Community facilitation of problem structuring and decision making processes: Experiences from the EU LEADER+ programme

This chapter analyses what EU academics have termed the ‘democratic deficit’ in the EU. In EU law, the concept of the ‘democratic deficit’ is used to classify the EU as a system that may hold some of the qualities of a democratic government, but is lacking others. The chapter then investigates just how much ‘democracy’ exists in the EU decision-making processes. There are those who claim that the EU will never be democratic, and those who argue that the EU actually does not suffer from true shortcomings. The chapter evaluates both of those claims, and considers if recent big events in the EU — such as the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, and the so-called Eurozone financial crisis — impact upon the debate. It also looks at the nature of Brexit during the Withdrawal Agreement's transition period, as well as the future relationship between the UK and the EU.

Download Full-text

Improving decision making processes in intellectual disability care : systems thinking and problem structuring techniques to support stakeholders’ engagement in decision making

10.26481/dis.20140129md ◽

2014 ◽

Author(s):

M. Duryan

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Intellectual Disability ◽

Systems Thinking ◽

Problem Structuring ◽

Care Systems ◽

Decision Making Processes

Download Full-text

Interest Groups and the (Non-)Enforcement Powers of EU Agencies: The Case of Energy Regulation

European Journal of Risk Regulation ◽

10.1017/err.2019.38 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 10 (3) ◽

pp. 458-484

Author(s):

Martino MAGGETTI

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Interest Groups ◽

Energy Policy ◽

Regulatory Networks ◽

Energy Regulation ◽

European Network ◽

Systematic Examination ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

Eu Energy Policy ◽

The Eu

Some EU agencies have been recently entrusted with enforcement powers, which imply a crucial extension of their regulatory reach. However, other comparable agencies did not receive such powers. This paper explores the case of energy regulation as an instance of these “negative” cases, and suggests that the lack of enforcement powers may have been partially determined by business interest groups. To illustrate this argument, this article firstly relies on official documentation to show that key interest groups were consistently opposed to the option of granting enforcement powers to the EU agency in charge (ACER). Secondly, it is suggested that these interest groups, which have been largely incorporated in regulatory networks during the prehistory of the agency, had access to, and exerted influence in, the governance of EU energy policy, and could plausibly have been able to concretise their preferences. A systematic examination of the representation of interest groups in the European network of energy regulators (CEER/ERGEG) during the period 2004–2011 is undertaken to corroborate this point. The conclusion draws attention to the fact that, although interest groups are less visible than other actors and their presence is less formalised, they could be very influential on decision-making processes within European networks and agencies.

Download Full-text

EU Status In Other International Organizations

Oxford Principles Of European Union Law: The European Union Legal Order: Volume I ◽

10.1093/oso/9780199533770.003.0044 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Geert De Baere

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

European Union ◽

International Law ◽

International Organizations ◽

International Organization ◽

The European Union ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

The Eu ◽

Federal Structure

The present chapter considers the position of the European Union in other international organizations. It is based on the premise that the Union, while arguably also a federal or quasi-federal structure, is legally still itself an international organization. From the perspective of international law, that explains at least partly the complexities involved in an international organization such as the EU acquiring a status in—let alone membership of—another international organization. The term ‘status’ or ‘position’ is understood here as the influence the Union can exercise, either formally or informally, in decision-making processes in other international organizations. As an ever-increasing number of decisions having an impact on the Union’s policies originate in international organizations, its position in such fora matters.

Download Full-text

Cancer patients’ organisation participation in heath policy decision-making: a snapshot/cluster analysis of the EU-28 countries

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018896 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (8) ◽

pp. e018896 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kyriakos Souliotis ◽

Lily-Evangelia Peppou ◽

Chara Tzavara ◽

Eirini Agapidaki ◽

Dimitrios Varvaras ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Health Policy ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Patient Involvement ◽

Policy Decision ◽

Secondary Outcome ◽

Health Policy Decision ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

Policy Decision Making ◽

The Eu

ObjectivesEven though patient involvement in health policy decision-making is well documented, studies evaluating the degree and impact of this participation are scarce. This is even more conspicuous in the case of cancer. There is evidence showing that patients with the same type of cancer and at the same stage of the disease will receive different treatments in different countries. Therefore, it is crucial to assess the degree of patient participation in health policy decision-making across Europe, as it may result in health inequalities across countries. In a response to this research call, the present study aimed to provide a snapshot of cancer patients’ organisation (CPO) participation in health policy processes in European Union (EU)-28 countries.SettingCPOs from the EU-28 countries.ParticipantsPrimary and secondary outcome measures: information about participants’ sociodemographic characteristics and their involvement in their CPO was collected as well as data about the CPO. A 17-item index containing questions about the type and impact of participation in various facets of health policy decision-making was used to assess the degree of CPOs participation in health policy decision-making processes and its impact.

Download Full-text

Intergovernmental Cooperation and the Idea of Community in the Institutional and Decision-making Sphere of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy

European Review ◽

10.1017/s1062798715000290 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 23 (4) ◽

pp. 540-552

Author(s):

Michal Piechowicz

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Security Policy ◽

Institutional Structure ◽

Evolutionary Development ◽

Treaty Of Lisbon ◽

Intergovernmental Cooperation ◽

Foreign And Security Policy ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

The Common ◽

The Eu

The Treaty of Lisbon (TL) altered the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) not only in its institutional structure, but also in its function and decision making processes. These changes affected the competences of member states, other authorities, and their relationships. They also influenced the prospects for intergovernmental cooperation and the evolutionary development of communitisation phenomena within this policy.

Download Full-text

Effects of gender equality institutionalization in the EU

Sociologija ◽

10.2298/soc1503490c ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 57 (3) ◽

pp. 490-504

Author(s):

Lilijana Cickaric

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Gender Equality ◽

Legal Framework ◽

Global Strategy ◽

The European Union ◽

Participation Of Women ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

Women In Decision Making ◽

The Impact ◽

The Eu

The impact of the EU on the implementation of the policy of equal opportunities for women can be seen from harmonization of legislation and construction of institutions for protection of women?s rights, and through participation of women in decision-making processes. The first part of the article discusses the theoretical framework for research the effects of institutionalization of gender equality in the EU. In the second section the institutional and legal framework are represented as a part of the global strategy aimed at achieving gender equality. The problems dealt with in the third part of the article concerning the presence of women at different levels of decision-making in the European Union. The newest data base from gender research for European Commission and European Parliament is used for this research. Index of Gender Equality (EIGE) shows that there are huge differences between Member States and that the EU is only halfway to achieving gender equality. Therefore, the integration of gender perspective in all fields and searching for measures to achieve higher level of gender equality are the focal points in EU gender politics.

Download Full-text

Drawing the Short Straw: Disproportional Effects of Russian Sanctions on Central Europe and the Baltic States

Canadian Journal of European and Russian Studies ◽

10.22215/cjers.v10i1.2493 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Jacqueline Dufalla

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Soviet Bloc ◽

Economic Assistance ◽

The European Union ◽

Member States ◽

Eu Member States ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

The Baltic ◽

Southern European Countries ◽

The Eu

In 2014, the agricultural sanctions Russia imposed on the European Union (EU) had a perceivable impact on the EU’s economy. Yet the sanctions arguably had a disproportionate impact, which suggests they were particularly successful in exposing underlying issues within the EU. Specifically, former Soviet bloc countries and southern European countries were far more greatly impacted by the sanctions than the larger western EU member states. This brings to light problems of disproportionate representation of member states within decision-making processes (especially within the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development), and the fragility of the EU's internal cohesion. By comparing typical decision-making processes of the EU with its responses during times of crisis, it becomes clear that the EU’s decision-making process and its internal cohesion with regard to economic assistance for former Soviet states, are vulnerable to Russia’s actions. The essay will conclude with recommendations on how to improve EU decision-making during times of crisis to counter this vulnerability. Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v10i1.261

Download Full-text

The Ordinary Legislative Procedure

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics ◽

10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1044 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Maja Kluger Dionigi ◽

Anne Rasmussen

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Democratic Legitimacy ◽

The European Union ◽

Formal Rule ◽

Rule Changes ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

Legislative Procedure ◽

Ordinary Legislative Procedure ◽

Free Environment ◽

The Eu

The ordinary legislative procedure (OLP), previously known as co-decision, has marked a significant milestone in the development of the European Union (EU) and transformed the way its institutions interact. What was initially seen as a cumbersome decision-making procedure subject to considerable criticism ended up being quite successful. The workings of the OLP have gradually developed, including both informal and formal rule changes to ensure a smoother functioning of the procedure. While the EU Council is still seen as the strongest body in the interinstitutional balance, the European Parliament (EP) is a co-legislator in most policy areas. After introducing the option to conclude legislation at first reading, so-called early agreements have become the norm in the OLP. The increase in early agreements by means of trilogues has speeded up decision-making but has not come without costs. Concerns have been raised about the transparency of trilogues and the accountability of the actors involved. Not surprisingly, these concerns have led to a shift in the research of the OLP from an emphasis on the powers of the different EU institutions to early agreements and their consequences for democratic legitimacy. Our careful review of the EU institutions’ own rules and practices governing trilogue negotiations shows that the rules and procedures for the conduct of negotiations have been adapted significantly over time. While there is a continued need for the EU to keep enforcing openness in its procedures, OLP interinstitutional bargaining does not operate in a rule-free environment. Yet most democratic scrutiny has been directed at the internal decision-making processes in the EP rather than at maximizing openness on the Council side or with respect to input from interest groups in the negotiation processes.

Download Full-text

From Integration to Exclusion: EU Composite Administration and Gaps in Judicial Accountability in the Authorisation of Pharmaceuticals

European Journal of Risk Regulation ◽

10.1017/err.2019.32 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

pp. 393-411 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Sabrina RÖTTGER-WIRTZ ◽

Mariolina ELIANTONIO

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Composite Structures ◽

Marketing Authorisation ◽

Mutual Recognition ◽

Internal Market ◽

Pharmaceutical Marketing ◽

Commission Decision ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

The Eu

In the EU, pharmaceuticals are subject to a marketing authorisation requirement that, depending on the type of product concerned, can be obtained either centrally through a Commission decision with EU-wide effects or in the Member States, potentially subject to mutual recognition in composite authorisation procedures. These composite decision-making processes can nowadays be considered a standard way of administrative decision-making in the EU internal market. Yet, judicial supervision remains anchored in the separation of jurisdictions between the national and the EU level, and between national levels. This article explores the challenges posed to judicial review in the case of pharmaceutical marketing authorisations when European administrative composite structures are used.

Download Full-text