engagement, and a common understanding to ensure a holistic approach to conflict resolution and a durable peace. The IIP functions as a platform to promote peace and non-violent conflict resolution across the world.

The Institute for Regional and International Studies (Bulgaria)

The IRIS initiates, develops and implements civic strategies for democratic politics at the national, regional and international level. The Institute promotes the values of democracy, civil society, freedom and respect for law and assists the process of deepening Bulgarian integration in NATO and the EU.

The European Institute of Romania

EIR is a public institution whose mission is to provide expertise in the field of European Affairs to the public administration, the business community, the social partners and the civil society. EIR’s activity is focused on four key domains: research, training, communication, translation of the EHRC case-law.

The Institute of New Europe (Poland)

The Institute is an advisory and analytical non-governmental organisation active in the fields of international politics, international security and economics. The Institute supports policy-makers by providing them with expert opinions, as well as creating a platform for academics, publicists, and commentators to exchange ideas.

YouTube

Latest publications

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
  • Iran–Israel Conflict Long-Distance Rivalry, Strategies, Toolkits, and Struggle for Penetrating Rival’s Strategic Depth
    by Mehran Atashjameh
    June 24, 2025
  • Ballistic Missiles, Asymmetric Warfare, and Law of Armed Conflict: A Technical Approach to Ensuring Compliance with the Distinction Principle
    by Mehran Atashjameh
    June 16, 2025
  • Russia Affairs Review May 2025
    by Adam Jankowski
    June 15, 2025

Categories

THE MOST POPULAR TAGS:

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

China economy European Union International politics International security NATO Poland Russia Security Ukraine USA

  • About
  • Publications
  • Europe
  • Security
  • O nas
  • Publikacje
  • Europa
  • Bezpieczeństwo
  • Indo-Pacific
  • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
  • People
  • Contact – Careers
  • Indo-Pacyfik
  • Trójmorze
  • Ludzie
  • Kontakt – Kariera

Financed with funds from the National Freedom Institute - Center for Civil Society Development under the Governmental Civil Society Organisations Development Programme for 2018-2030.

Sfinansowano ze środków Narodowego Instytutu Wolności – Centrum Rozwoju Społeczeństwa Obywatelskiego w ramach Rządowego Programu Rozwoju Organizacji Obywatelskich na lata 2018-2030.



© 2019-2024 The Institute of New Europe Foundation · All rights reserved · Support us