CEEOL – Central and Eastern European Online Library

This article examines how India’s draft Digital Competition Bill (DCB), read alongside India’s investment treaty landscape, can create a fresh layer of regulatory uncertainty for large technology investors. It explains why the DCB is being positioned as a distinct instrument, rather than a subset of the proposed Digital India Act or the Digital Personal Data Protection Act and identifies an early friction point: an ex-ante competition design, built around data portability and continuing access, can sit uneasily with a consent-based privacy framework. The analysis then places the DCB within the policy arc that followed the Standing Committee of Finance report and the Committee on Digital Competition Law deliberations. It asks whether India’s ersatz adaptation of the European’s framework employing the spaghetti bowl effect as a framing device. The article maps the most plausible investment treaty claim pathways if the DCB comes into force, including FET arguments tied to legitimate expectations and transparency, and indirect expropriation concerns linked to operational control over data and platform conduct, as well as, Section 38 and its exemption power, and its implications on equal treatment debates and carve out risks. The article concludes that The DCB’s objectives and boundaries need sharper articulation, and the more durable response lies in clearer right to regulate language and disciplined carve outs.

Psichologinis atsparumas ir gebėjimas valdyti stresą tampa vis svarbesniais veiksniais akademinėje aplinkoje ir susiduriant su ekstremaliomis situacijomis. Studentai patiria įvairialypį stresą, kylantį dėl akademinių reikalavimų, asmenybės bruožų ir gyvenimo būdo, o globalūs iššūkiai didina emocinę įtampą. Straipsnyje integruojami empirinio tyrimo ir mokslinės literatūros duomenys, siekiant atskleisti psichologinio atsparumo stiprinimo galimybes. Tyrimo metu Nyderlanduose buvo apklausti 107 nuolatinių studijų studentai, tyrime taikytas skerspjūvio dizainas, naudotos PSS-14, BFI ir SCRI metodikos. Rezultatai parodė, kad studentai dažniausiai patiria vidutinį streso lygį, lydimą psichosomatinių simptomų. Didžiausią poveikį stresui daro akademiniai stresoriai, o neurotiškumas reikšmingai didina suvokiamą streso lygį. Taip pat nustatyta, kad mažiau sveikas gyvenimo būdas ir silpnesni įveikos gebėjimai yra susiję su aukštesniu streso lygiu. Straipsnyje pabrėžiama, kad stipresni įveikos gebėjimai, emocijų reguliacija ir sveiki gyvenimo įpročiai siejasi su mažesniu stresu. Taip pat aptariama pozityviosios psichologijos, dvasingumo ir prasmės paieškos reikšmė stiprinant psichologinį atsparumą.

Article 21 of the Digital Services Act (DSA) introduces a novel regulatory framework for out-of-court dispute settlement (ODS) in the European Union’s digital ecosystem, positioning itself as a key instrument for enhancing platform accountability and safeguarding users’ fundamental rights. This paper examines the early implementation of Article 21, with particular attention to its institutional design, emerging challenges, and potential for regulatory refinement. As the DSA transitions from legislative ambition to operational practice, understanding how its dispute resolution mechanisms function in practice is critical for assessing their effectiveness and long-term viability. Methodologically, the analysis adopts a qualitative and doctrinal approach, combining legal interpretation of Article 21 DSA with early empirical observations from the first certified ODS bodies and comparative insights drawn from Directive 2013/11/EU on consumer alternative dispute resolution. Although the limited duration of implementation constrains the availability of systematic quantitative data, preliminary evidence provides sufficient grounding to identify structural patterns, risks, and areas requiring further development. The findings indicate that Article 21 DSA establishes a hybrid governance model that balances centralised European oversight with decentralised operational autonomy. Certified ODS bodies are entrusted with resolving disputes between users and online platforms – particularly Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) – in a manner that promotes procedural fairness, transparency, and accessibility. Early implementation suggests that users value the availability of such mechanisms, particularly as an alternative to formal judicial proceedings, which may not de facto be capable of ensuring effective access to justice for disputes involving digital platforms. At the same time, the coordination of multiple independent actors within a unified regulatory framework introduces significant institutional and procedural complexity. A central concern identified in this study is the risk of replicating structural shortcomings observed in earlier EU dispute resolution frameworks, notably those under Directive 2013/11/EU. In particular, persistent power asymmetries between users and service providers, combined with the relatively low economic value of many disputes, may limit user engagement and undermine the perceived effectiveness of the system. These challenges are further compounded by the non-binding nature of ODS decisions, which raises questions regarding enforceability and platform compliance. Without adequate safeguards, such limitations may erode user trust and reduce participation, especially among individuals who perceive the process as burdensome or unlikely to yield meaningful outcomes. The analysis also highlights the importance of procedural coherence and user experience in determining the legitimacy of the ODS framework. Variations in procedural rules across different certified bodies risk producing inconsistent outcomes and fragmented user experiences. Moreover, early user feedback underscores the significance of accessibility factors, including clarity of information, ease of submission, and transparency throughout the dispute resolution process. Barriers such as complex interfaces, limited guidance, and insufficient language support may disproportionately affect vulnerable users, thereby challenging the inclusiveness of the system. In response to these findings, the paper proposes several avenues for regulatory refinement. First, the development of common procedural standards is essential to ensure consistency, interoperability, and predictability across ODS bodies, while preserving space for innovation through digital tools and user-centred design. Second, improving accessibility and user engagement should be prioritised through simplified interfaces, multilingual support, and enhanced guidance mechanisms. Third, addressing structural power imbalances requires the introduction of stronger incentive structures to encourage platform compliance, including transparency measures and reputational mechanisms. Finally, the establishment of robust monitoring and reporting systems, based on the collection of anonymised data on dispute outcomes and user satisfaction, is crucial for enabling evidence-based policy development and continuous improvement. In conclusion, the early implementation of Article 21 DSA demonstrates both the promise and the complexity of EU-regulated digital dispute settlement. While significant challenges remain, particularly in relation to enforceability, procedural fragmentation, and user engagement, the regulatory framework provides a solid foundation for future development. With targeted refinements and sustained oversight, Article 21 has the potential to evolve into a credible, accessible, and effective mechanism for resolving platform-user disputes, thereby contributing to a broader model of digital accountability within the European Union.

Purpose: The study aims to examine how the structural design of corporate hackathons and teamlevel interaction processes influence innovation outcomes, with a particular focus on prototype quality, originality, and feasibility. The research contributes to the understanding of hackathons as instruments of corporate innovation within an open-in-novation framework. Methodology: An exploratory mixed-method research design was applied, combining qualitative observations and quantitative evaluations of eight interdisciplinary teams participating in a five-day corporate hackathon. Data were analysed to identify relational patterns between hackathon design characteristics, team microdynamics, and innovation outcomes assessed by an expert jury. Findings: The results indicate that innovation performance is systematically associated with two key dimensions: Organizational Clarity and Team Competence. Clear problem formulation and accessible mentorship were identified as critical design factors positively influencing technical feasibility and overall project quality. Teams demonstrating higher levels of complementary expertise and effective collaboration produced more original and implementable solutions. Originality: The study develops a Hackathon Design Framework that integrates structural design elements, team-level processes, and innovation outcomes into a unified conceptual model. By conceptualising corporate hackathons as temporary open-innovation systems, the research advances theoretical understanding of short-term innovation mechanisms and provides practical guidance for organisations seeking to enhance innovation capability and competitive advantage through hackathon-based initiatives.

Purpose. The existing international competency indices fail to capture the structural differentiation in AI-driven educational transformation across EU moderate innovator economies, rendering evidence-based policy design inadequate. Author attempted to evaluate it. Methodology. The simplified multiple criteria assessment methodology based on global and regional expert evaluations of education quality determining knowledge and innovation development was employed. Analyzing the Visegrad Group (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia) and the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) over 2022 - 2025, the study produces three original scientific results. Findings. First, it identifies and empirically documents how the AI integration raises measurable technical skill acquisition by 60–80 percent while simultaneously intensifying demand for metacompetencies - creativity, ethical reasoning, adaptability - that current frameworks cannot reliably assess, generating a 34 percent wage premium for workers combining both (Eurostat LFS, 2022–2024). Second, it provides the first systematic empirical documentation of two distinct regional catch-up trajectories - Digital Leapfrogging (Baltic States: R&D efficiency through knowledge-intensive services, return ratio 7.2:1) and Industrial Deepening (Visegrad Group: AI as manufacturing process optimizer, return ratio 3.8:1) - with quantified efficiency differentials. Third, it validates the Creativity Assessment Framework significantly outperforming GPA-based prediction. The Estonia - Hungary differential in AI integration scores illustrates the compounding consequences of coordinated policy versus governance instability. Originality. Revealed the AI Competency Paradox; proposed Multi-Dimensional Creativity Assessment Framework; systematic documentation of regional innovation strategy divergence. Policy implications address national AI-education coordination, culturally calibrated creativity assessment, and digital diaspora engagement mechanisms.

This article addresses the limited integration of disability-related topics into management research, with a focus on inclusive career development. While diversity and inclusion are frequently emphasized in strategic organizational goals, disability remains an underexplored dimension. The aim of this study is to identify research trends, conceptual gaps, and emerging directions in academic literature on disability in the context of management and career studies. Using bibliometric analysis of 1325 articles from the “Web of Science” database, this research distinguishes dominant themes, author networks, and temporal shifts in focus. The findings reveal that most studies approach disability from a health or policy angle, with weak integration into strategic human resource or talent management discourse. The study high- lights the need for a paradigmatic shift from a deficit-oriented to an empowerment-based approach and proposes directions for future inquiry in inclusive talent and career management.

The purpose is to assess the scope and dynamics of financial services consumed from credit institutions and their role in economic growth, based on theoretical frameworks and empirical analysis, using the cases of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. Methodology: The research methods employed in this article include analysis of scientific literature, methods of comparison and generalization, correlation analysis, pairwise regression analysis, and multivariate regression analysis. Findings: The role, changes and extent of financial services consumed by individuals and households can be analysed from different theoretical perspectives. Findings indicate that in Lithuania and Latvia, the greatest increases in GDP are associated with the number of individuals using the internet for internet banking, whereas in Estonia, the most significant driver of GDP growth is household lending for house purchase. Originality: after highlighting the theoretical approaches, financial services consumed by individuals and households, focused on indicators of loans, financial leasing, use of pay- ment cards, internet banking, and deposits, and regression analysis with GDP of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia.

Straipsnyje pristatomas reikšmingumo suvokimo (reikšmijautos) konstruktas, kuriuo vertinamas individų pojūtis, kad jie ir jų darbas yra svarbūs ir reikšmingi. Pristatoma teorinė reikšmijautos analizė ir žvalgomasis empirinis tyrimas, nagrinėjantis reikšmijautos panašumus ir skirtumus bendrojo lavinimo mokyklų pedagogų populiacijoje pagal sociodemo­ grafinius faktorius. Nustatyti reikšmijautos skirtumai pagal mokytojų amžių, lytį ir poziciją. Pateikiamos tyrimo išvados, apribojimai ir rekomendacijos.

Remiantis Katalikų Bažnyčios mokymu, teisiniais ir moksliniais šaltiniais bei 2018– 2025 m. atliktais Lietuvos gyventojų nuomonės tyrimais, straipsnyje gvildenama šeimos sampratos visuomenėje kaita. Katalikų Bažnyčios dokumentų ir Lietuvos Respublikos įstatymų apžvalga atskleidė glaudžias sąsajas tarp juose įtvirtintos prigimtinės šeimos sampratos: ji kildinama iš vyro ir moters skirtingumo ir papildomumo; grindžiama santuokos, kraujo giminystės, tėvystės, motinystės, vaikystės ar įvaikinimo ryšiais; suvokiama kaip valstybės ir visuomenės pagrindas; saugoma ir globojama valstybės. Vis dėlto šiandienos sociokultūrinių pokyčių kontekste galima įžvelgti dėl šeimos sampratos transformacijos kylančias grėsmes: visuomenės mentaliteto lyties ir šeimos sampratos klausimais dekonstravimą remiantis socialinio konstruktyvizmo nuostatomis, įpareigojimą visuotinai šia samprata vadovautis, pvz., diegiant nepilnamečių lytiškumo ir seksualumo ugdymą mokyklose. Tiriant visuomenės poziciją, buvo atlikta reprezentatyvių tyrimų, atskleidžiančių Lietuvos gyventojų požiūrį, lyginamoji analizė pagal šeimos sampratos identifikavimo kriterijus (laikyseną prigimtinės ar įvairove grindžiamos šeimos sampratos klausimu; požiūrį į tos pačios lyties asmenų porų santykių teisinį reguliavimą; poziciją jų normalizavimo klausimu). Analizuojant duomenis nustatyta, kad, nepaisant pastangų dekonstruoti vyro ir moters skirtingumu ir papildomumu grindžiamą prigimtinės šeimos sampratą, Lietuvos gyventojų parama jai išlieka stabili: nepritariama šeimos sampratos keitimui, neigiamai vertinamas tiek šeimos sampratą plečiantis Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucinio Teismo nutarimas dėl lyčiai neutralios partnerystės instituto, tiek įpareigojimas Seimui šiame nutarime nurodytu būdu sureguliuoti skirtingų lyčių ir tos pačios lyties asmenų porų santykius, pasisakoma prieš tos pačios lyties asmenų porų santykių normalizavimą. Ryškėja tendencija, kad, intensyvėjant siekiams plėsti šeimos sampratą, visuomenės palankumas prigimtinei šeimai auga, o neturinčiųjų šiuo klausimu aiškios pozicijos dalis mažėja, nebe taip palankiai vertinama lyčiai neutrali šeima ir partnerystė.