The implementation of the IPPC Directive from a comparative perspective and lessons for its recast (Part II)

2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 319-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eberhard Bohne
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Better Regulation ◽  
Administrative Structures

AbstractThis contribution presents a comparative empirical and legal evaluation of the implementation of the IPPC directive in eight EU member states focusing on the integrated approach of the directive. The national transpositions left existing national administrative structures and procedures basically unchanged. Holistic integrated permitting does not occur in any of the countries under study. Explaining the findings with incremental political theory, they serve as the basis for some reflections on the planned recast of the IPPC directive and the prospects for better regulation. While the first part of the article (JEEPL 5.1, 2008, 1–33) displayed the basic shortcomings of the IPPC review process (1.), the concepts of integration under the Directive (2.) and the empricial analysis of the national approaches to integrated permitting (3.1–3.3) this second part explains and evaluates the findings with regard to the pending revision of the directive.

The implementation of the IPPC Directive from a comparative perspective and lessons for its recast (Part1 )

2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eberhard Bohne
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Empirical Analysis ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Better Regulation ◽  
Administrative Structures ◽  
The Empirical Analysis

AbstractThis essay presents a comparative empirical and legal evaluation of the implementation of the IPPC Directive in eight EU member states focusing on the integrated approach of the directive. The national transpositions left existing national administrative structures and procedures basically unchanged. Holistic integrated permitting does not occur in any of the countries under study. Explaining the findings with incremental political theory, they serve as the basis for some reflections on the planned recast of the IPPC Directive and the prospects for better regulation. This first part of the article displays the basic shortcomings of the IPPC review process (1.) the concepts of integration under the Directive (2.) and the empirical analysis of the national approaches to integrated permitting (3.1 – 3.3). The second part which will be published in the subsequent JEEPL issue explains and evaluates the findings with regard to the pending revision of the Directive.

scholarly journals New perspectives after the transition of EPIET to ECDC – the future of the programme

2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (43) ◽  
Author(s):  
V Bremer ◽  
A Bosman ◽  
D Coulombier
Keyword(s):  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Training Programme ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
European Public ◽  
Response Capacity ◽  
Training Activities ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Training Programmes

Strengthening capacity in intervention epidemiology is key to the overall goal of responding to the challenge to detect and counter threats posed by outbreaks of infectious diseases in the European Union (EU). Since its founding in 1995, the European Programme for Intervention Epidemiology Training (EPIET) has become a core resource in training in intervention epidemiology in the EU. EPIET was integrated into the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) on 1 November 2007 and this has resulted in an increased sustainability of the programme, allowing for long-term planning. Also, a new training programme, the European public health microbiology training (EUPHEM), was set up in 2008 to increase the response capacity for microbiology. Collaboration with EU Member States and other training programmes has been further intensified. Merging EPIET and other training activities in the ECDC training section has created the opportunity to develop an integrated multilevel approach to training in applied field epidemiology. An integrated approach to training activities on EU level, and increasing the number of EPIET and EPIET-associated fellows are essential to respond to the training needs of EU Member States, particularly new Member States. An external evaluation of EPIET in 2009 will provide guidance for a future strategy for the programme. This article examines the achievements of the EPIET programme after its transition to ECDC and provides an outlook on its future.

scholarly journals Uses and Potential Abuses of “Negative Claims” in the EU: The Urgent Need for Better Regulation

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 469-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio Carreño ◽  
Paolo Vergano
Keyword(s):  
Palm Oil ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Gluten Free ◽  
Member States ◽  
Nutrition Claims ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Better Regulation ◽  
Additional Costs ◽  
The Eu

“Negative claims” can be defined as claims indicating that certain ingredients, nutrients or substances are not present in a foodstuff. Legitimate uses of regulated negative claims in the EU include some nutrition claims and “gluten-free” claims. Some EU Member States have legislated on “GM-free” claims. The article describes in more detail some cases (i.e., BPA-free, MSG-free, Aspartame-free and palm oil-free), where negative claims are used with an implied message that whatever is used instead of the often “demonised” substance is safer, healthier or greener. The article argues that EU and EU Member States’ legislators and regulators should ensure that consumers are not misled by astute marketing techniques that have no informative agendas, but simply aim at denigrating certain products in order to promote “free-from” products. This issue is particularly timely and important given the imminent application of the EU's Food Information Regulation and the additional costs that it will impose on the industry in the name of providing complete, reliable and evidence-based information to consumers.

scholarly journals EU Armed Forces’ Use of Social Media in Areas of Deployment

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Hellman ◽  
Eva-Karin Olsson ◽  
Charlotte Wagnsson
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Us ◽  
Use Of Social Media ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Social Media Strategy

The advent of social media can be seen both as a risk and an opportunity by armed forces. Previous research has primarily examined whether or not the use of social media endangers or strengthens armed forces’ strategic narrative. We examine armed forces’ perceptions of risks and opportunities on a broad basis, with a particular focus on areas of deployment. The article is based on a survey of perceptions of social media amongst the armed forces of EU member states, thus adding to previous research through its comparative perspective. Whereas previous research has mainly focused on larger powers, such as the US and the UK, this article includes the views of the armed forces of 26 EU states, including several smaller nations. In analyzing the results we asked whether or not risk and opportunity perceptions were related to national ICT maturity and the existence of a social media strategy. The analysis shows that perceptions of opportunities outweigh perceptions of risks, with marketing and two-way communication as the two most prominent opportunities offered by the use of social media. Also, armed forces in countries with a moderate to high ICT maturity emphasize social media as a good way for marketing purposes.

scholarly journals Better regulation in the EU and its member states: experience for Ukraine

2019 ◽  
pp. 20-30
Author(s):  
Oleksandr Rudik
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Better Regulation ◽  
Regulatory Impact ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Regulatory Impact Assessment

The article examines the experience of better regulation in the EU and its member states. The European Union and the 28 EU member states show a strong political commitment towards regulatory reform. In the European Union, regulatory policy has progressed under the better regulation agenda and played a crucial role in shaping the current regulatory processes. At the same time, all EU member states have adopted an explicit policy to promote the quality of regulations. To this end, the author analyses the key findings of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 2019 report «Better Regulation Practices across the European Union». In the report the OECD has analysed the application of all 28 EU member states’ regulatory management tools to EU-made laws and regulations. The article also gives examples of the best regulatory practices of the EU member states such as Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Sweden, the United Kingdom. The article concludes that the experience of the EU and its member states in developing and implementing a better regulation policy, in particular the better regulation agenda, is beneficial for Ukraine. In this regard, the article highlights the following legislative and institutional components of this experience: stakeholder engagement in the process of policymaking and regulatory policy implementation by automatically publishing of draft regulatory acts and accompanying impact assessments on the specially designed interactive government portal; highlighting the preliminary and final stages of regulatory impact assessment of all regulations, except for deregulatory and low-cost measures, thereby taking into account stakeholder comments; regular and systematic conduct of ex ante and ex-post evaluation of laws and regulations on the basis of a specially developed sound evidence-based methodology; conducting of regulatory impact assessment and stakeholder engagement during the process of EU directives transposition into member states’ national legislation; introduction of systematic regulatory oversight and quality control of regulatory management tools, which should cover not only regulatory impact assessment practice but also stakeholder engagement.

scholarly journals ‘Thou Shalt be Saved’ (from Trial)? The Ruling of the Italian Constitutional Court on Berlusconi's Immunity Law in a Comparative Perspective

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-39
Author(s):  
Sascha Hardt ◽  
Mariolina Eliantonio
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States

Parliamentary and executive immunity – Italian Corte Costituzionale – Constitutional versus ordinary lawmaking – Comparative perspective to other EU member states – Italian situation unique

scholarly journals Reducing Administrative Burdens as Part of the »Better Regulation« Programme – the Case of Slovenia

2010 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 369-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregor Virant ◽  
Polona Kovač
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Process Optimisation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Essential Component ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Quality Principles ◽  
Better Regulation ◽  
Innovative Solutions ◽  
Principles And Standards ◽  
Almost All

The reduction of administrative burdens is an essential component of the Better Regulation programme in almost all EU Member States. The first part of the paper presents the BR programme as an attempt to modernise public administration, and it tries to define what good regulation means in accordance with various substantive and formal standards. It also describes the principles and standards of good regulation, together with the tools to achieve it. The following is a general and Slovenia-specific presentation of the removal of administrative burdens and barriers in terms of procedure simplification and deregulation (with particular emphasis on differences between process optimisation and deregulation), highlighting innovative solutions. The results, impacts, and shortcomings presented here are critically evaluated as a basis for further research. KEYWORDS: • better regulation • reduction of administrative burdens/barriers • EU • Slovenia • regulation quality • principles • standards • tools

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document