18. Internal Policies

2021 ◽  
pp. 779-844
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze

This chapter provides an overview of four internal Union policy areas that have come to significantly affect the lives of European citizens. It begins by introducing the Union's Economic and Monetary Policy. This policy is not only responsible for the creation of a common European currency—the euro—which has become a leading world currency; it recently provoked enormous controversy over the powers of the European Union to interfere with national economic choices. The chapter then moves to ‘Social Policy’; this is an important internal policy for a continent that prides itself on being the ‘social continent’. It also explores the Treaty title on ‘Consumer Protection’, which has had an enormous impact on national contract laws. Finally, the chapter looks at the Union's regional or cohesion policy.

Author(s):  
Adviye Damla Ünlü

Globalization, the much-debated phenomenon of the last decade, has affected the governance of policies. Social policy governance is one of the most affected notions of the globalization process. Context of debates on social policy governance has been transformed from state-centric analysis to the multi-centric analysis. The future of the social policy is highly linked to both global governance and regional governance. In this regard, the aim of this chapter is to draw attention to the multi-centric nature of the social policy governance and to form a framework for the effects of intergovernmental institutions on social policy governance and to discuss their weaknesses and strengths particularly regarding the United Nations, Bretton Woods institutions and the European Union.


Author(s):  
Mary Daly

Social policy has a particular character and set of associated politics in the European Union (EU) context. There is a double contestation involved: the extent of the EU’s agency in the field and the type of social policy model pursued. The former is contested because social policy is typically and traditionally a matter of national competence and the latter because the social policy model is crucial to economic and market development. Hence, social policy has both functional and political significance, and EU engagement risks member states’ capacity to control the social fate of their citizens and the associated resources, authority, and power that come with this capacity. The political contestations are at their core territorially and/or social class based; the former crystalizes how wide and extensive the EU authority should be in social policy and the latter a left/right continuum in regard to how redistributive and socially interventionist EU social policy should be. Both are the subject of a complicated politics at EU level. First, there is a diverse set of agents involved, not just member states and the “political” EU institutions (Parliament and Council) but the Commission is also an important “interested” actor. This renders institutional politics and jockeying for power typical features of social policymaking in the EU. Second, one has to break down the monolith of the EU institutions and recognize that within and among them are actors or units that favor a more left or right position on social policy. Third, actors’ positions do not necessarily align on the two types of contestation (apart perhaps from the social nongovernmental organizations and to a lesser extent employers and business interests). Some actors who favor an extensive role for social policy in general are skeptical about the role of the EU in this regard (e.g., trade unions, some social democratic parties) while others (some sectors of the Commission) wish for a more expansive EU remit in social policy but also support a version of social policy pinned tightly to market and economic functions. In this kind of context, the strongest and most consistent political thrust is toward a type of EU social policy that is most clearly oriented to enabling the Union’s economic and market-related objectives. Given this and the institutional set-up, the default position in EU social policy is for a market-making social policy orientation on the one hand and a circumscribed role for the EU in social policy on the other.


Author(s):  
Shannon Dinan

The European Union has no unilateral legislative capacity in the area of social policy. However, the European Commission does play the role of guide by providing a discursive framework and targets for its 28 Member States to meet. Since the late 1990’s, the EU’s ideas on social policy have moved away from the traditional social protection model towards promoting social inclusion, labour activation and investing in children. These new policies represent the social investment perspective, which advocates preparing the population for a knowledge-based economy to increase economic growth and job creation and to break the intergenerational transmission of poverty. The EU began the gradual incorporation of the social investment perspective to its social dimension with the adoption of ten-year strategies. Since 2000, it has continued to set goals and benchmarks as well as offer a forum for Member States to coordinate their social initiatives. Drawing on a series of interviews conducted during a research experience in Brussels as well as official documents, this paper is a descriptive analysis of the recent modifications to the EU’s social dimension. It focuses on the changes created by the Europe 2020 Strategy and the Social Investment Package. By tracing the genesis and evolution of these initiatives, the author identifies four obstacles to social investment in the European Union's social dimension.   Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v10i1.263


Author(s):  
Adviye Damla Ünlü

Globalization, the much-debated phenomenon of the last decade, has affected the governance of policies. Social policy governance is one of the most affected notions of the globalization process. Context of debates on social policy governance has been transformed from state-centric analysis to the multi-centric analysis. The future of the social policy is highly linked to both global governance and regional governance. In this regard, the aim of this chapter is to draw attention to the multi-centric nature of the social policy governance and to form a framework for the effects of intergovernmental institutions on social policy governance and to discuss their weaknesses and strengths particularly regarding the United Nations, Bretton Woods institutions and the European Union.


2020 ◽  
pp. 203195252094533
Author(s):  
Vincent Février

The Concept of worker is the gateway to the access to the protection of labour and social security law. The Court of Justice of the European Union first defined this concept in the field of the Free Movement of Workers in the Lawrie-Blum case. The scope of this article is to compare the definitions used by the Court in the fields of the free movement of workers and in the Social Policy Directives, in order to ascertain to which extent they can differ. Our in-depth analysis of the case law offers a nuanced picture. On one hand, it highlights that the Court tries to extend the application of the Lawrie-Blum formula to Directives which do not refer back to the national definitions of a worker, but that specificities remain in this area, like the emphasis on the link of subordination. On the other hand, for Directives referring to a national concept of workers, the Court began recently to state that, even if the competence of the Member States on this question must be acknowledged, it is not limitless.


2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon Dinan

The European Union has no unilateral legislative capacity in the area of social policy. However, the European Commission does play the role of guide by providing a discursive framework and targets for its 28 Member States to meet. Since the late 1990’s, the EU’s ideas on social policy have moved away from the traditional social protection model towards promoting social inclusion, labour activation and investing in children. These new policies represent the social investment perspective, which advocates preparing the population for a knowledge-based economy to increase economic growth and job creation and to break the intergenerational transmission of poverty. The EU began the gradual incorporation of the social investment perspective to its social dimension with the adoption of ten-year strategies. Since 2000, it has continued to set goals and benchmarks as well as offer a forum for Member States to coordinate their social initiatives. Drawing on a series of interviews conducted during a research experience in Brussels as well as official documents, this paper is a descriptive analysis of the recent modifications to the EU’s social dimension. It focuses on the changes created by the Europe 2020 Strategy and the Social Investment Package. By tracing the genesis and evolution of these initiatives, the author identifies four obstacles to social investment in the European Union's social dimension.


1994 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 247-266
Author(s):  
Theodor Strohm

Abstract Besides the economical criteria of convergence, which have been precisely laid down in the EC-treaties, especially in the treaties of Maastricht, the integration of labour markets is an explicit aim of the European Union. Considering that approx. 19 million employees within the EC are not gainfully employed, a common and well-aimed labour market policy seems to be one of the major responsibilities of European economical and social policy. The instruments of job creation and preservation in Germany are being compared with the aims of the EC-comission, also experiences of other countries are being involved. The Christian Churches in Europe are committed to get involved in tackling unemployment and its human-destructing effects. The Social Chamber of the EKD has made continuous proposals. At present, it is working on continuing its previous memorandums on unemployment. With this, also the memorandum ))Responsibility for a Social Europe« (1992) is being continued and put into concrete terms.


2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 695-714 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moritz Hartmann

Between the relics of a nation state past and the promises of a transnational future, the normative evolution of the European Union has rightly been described as “an international legal experiment.” Europeanization, in that sense, has been construed as an experimental legal mode for the integration of national economic diversity through harmonized regulation. Even though the European Union's operating code has remained decisively economic, the normative matrix itself has transcended the historical objective of economic homogeneity. European integration therefore experienced a normative turn after the completion of the single market; the European Union progressively captured the social space of the continent, evolving into a societal experiment of normative imagination and cultural plurality, taking it beyond economic integration, market freedoms, and monetary stability.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document