Europe will find ways to work more closely with Taiwan

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
China Policy ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The One ◽  
The Eu

Significance Taipei has seized the opportunity, increasing its lobbying of both EU institutions and member states. China has threatened that those supporting closer ties with Taiwan will "pay a heavy price”. Impacts The Czech Republic’s new government will promote ties with Taiwan as during its presidency of the EU Council in the second half of 2022. No member state or EU institution is ready to abandon the 'One China' policy, but they will find ways to increase interaction with Taipei. There will be further rhetorical skirmishes and credible Chinese threats of sanctions on European individuals promoting ties with Taiwan.

EU comitology reform could politicise regulation

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Interest Group ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Eu Regulation ◽  
Regulatory Decisions ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Final Reform

Subject Proposed reform of the EU comitology procedure. Significance The little-known ‘comitology’ procedure plays a key role in EU regulation. In recent years, this process has been breaking down as member-state expert representatives in comitology committees often abstain from voting, forcing the European Commission to take controversial decisions on its own (and accept any blame for them). In response, the Commission has proposed reforms that would pressure member states to take a position on (and hence political ownership of) controversial regulatory decisions. Impacts Government representatives, interest-group representatives and corporate lobbyists will be most affected by comitology reform. Despite adding transparency and avoiding blame-shifting to Brussels, the reforms would probably not help the EU’s image with citizens. The European Parliament might demand -- as part of any final reform package -- an increase in its involvement in the comitology process.

Practice of the member states of the European Union in the field of anti-corruption regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmytro S. Melnyk ◽  
Oleg A. Parfylo ◽  
Oleksii V. Butenko ◽  
Olena V. Tykhonova ◽  
Volodymyr O. Zarosylo
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Content Analysis Method ◽  
The Eu

Purpose The experience of most European Union (EU) Member States has demonstrated effective anti-corruption practices, making the EU one of the leaders in this field, which can be used as an example to learn from in the field of anti-corruption. The purpose of this study is to analyze and identify the main features of anti-corruption legislation and strategies to prevent corruption at the national and supranational levels of the EU. Design/methodology/approach The following methods were used in the work: discourse and content analysis, method of system analysis, method of induction and deduction, historical-legal method, formal-legal method, comparative-legal method and others. Using the historical and legal method, the evolution of the formation of anti-corruption regulation at the supranational level was revealed. The comparative law method helped to compare the practices of the Member States of the EU in the field of anti-corruption regulation. The formal-legal method is used for generalization, classification and systematization of research results, as well as for the correct presentation of these results. Findings The main results, prospects for further research and the value of the material. The paper offers a critical review of key EU legal instruments on corruption, from the first initiatives taken in the mid-1990s to recent years. Originality/value In addition, the article analyzes the relevant anti-corruption legislation in the EU member states that are in the top 10 countries with the lowest level of corruption, namely: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg.

scholarly journals The European Union's policy on human rights and Chinese sovereignism: The case of Xinjiang

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-86
Author(s):  
Dragan Trailovic
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
The Other ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The One ◽  
Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region ◽  
Rights Issues ◽  
The Eu

The article explores the European Union's approach to human rights issues in China through the processes of bilateral and multilateral dialogue on human rights between the EU and the People's Republic of China, on the one hand. On the other hand, the paper deals with the analysis of the EU's human rights policy in the specific case of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, which is examined through normative and political activities of the EU, its institutions and individual member states. Besides, the paper examines China's response to the European Union's human rights approaches, in general, but also when it comes to the specific case of UAR Xinjiang. ?his is done through a review of China's discourse and behaviour within the EU-China Human Rights Dialogue framework, but also at the UN level and within the framework of bilateral relations with individual member states. The paper aims to show whether and how the characteristics of the EU's general approach to human rights in China are reflected in the individual case of Xinjiang. Particular attention shall be given to the differentiation of member states in terms of their approach to human rights issues in China, which is conditioned by the discrepancy between their political values, normative interests and ideational factors, on the one hand, and material factors and economic interests, on the other. Also, the paper aims to show the important features of the different views of the European Union and the Chinese state on the very role of Human Rights Dialogue, as well as their different understandings of the concept of human rights itself. The study concluded that the characteristics of the Union's general approach to human rights in China, as well as the different perceptions of human rights issues between China and the EU, were manifested in the same way in the case of UAR Xinjiang.

scholarly journals Durable Relationship and Family Members “by Analogy” in the European Union

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 175
Author(s):  
Tanel Feldman ◽  
Marco Mazzeschi
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Family Member ◽  
Family Members ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Registered Partnership ◽  
The Family ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Union Citizen ◽  
The Eu

Rights of residence derived from a durable relationship with an EU citizen, are left to a relatively wide discretion of the Member States. Pursuant to Article 2.2 (b) Directive 2004/38/EC (“Directive”), “the partner with whom the Union citizen has contracted a registered partnership, on the basis of the legislation of a Member State, if the legislation of the host Member State treats registered partnerships as equivalent to marriage and in accordance with the conditions laid down in the relevant legislation of the host Member State” qualifies as family member. Provided that they have a durable relationship (duly attested) with an EU citizen, pursuant to Article 3.2(b), unregistered partners are as well beneficiaries of the Directive. The durable relationship was expressly excluded from the scope of Article 2(2)(b): “Unlike the amended proposal, it does not cover de facto durable relationships” (EU Commission, Document 52003SC1293). Article 3 (2)(a) covers “other family members” (no restrictions as to the degree of relatedness) if material support is provided by the EU citizen or by his partner or where serious health grounds strictly require the personal care of the family member by the Union citizen. Pursuant to Article 3.2, “other family members” and unregistered partners can attest a durable relationship, must be facilitated entry and residence, in accordance to the host Member State’s national legislation. In the light of Preamble 6 Directive, the situation of the persons who are not included in the definition of family members, must be considered “in order to maintain the unity of the family in a broader sense”. The questions discussed in this paper are the following: (i) are Member States genuinely considering the concept of durable relationship in view of maintaining the unity of the family in a broader sense? and (ii) how to overcome legal uncertainty and which criteria, both at EU and at international level, can be taken into account in order to assess whether a durable relationship is genuine and should be granted the rights set forth by the Directive?

scholarly journals Russian-German initiative tackles infectious diseases

2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (19) ◽  
Author(s):  
Collective Editorial team
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
Member State ◽  
Union Member ◽  
Member States ◽  
Transnational Cooperation ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu

Transnational cooperation is often essential when dealing with infectious diseases, and one challenge facing European Union Member States is finding ways to collaborate with partners outside the EU. An example of one Member State doing just this is the Koch-Metschnikow-Forum (KMF).

scholarly journals The Effect of Enforceability

Lexonomica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-28
Author(s):  
Bettina Nunner-Krautgasser
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
European Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Coercive Measures ◽  
Res Judicata ◽  
Performance Judgments ◽  
Austrian Law ◽  
The Eu

In this paper, the author focuses on the effect of enforceability, in particular in relation to Austrian law. However, insights into German and European law are also provided. Enforceability is an effect of a judgment which is basically only granted to performance judgments. Declaratory and constitutive decisions (with the exception of the decision on costs) are not enforceable as such. As a result, the order for performance contained in the judgment can be enforced by state coercive measures. Enforceability occurs upon termination of the performance period. Enforceability is neither a consequence of, nor necessarily coincides with, res judicata. The introduction of the Brussels Ia Regulation has fundamentally changed the system of enforcement of foreign decisions. Decisions given in the EU Member State and enforceable in that State are now enforceable in another Member States without the need for a declaration of enforceability.

The integrated assessment of RES cooperation between the EU and its neighbours

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 427-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marijke Welisch ◽  
Gustav Resch ◽  
André Ortner
Keyword(s):  
Renewable Energy ◽  
North Africa ◽  
Renewable Energy Sources ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Western Balkans ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Good Resource ◽  
The Eu

Purpose The purpose of the paper is to provide estimation results for feasibility of renewable energy source (RES) deployment in Turkey, the Western Balkans and North Africa. From these results, the potential for cooperation in renewables production between the countries and the European Union (EU) is assessed and evaluated, in a mid- (2030) and long-term (up to 2040) perspective. Design/methodology/approach The authors focus on the quantitative assessments undertaken on the extent to which RES cooperation can create mutual benefits, identifying costs and benefits for both sides, but in particular with respect to RES target achievement (2020 and 2030) at EU level. The potentials for RES generation in Turkey, North Africa and the Western Balkans are calculated under different policy pathways, taking into account different levels of economic and non-economic barriers that could occur. Findings Overall, the authors found that increasing RES deployment in the three analysed regions and initiating or intensifying cooperation with EU28 Member States leads to mutual benefits. Concretely, these benefits become apparent in terms of the EU Member States importing renewable energy sources for electricity with a good resource quality and adding on to their targets for RES deployment. At the same time, substantial savings occur for the EU, in turn leading to income and investments in the cooperating regions. Originality/value The assessment underlying this paper is the first of its kind to the authors’ knowledge that opens up the geographical spread in comparison to merely assessing cooperation between Europe and the Middle East and North Africa. Furthermore, the multitude of policy parameters analysed provides detailed and robust insights concerning a broad variety of different possible scenarios.

European social models in times of crisis: Sapir’s contribution reviewed

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (3/4) ◽  
pp. 295-311
Author(s):  
Matilde Lafuente-Lechuga ◽  
Úrsula Faura-Martínez ◽  
Olga García-Luque
Keyword(s):  
Economic Crisis ◽  
Poverty Reduction ◽  
Graphical Analysis ◽  
Social Model ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Social Models ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Europe 2020 ◽  
The Eu

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to show evidence of the divergence of welfare outcomes in the European Union (EU) during the economic crisis, which made the European social model fail, and the convergence among European countries halt. This study reviews Sapir’s model for classifying European welfare state systems and adapts it to the new reality, taking into account Europe 2020 targets on poverty reduction and employment growth. Design/methodology/approach Two variables are used in the application of Sapir’s graphical analysis to European social models: the employment rate as efficiency indicator, and the people At Risk Of Poverty and/or Exclusion rate as equity indicator. Both efficiency and equity are present in Europe 2020 targets. In addition, a cluster analysis is applied. Findings The division of EU member states into four geopolitical social models has proved to be dynamic, changing in the period under analysis. As a consequence of the economic crisis and the fiscal consolidation, efficiency and equity levels across the EU are polarised between the Mediterranean and the Nordic models. Originality/value This paper shows the effects of the economic crisis in the EU, analysing the evolution between 2008 and 2014, and incorporating Eastern Europe new member states into the analysis.

scholarly journals Difference of application of VAT in EU member states during the supply of goods including installation

2008 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 47-56
Author(s):  
Petr David ◽  
Danuše Nerudová
Keyword(s):  
Czech Republic ◽  
Member State ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
The State ◽  
Member States ◽  
Standard Methods ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

There still exist the differences in provision of VAT, in interpretation of VAT provisions and application of the rules in practice between the EU member states. Application of VAT during the supply of goods with installation to other EU member state, both during the existence of establishment in the state of customer and also without it, is considered to be one from the problematic field. Other discrepancies are created by inclusion of the sub suppliers, who can come from other EU member state or from the same state as customer, to this transaction. Questions of VAT application during the supply of goods with installation to other EU member state were processed by using standard methods of scientific work in the frame of five selected EU countries – Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Czech Republic.

Harmonising public sector accounting laws and regulations of the European Union member states: powers and competences

2021 ◽  
pp. 002085232110600
Author(s):  
Karoline Helldorff ◽  
Johan Christiaens
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Public ◽  
Public Sector Accounting ◽  
Will Force ◽  
The One ◽  
Rules Set ◽  
The Eu

This paper analyses the powers and competences of the EU to standardise public sector accounting of the member states and to take other EU action in the field of public sector accounting. We argue that public sector accounting forms part of the administrative organisation of the member states that is not a core EU competence. EU initiatives such as the European Public Sector Accounting Standards project, which aim to increase transparency and comparability, therefore need to follow the rules set out for administrative matters in general. The study reveals on the one hand that EU actions are essentially limited to voluntary cooperation and influences of other policy areas. But on the other hand, it shows that they do not need to be limited to the initiatives currently driven by Eurostat. Points for practitioners The future of the European Public Sector Accounting Standards project is uncertain. However, it is very unlikely that it will take the shape of a top-down set of readymade EU accounting standards that will force public administrations to adjust their inner workings. Public sector accounting is not (yet) a (typical) European policy, but simply a national one that the EU can support. The EU initiative can be considered as an opportunity for collaboration and knowledge sharing on how to increase transparency of public sector accounting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document