Environmental Reporting by the EU Member States and the Commission – Current Practices, Legislative Action and a Way Forward

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-228
Author(s):  
Anna Vanhellemont

Literature on environmental reporting by Member States and the Commission is scarce. Furthermore, the way in which environmental reporting is construed in EU legislation and takes place in practice in the Member States, has only recently been subject to a comprehensive review. Following the 2017 Fitness Check of environmental reporting and subsequent action plan, on which a progress report was published in June 2019, it is high time to look at the state of environmental reporting in the EU. This article looks into several provisions and practices of environmental reporting from the perspective of legal certainty, transparency and, more specifically, access to environmental information. Environmental monitoring and reporting are essential to ensure proper implementation of and compliance with EU environmental legislation. However, discrepancies in legislation and issues in reporting practices can be noted. The Commission has taken several initiatives to streamline and improve environmental reporting, the most significant example being the adoption of Regulation 2019/1010 to align the reporting obligations in the field of environmental policy. Nevertheless, it seems there is still room for improvement. The article concludes with a look into the future of environmental reporting requirements, asking the question what more can be done.

Author(s):  
Viktor Boiko ◽  
Mykola Vasylenko ◽  
Serhii Kukharenko

The article deals with the issues of establishing cybersecurity in the EU and its member-states at the legislative level as viewed from the point of a systematic approach. The authors identified problematic aspects of improving cybersecurity quality and conditions. They analyzed the impact of the EU member states legislation on cy-bersecurity. The article as well considers the process of ICT development and pre-sents the ways of creating new challenges by means of new technologies. Key words: cybersecurity, cyber resilience, regulatory instruments, EU legislation, innovations.


Significance German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said Germany is "ready to offer support" on four Turkish demands in return for cooperating with the EU in the migrant crisis. At a joint press conference in Istanbul yesterday, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu repeated Ankara's four conditions for implementing an action plan against the influx of Syrian refugees into Europe. It wants more EU aid for those refugees inside Turkey; three chapters opened in Turkey's EU accession negotiations; visa liberalisation for Turks travelling to the EU; and a seat for Turkey at EU summits. Impacts Erdogan's resentment over EU condemnations of growing authoritarianism is so deep that any EU softening will have little impact. Davutoglu and Erdogan present Turkey as so important globally, that the EU is desperate that it join; they have no interest in accession. Several EU member states have severe reservations about visa liberalisation, funding aid and opening new accession chapters.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-117
Author(s):  
Evgenia Kokolia

SOLVIT is an informal out-of-court dispute-resolution tool between the EU Member States and Norway, Lichtenstein and Iceland to practically help citizens and businesses when encountering problems in cross-border situations with their rights enshrined in EU legislation. In light of the recently adopted Commission Communication on the reinforcement of SOLVIT, 1 the authors analyse its key characteristics and challenges. The authors concludes that an enhanced role of SOLVIT can efficiently promote a culture of compliance and smart enforcement of EU law in the Single Market together with the Member States.


2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-83
Author(s):  
Adam A. Ambroziak ◽  

The COVID-19 pandemic has been an extraordinary event for the EU Member States and a period wherein EU legislation and the efficiency of EU institutions have been put to the test. The crisis triggered by the decisions made by governments in Europe (which were motivated by their wishes to protect the health and lives of their peoples and to satisfy the rapid demand for drugs, personal protective equipment, and medical devices) disrupted market forces. Although most of these measures were based on both domestic and EU legislation, they seriously hindered the smooth functioning of the EU Single Market, including the free movement of goods. This paper aims to find out whether EU legislation succeeded in coping with the challenges triggered by COVID-19 in the field of international trade and whether measures taken by the European Commission with a view to complying with the rules of the EU Single Market adequately took care of the needs stemming from the COVID-19 outbreak and whether it properly tackled protectionist instruments adopted by the Member States. We have focused on international trade and the free movement of goods within the EU as they both constitute the cornerstone of EU economic integration. We found that although EU legislation was not tailored specifically for the times of a COVID-19 pandemic, in the area of international trade (including intra-EU trade), as well as in the field of placing goods on the market, it provided extraordinary solutions. Apparently, the explanations and guidelines provided by the Commission have limited the scope of individual protectionist and interventionist actions of the Member States.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 3999
Author(s):  
Filip Aggestam ◽  
Helga Pülzl

The first EU Forest Strategy was adopted in 1998 to provide general guidelines for an EU forest policy designed to coordinate other EU forest-relevant policies. The implementation of the first strategy was done under the auspices of the EU Forest Action Plan, covering the period from 2007 to 2011. The Forest Action Plan was a tool that facilitated voluntary cooperation between EU Member States (no enforcement capabilities), with some coordinating actions being implemented by the European Commission. The reason for returning to the Forest Action Plan in this article is to provide further insight into how it was employed by EU Member States—in contrast to the majority of similar articles on the topic, which are primarily concerned with an examination of EU forest-relevant policies by either analyzing the impact of EU decision-making on forestry at the national level or studying EU Member States’ influence on the EU rather than how EU Member States actually react to EU strategies. This paper addresses this empirical gap and highlights the significant variations of the Europeanization effects on EU Member States when deciding upon and implementing a non-legally binding policy instrument when compared to legally binding policy instruments. Individual Member States exhibit varied strategies when implementing a soft policy instrument, as their respective decision spaces are substantially different, particularly when the costs and benefits of complying are not comparable to those of a legally binding instrument. These results highlight the need for a more nuanced and varied approach to the implementation of soft policy instruments by the EU, with the additional implementation strategies suggested in this article being presented to assist in meeting this need for variation.


Author(s):  
Malgozhata Kaminska

The image of disability in EU societies is changing. On the one hand, statistical data (global and European) indicate an increase in the number of people with disabilities. This is especially true for women, the elderly and the poor. On the other hand, numerous legislative and implementation activities are undertaken to implement the social model in the approach to disability issues. The effectiveness of social and economic policies in the EU member states is expressed by the quality of life of people with disabilities. The article presents the WHO global position on the disability problem and a brief comparative analysis of key statistical data characterising people with disabilities in the EU member states. The EU priorities regarding the standards of functioning of people with disabilities in the objective and subjective dimensions are discussed. The source of the EU’s strategy and activities are international documents: The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 2006 and the Council of Europe Disability Action Plan.


10.23856/2704 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 37-43
Author(s):  
Vladyslav Yamkovyi ◽  
Oleh Stets

The article is concerned with the problems of adaptation of Ukrainian legislation to the legislation of the EU member states as well as the modern problems on the way of harmonization of the national legislation in order to bring it in line with European legal norms and standards


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viktor Ladychenko ◽  
Olena Yara ◽  
Olena Uliutina ◽  
Liudmyla Golovko

This scholarly work examines the environmental protection legislation of Ukraine and its application in practice, aiming to identify the main challenges it faces in the context of the required harmonization of Ukrainian environmental legislation with EU law according to the Association Agreement, while also making suggestions on how to better respond to these issues. This paper also refers to the experience of EU member states in the field of environmental liability. Legal nature, content and meaning of the criminal liability of legal persons in the environmental sphere according to the law of EU member states were studied in order to determine the appropriateness and mechanism of implementation of such responsibility in Ukraine. Arguments for establishment of criminal liability of legal persons were presented. Keywords: Environmental policy, environmental crime, environmental responsibility, adaptation of Ukrainian environmental legislation to EU standards.


2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-32
Author(s):  
Barbara Pavlíková

Abstract A present paper deals with the question very often solved by the pet owner all around the EU Member States. It provides a closer look at the obligations associated with the travelling with the pet animals between the Member States or between the Member State and the third countries. It is focused on non-commercial transportation of pets, as vacation, trip, etc. Contribution by the means of synthesis, analysis and comparison offers an overview of the fundamental EU legislative acts in the fi eld in question. It also addresses the issue of pet passports, the most important identifi cation document, required for pet animals at the EU territory. Defi nitions of the frequently used terminology are listed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Thissen ◽  
Stefanie Seeling ◽  
Peter Achterberg ◽  
Angela Fehr ◽  
Luigi Palmieri ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Health reporting shall provide up-to-date health-related data to inform policy-makers, researchers and the public. To this end, health reporting formats should be tailored to the needs and competencies of the target groups and provide comparable and high-quality information. Within the Joint Action on Health Information ‘InfAct’, we aimed at gaining an overview of health reporting practices in the EU Member States and associated countries, and developed quality criteria for the preparation of public health reports. The results are intended to facilitate making health information adequately available while reducing inequalities in health reporting across the EU. Methods A web-based desk research was conducted among EU Member States and associated countries to generate an overview of different formats of national health reporting and their respective target groups. To identify possible quality criteria for public health reports, an exploratory literature review was performed and earlier projects were analysed. The final set of criteria was developed in exchange with experts from the InfAct consortium. Results The web-based desk research showed that public health reports are the most frequently used format across countries (94%), most often addressed to scientists and researchers (51%), politicians and decision-makers (41%). However, across all reporting formats, the general public is the most frequently addressed target group. With regards to quality criteria for public health reports, the literature review has yielded few results. Therefore, two earlier projects served as main sources: the ‘Evaluation of National and Regional Public Health Reports’ and the guideline ‘Good Practice in Health Reporting‘from Germany. In collaboration with experts, quality criteria were identified and grouped into eight categories, ranging from topic selection to presentation of results, and compiled in a checklist for easy reference. Conclusion Health reporting practices in the EU are heterogeneous across Member States. The assembled quality criteria are intended to facilitate the preparation, dissemination and access to better comparable high-quality public health reports as a basis for evidence-based decision-making. A comprehensive conceptual and integrative approach that incorporates the policy perspective would be useful to investigate which dissemination strategies are the most suitable for specific requirements of the targeted groups.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document