International Organizations, the EU and Global Social Policy

Author(s):  
Bob Deacon
2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 1980-1996
Author(s):  
T.S. Malakhova

Subject. Foreign economic and trade ties among countries are getting tighter and less predictable in the early 21st century. This directly stems from a growing disparity of partners, especially if it goes about their future cooperation as part of integration groups or international organizations. Communities of experts suggest using various approaches to locally adjusting integration phases, especially implementing the two-speed integration in the European Union. Objectives. The study is an attempt to examine an improvement of foreign economic cooperation and suggest its implementation steps for the European Union. This all is due to considerable inner controversies and problems within the EU, which grow more serious year by year. Methods. The methodological framework comprises the historical logic, dialectical principles, scientific abstraction method. The process and system approach was especially important for justifying the implementation of the above steps. It was used to examine foreign economic relations of partners in the European Union. Results. The article sets forth the theoretical and methodological framework for the geostrategic economic bloc, including a conceptual structure model. I present steps to implement a foreign economic cooperation of partners in the EU in terms of its form. Conclusions and Relevance. Should the form of the foreign economic relations among the EU countries be implemented, counties at the periphery of the EU will be able to become active parties to the integration group.


Author(s):  
Antoine Vandemoorteele

This article analyzes the role of the European Union (EU) and Canada in the promotion of Security Sector Reforms (SSR) activities in two regional organizations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The concept of SSR seeks to address the effective governance of security in post-conflict environment by transforming the security institutions within a country in order for them to have more efficient, legitimate and democratic role in implementing security. Recent debates within the EU have led to the adoption of an SSR concept from the Council and a new strategy from the European Commission on the SSR activities. Within the framework of the ESDP, the EU has positioned itself as a leading actor, in this domain, including in its crisis management operations. On the other hand, Canada, through its whole-of government and human security programs has also been an important actor in the promotion of SSR activities. Yet, even though several international organizations (including the United Nations, the OSCE and NATO) are effectively doing SSR activities on the ground, there does not exist a common framework within any of these organizations despite the role of the EU and Canada. As such, it is surprising to found no global common policy for SSR while this approach is precisely holistic in its foundations. Taking these elements into consideration, this paper analyzes two specific aspects : a) the absence of a common policy framework within international organizations and b) the major differences between the approaches of the OSCE and NATO in the domain of SSR and the implications for the EU and Canada’ roles.   Full extt available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v3i2.186


2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-174
Author(s):  
Anne van Aaken

Ever more risky service activities are carried out across borders, creating spillovers and externalities. At the same time, if freedom to provide services is legally enabled, states can cooperate in multiple ways to mitigate the potential risks accruing from crossborder activities. Global Administrative Law Scholarship distinguishes five types of administrative regulation: “administration by formal international organizations; administrations based on collective action by transnational networks of governmental officials; distributed administration conducted by national regulators under treaty regimes, mutual recognition arrangements or cooperative standards; administration by hybrid intergovernmental–private arrangements; and administration by private institutions with regulatory functions. In practice many of these layers overlap or combine […]”. In the area of risky cross–border service provision, the EU has moved from a more decentralised version of networks and mutual recognition characterised by coordination and minimum harmonization of rules and standards to a more centralized commandand–control system with European authorities and supervision.


2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 299-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis G. Castles

This article uses a simple statistical technique to examine whether there is a distinct European social policy model and whether such a model has consolidated during the 1980s and 1990s. In terms of total social expenditure and its major aggregates, it shows that Europe as a whole, and the countries presently constituting the EU, are somewhat more similar to each other than are the countries constituting a wider OECD grouping, but that this similarity is probably insufficient to warrant the label of European social policy model. In respect of individual programmes like pensions, health and unemployment benefits differences between Europe and the wider OECD are even less distinct. Over time, there is a general tendency for there to be greater coherence in total spending levels and in levels of expenditure on poverty alleviation and health care, but less coherence in respect of levels of social security spending. While the evidence for any kind of encompassing European social model is weak, the article does identify a Northern European grouping of countries, which, in several respects, manifests an expenditure profile quite distinct from OECD nations in general.


Author(s):  
M. R. Saliya

The article discusses the issue of legal regulation of the digital currency of central banks. The experience of international organizations, as well as the fi rst steps in this direction from China, represented by the People’s Bank of China and the European Union, represented by the European Central Bank, are examined.


2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 117-138
Author(s):  
Janina Witkowska

This paper undertakes an analysis and assessment of European Union (EU) social policy in the context of the sustainability of the group's social and economic development. The process of Europeanizing EU social policy is not advanced. Thus, the weight of solving social problems primarily rests with member countries. EU social policy is "looser" in character than other EU policies and its scope is limited to those areas where member states were willing to transfer certain prerogatives to European Union level. The EU only supports social policy in the context of the sustainability of the group's social and economic development. The process of Europeanizing EU social policy is not and supplements the actions of member states in the social sphere. At the same time, the EU supports the concept of corporate social responsibility. Corporate social responsibility is defined as the voluntary taking into account by companies of social and environmental matters in their operations and in relations with interested parties.


Author(s):  
Olga Shpakovych ◽  
Sofia Penkovska

The article presents the result of theoretical and practical study of the relationship between state sovereignty and supranationalityof international organizations. In particular, it is determined that the phenomenon of supranationality of international organizations isderived from state sovereignty and acts as its external law. It has been shown that, in view of this, supranationality is limited becauseit arises through the exercise of sovereignty by states, and, accordingly, is limited by the amount of state sovereignty exercised by states.The relevant mechanism has also been studied on the example of the functioning of the European Union.Regarding the theoretical results, the following should be noted. First, it was proved that despite the different approaches of scho -lars to the understanding of supranationality, definitions of this concept and the separation of its features (properties), in each case,supranationality is a direct realization of state sovereignty. At the same time, the realization of state sovereignty in relation to such pro -perties of international organizations as supranational is primary, and supranationality in this case is derivative. In addition, the phenomenonof supranationality of international organizations due to the fact that it is derived is limited, because supranationality arisesthrough the exercise of sovereignty by states, and, accordingly, is limited by the amount of state sovereignty exercised by states. Thatis why when analyzing the relationship between the supranationality of international organizations and state sovereignty, one cannotconsider the priority of one of the two, because supranationality is in essence a manifestation of state sovereignty.Regarding the practical results, the author considers it appropriate to emphasize that both the regional international organization –the EU was studied, and, at the same time, it was proved that all theoretical provisions were reflected in practice, in particular, envisagedfunctions, goals and the tasks of the studied international organizations are limited in scope by the manifestation of sovereignty shownby states, similar to the regulations issued by organizations. Another indication that the state can exercise its sovereignty in any case isthat there is an effective and transparent procedure for leaving these organizations


2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Glencross

AbstractThis article analyses the 2005 French referendum debate on the EU Constitutional Treaty as an instance of depoliticization. Particular emphasis is placed on the argumentative strategy of President Chirac as, despite the treaty's focus on institutional reform, he eventually chose to justify the document in terms of social policy: an ultimately unconvincing strategy because voters believed it was contradicted by current EU policy priorities. On this evidence, pace Glyn Morgan, prioritizing a justification of EU finality over that of institutions and policies does not seem appropriate. Rather, the priority for integration is to overcome elites' strategies of depoliticization during referendum campaigns.


Author(s):  
Dmitry V. Agashev ◽  
◽  
Sergey G. Trifonov ◽  
Kristine V. Trifonova ◽  
◽  
...  

The article assesses the EU legal system as a unique institutional unit and highlights its features. It deals with the comparative legal aspects of the regulation of the social welfare of migrant workers in the EU and the EAEU. Attention is paid to the study of legislation on social welfare for migrant workers in the EU, as well as the possibility of realizing the experi-ence accumulated within the EAEU. It is emphasized that the use of comparative models con-cerning the social welfare of migrant workers in the EU and the EAEU can be productive, taking into account the analysis of the state and dynamics of the EU's legal policy in its historical development. The authors have analyzed the historical stages reflecting the difference within the EU approaches to the regulation of social welfare relations for migrant workers. The emphasis is on the role of EU administrative institutions, which provide a balancing approach to the key principles and social policy settings, due to the desire to eliminate distortions and possible conflicts between the norms of states. At the same time, EU members have the competence within the existing common standards of financial security obligations to expand the estab-lished standards and this makes the EU's social policy geographically differentiated. It is noted that the allied states, formed on trade and economic grounds, such as the EU and the EAEU, are characterized by an objective desire for a single legal space, with the uni-fication of approaches on the social welfare of migrant workers throughout the Union. Never-theless, in complex interstate unions, it is impossible to abandon the principle of multi-level regulation of social and security relations, and in this sense, the situation in the EU and the EAEU is quite similar. The current state of EU law in terms of regulating the relations under consideration largely preserves national legal regimes, and each of them, through its special legal means, determines a different amount of social rights of migrant workers. In the context of the EAEU, a similar approach should not be considered productive, since it does not contribute to the goals of this interstate association, defined by Article 4 of the Treaty on its creation. Therefore, within the framework of the EAEU, it is advisable to fix as early as possible the uniform standards in the area of social welfare of migrant workers, estab-lishing a relatively narrow range of powers of the member states of the Union.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document