scholarly journals The Limited Role of the European Union in the Management and Governance of the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 482-506
Author(s):  
Joelle Grogan

Abstract Building on two global Symposia hosted by the Verfassungsblog and convened by the author, the 2020 “COVID-19 and States of Emergency” and the 2021 “Power and the COVID-19 Pandemic”, in addition to the findings of the Democracy Reporting International ‘Rule of Law Stress Test’ which surveyed EU Member States’ responses to the pandemic, this article investigates the impact of the pandemic on governance and legal systems within the EU, and evaluates the actions taken by EU institutions and national governments in response to the health crisis against the standards of the rule of law.

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
Juan Carlos Martín ◽  
Concepción Román

During March and April 2020, the European Union (EU) was the center of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many national governments imposed severe lockdown policies to mitigate the health crisis, but the citizens’ support to these policies was unknown. The aim of this paper was to analyze empirically how citizens in the EU have reacted towards the measures taken by the national governments. To this end, a microeconometric model (ordered probit) that explains the citizens’ satisfaction by a number of attitudes and sociodemographic factors was estimated using a wide database formed by 21,804 European citizens in 21 EU countries who responded a survey between 23 April and 1 May 2020. Our results revealed that Spaniards were the least satisfied citizens in comparison with Danes, Irelanders, Greeks, and Croats, who were the most satisfied nationals. The years of education and the social class also played a determinant role. We also found that the most important determinant was the political support to the government, and that those who were more worried by the economy and the protection of individual rights were usually more critical of the measures than those who were more worried by the health consequences.


Author(s):  
Amy Verdun

European integration theories help us understand the actors and mechanisms that drive European integration. Traditionally, European integration scholars used grand theories of integration to explain why integration progresses or stands still. Born out of assumptions that are prevalent in realist international relations theories, intergovernmentalism was first developed as a theory in opposition to neofunctionalism. In a nutshell, intergovernmentalism argues that states (i.e., national governments or state leaders), based on national interests, determine the outcome of integration. Intergovernmentalism was seen as a plausible explanatory perspective during the 1970s and 1980s, when the integration process seemed to have stalled. Despite the fact that it could not explain many of the gradual incremental changes or informal politics, intergovernmentalism—as did various other approaches—gained renewed popularity in the 1990s, following the launch of liberal intergovernmentalism. During that decade, the study of European integration was burgeoning, triggered in part by the aim to complete the single market and the signing of the Maastricht Treaty that launched the European Union (EU). Intergovernmentalism also often received considerable pushback from researchers who were unconvinced by its core predictions. Attempts to relaunch intergovernmentalism were made in the 2010s, in response to the observation that EU member states played a prominent role in dealing with the various crises that the EU was confronted with at that time, such as the financial crisis and the migration crisis. Although intergovernmentalism is unable —and is not suited—to explain all aspects of European integration, scholars revert to intergovernmentalism as a theoretical approach in particular when examining the role of member states in European politics. Outside the EU, in the international arena (such as the United Nations), intergovernmentalism is also observed when studying various forums in which member states come together to bargain over particular collective outcomes in an intergovernmental setting.


Author(s):  
Juan Carlos Martín ◽  
Concepción Román

During March and April 2020, the European Union (EU) was the center of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many National Governments imposed severe lockdown policies to mitigate the health crisis. The European Parliament commissioned a survey to analyse the citizens’ attitudes over a number of issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic. 21804 European citizens in 21 EU countries responded the survey between 23 April and 1 May 2020. The paper analyses empirically the individual satisfaction that European citizens have experienced over the measures taken by the respective National Governments to control the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis is based on a micro-econometric model (ordered probit) that explains the citizens’ satisfaction by a number of attitudes and sociodemographic factors. Our results reveal that Spaniards are the least satisfied citizens in comparison with Danes, Irelanders, Greeks and Croats who are the most satisfied nationals. The years of education and the social class also play a determinant role. We also find that the most important determinant is the political support to the Government, and that those who are more worried by the economy and the protection of individual rights are usually more critic with the measures than those who are more worried by the health consequences.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 6278
Author(s):  
Lars Carlsen ◽  
Rainer Bruggemann

The inequality within the 27 European member states has been studied. Six indicators proclaimed by Eurostat to be the main indicators charactere the countries: (i) the relative median at-risk-of-poverty gap, (ii) the income distribution, (iii) the income share of the bottom 40% of the population, (iv) the purchasing power adjusted GDP per capita, (v) the adjusted gross disposable income of households per capita and (vi) the asylum applications by state of procedure. The resulting multi-indicator system was analyzed applying partial ordering methodology, i.e., including all indicators simultaneously without any pretreatment. The degree of inequality was studied for the years 2010, 2015 and 2019. The EU member states were partially ordered and ranked. For all three years Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Austria, and Finland are found to be highly ranked, i.e., having rather low inequality. Bulgaria and Romania are, on the other hand, for all three years ranked low, with the highest degree of inequality. Excluding the asylum indicator, the risk-poverty-gap and the adjusted gross disposable income were found as the most important indicators. If, however, the asylum application is included, this indicator turns out as the most important for the mutual ranking of the countries. A set of additional indicators was studied disclosing the educational aspect as of major importance to achieve equality. Special partial ordering tools were applied to study the role of the single indicators, e.g., in relation to elucidate the incomparability of some countries to all other countries within the union.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-224
Author(s):  
D. A. Potapov

The paper examines the role of investment cooperation and national foreign investment regime as a means to promote China’s economic and political interests and to respond to new global challenges that the country faces nowadays. To this end, the author examines the main stages of China’s liberalization of the legal regime for foreign investment from the end of the 1970s with a special focus on a new foreign investment law. In doing so the author attempts to link the evolution of investment regulation in the PRC with the dynamics of international relations development and the changing role of China as a regional and global actor. The author emphasizes that a trend towards the emergence of a polycentric world order not only provokes the rise of international tensions but also provides new incentives to promote dialogue and enhance cooperation between states and non-governmental actors, particularly by encouraging foreign investments. At the same time, there is a growing need to improve regulatory mechanisms for direct foreign investments. All these contradictory trends have directly affected China’s foreign investment regime reform. In this context the investment cooperation between the PRC and the European Union is of particular importance. The EU possesses a set of innovative technological solutions and competencies that are of particular interest to the Chinese leaders in the context of their efforts to modernize the country’s economy. The paper examines the volume, dynamics and key directions of investment flows between China and the EU member-states. The fact that after seven years of difficult negotiations, the EU and China managed to develop a special bilateral regulatory mechanism — EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment — underscores again the importance of this cooperation for both parties. Even though the EU has suspended the ratification of this deal on the pretext of human right violations in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, the author concludes, that in the future this agreement will come into force, since the very logic of the emerging polycentric world order urges for deeper cooperation between the EU and China. In this context, the investment regulation appears not only as a means to protect the Chinese economic interests, but also as an instrument to strengthen China’s international positions in the changing global context.


2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 394-399
Author(s):  
Pieter Emmer

In spite of the fact that negotiations have been going on for years, the chances that Turkey will eventually become a full member of the European Union are slim. At present, a political majority among the EU-member states headed by Germany seems to oppose Turkey entering the EU. In the Netherlands, however, most political parties are still in favour of Turkey's membership. That difference coincides with the difference in the position of Turkish immigrants in German and Dutch societies.


Author(s):  
Artur Nowak-Far

AbstractAt present, the European rule of law enforcement framework under Article 7 TEU (RLF) is vulnerable to unguaranteed, discretionary influences of the Member States. This vulnerability arises from its procedural format which requires high thresholds in decision-making with the effect that this procedure is prone to be terminated by the EU Member States likely to be scrutinized under it, if only they collude. Yet, the Framework may prove effective to correct serious breaches against human rights (in the context of ineffective rule of law standards). The European Commission is bound to pursue the RLF effectiveness for the sake of achieving relative uniformity of application of EU law (at large), and making the European Union a credible actor and co-creator of international legal order. The RLF is an important tool for the maintenance of relative stability of human rights and the rule of law in the EU despite natural divergence propensity resulting from the procedural autonomy of the EU Member States. By achieving this stability, the EU achieves significant political weight in international dialogue concerning human rights and the rule of law and preserves a high level of its global credibility in this context. Thus, RLF increases the EU’s effectiveness in promoting the European model of their identification and enforcement.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-37
Author(s):  
Alena Dorakh

Despite recent concerns about the increasing influence of outside investors on the European Union (EU) and Western Balkans, the developed European countries are still a dominant source of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the region, confirming the benefits of EU membership. At the same time, fast-growing connectivity and lower trade costs in accession and neighboring countries determine the FDI growth from China, particularly via the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). By applying panel data over 2000-2019 for 34 countries, which form 89% of all European FDI, we first examine FDI patterns around Europe, compare the EU, NMS, and Western Balkans; verify the importance of EU membership for FDI, caused reducing trade costs and improving connectivity. Thus, the new EU member states (NMS) and Western Balkans appear both as a home country and as a pre- entry destination to the EU. Then, we calculate trade costs indices for each selected country and partners over time and find that Europe and China are closely interconnected through trade and FDI. It means that stronger ties with China can be realized for the sample countries at the cost of easing relations with the EU. Finally, incorporating trade costs indices into the FDI model; we evaluate the impact of connectivity on FDI and estimate how BRI affected FDI in Europe. Additionally, we validate that the old framework of horizontal and vertical FDI not representative well and even new complex vertical or export-oriented FDI strategies are shifting today.


Author(s):  
Thomas Kalinowski

The global role of the European Union and its position in the trilemma triangle differ substantially from the global–hegemonic approach pursued by US finance-led capitalism. This chapter first explores the historical choices that countries in Europe made after the collapse of the BWS and the internal, regional dynamics of an emerging integration-led euro capitalism. We show that the EU (and until 1992 the European Economic Community) developed a distinct regional solution for the challenges of globalization with the creation of the single market and the European Monetary Union. This growth model is based economically on a specific European complementary specialization production system and politically on a distinct form of euro-corporatism. This does not mean that national governments and national political economies have become irrelevant, but rather that there is a convergence towards a common EU position when it comes to global economic governance.


2019 ◽  
pp. 16-51
Author(s):  
Anniek de Ruijter

This book looks at the impact of the expanding power of the EU in terms of fundamental rights and values. The current chapter lays down the framework for this analysis. Law did not always have a central role to play in the context of medicine and health. The role of law grew after the Second Word War and the Nuremberg Doctors Trials (1947), in which preventing the repetition of atrocities that were committed in the name of medicine became a guidepost for future law regarding patients’ rights and bioethics. In the period after the War, across the EU Member States, health law developed as a legal discipline in which a balance was struck in medicine and public health between law, bioethics, and fundamental rights. The role of EU fundamental rights protections in the context of public health and health care developed in relation with the growth of multilevel governance and litigation (national, international, Council of Europe, and European Union). For the analysis here, this chapter develops an EU rights and values framework that goes beyond the strictly legal and allows for a ‘normative language’ that takes into consideration fundamental rights as an expression of important shared values in the context of the European Union. The perspective of EU fundamental rights and values can demonstrate possible tensions caused by EU health policy: implications in terms of fundamental rights can show how highly sensitive national policy issues may be affected by the Member States’ participation in EU policymaking activities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document