Editorial Note Special Issue: »Fiscal Consolidation and Regulatory Reform in the EU«

This virtual event was held as a follow-up to the inaugural Biopesticide Summit and Exhibition at Swansea University in July 2019, and postponed in 2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Sarah Harding, Communication Director at The World BioProtection Forum (WBF) & Biopesticide Summit opened the event with a few brief words of introduction before handing over to Dr Minshad Ansari, Chairman of the WBF.<br/> Dr Ansari was delighted with the more than 150 attendees already logged into the event with over 300 registered. The WBF was created in 2019 as a non-profit organization to bring together industry and academia for innovation. Dr Ansari thanked the event's supporters – AgBio, Agri Life, Bayer, Bionema, Ecolibrium Biologicals, Koppert Biological Systems, Harry Butler Institute and Sri BioAesthetics, as well as the media partners including Outlooks on Pest Management. He reiterated the need for regulatory reform due to removal of chemical pesticides, demands for organic food, limited biopesticide products registered and a lengthy and costly biopesticide registration process (5 years in EU where there are just 60 products available vs. 2.1 years in USA and where over 200 products are already available on market). The US is clearly in a much better place; in Europe, it is too expensive for SMEs and little progress has been made despite the work of the IBMA (International Biocontrol Manufacturers Association) and others. With respect to the biopesticides market share (value) by region, Europe has 27.7% market share (21.3% CAGR) and yet within UK, the CAGR is limited (unlike other European countries) – there are few products available in the market compared to chemical pesticides. The current biopesticide regulation is complex and not fit for purpose (compare 60 vs 200). Industry is facing a serious problem with pest control following the removal of some chemical pesticides, e.g.European cranefly which has caused many problems to the turf industry and has been impacted by the removal of chlorpyrifos. However, Brexit provides opportunities in the UK through government plans to "Build Back Better" by supporting Green Tech. At the EU level, the EU has committed to reducing use of pesticides by 50% (equating to 505 products) by 2030 so there are opportunities here for biopesticides to fill the market.<br/> Dr Ansari finished his introduction by restating the objectives for the meeting: for the speakers to present and debate the need for reform, their visions for a successful regulatory system, and how the WBF is working towards process reform in UK biopesticide regulation.

Download Full-text

Received Wisdom and Beyond: Lessons from Fiscal Consolidation in the EU

SSRN Electronic Journal ◽

10.2139/ssrn.1284378 ◽

2008 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Martin Larch ◽

Alessandro Turrini

Keyword(s):

Fiscal Consolidation ◽

The Eu

Download Full-text

Extraterritoriality of EU law and human rights after Lisbon: The case of trade and public procurement

Europe and the World A law review ◽

10.14324/111.444.ewlj.2018.10 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Samantha Velluti ◽

Vassilis P. Tzevelekos

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Public Procurement ◽

Legal Order ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

Eu Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Special Issue ◽

International Human Rights ◽

International Human ◽

The Eu

The paper introduces the theme and topics of this Special Issue on the extraterritoriality of EU law and human rights in the fields of trade and public procurement since the entry into force of the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon. It briefly explores the meaning of extraterritoriality in international (human rights) law and the EU legal order highlighting the complexity of such notion in both legal systems. In so doing, it provides the context and focus of analysis of the collection of papers that make up this Special Issue, which addresses a number of topical questions concerning the extraterritorial conduct of the EU, as well as the extraterritorial effects of EU law in those specific fields, from the perspective of human rights.

Download Full-text

Conclusions: What future for the Treaty of Lisbon?

Política y Sociedad ◽

10.5209/poso.72661 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 58 (1) ◽

pp. e72661

Author(s):

Ariadna Ripoll

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

Political System ◽

Window Of Opportunity ◽

The European Union ◽

Special Issue ◽

Political Union ◽

Treaty Of Lisbon ◽

Institutional Structures ◽

Normative Issues ◽

The Eu

This conclusion to the special issue reflects on the evolution of European integration since the early 1990s in order to better understand the contested origins of the Treaty of Lisbon and the consequences the latter have had for the EU’s political system. It considers the various contributions of the special issue and shows how the Treaty emerged in an era of shifting cleavages, disputed steps towards a more political Union and rising populism. This legacy has led to more polarisation and politicisation – a phenomenon that the Treaty of Lisbon struggles to encapsulate and conciliate with the culture of consensus and compromise inherent to its institutional structures. As a result, we observe a bias towards policy stability – and even failure – that affects the legitimacy and democratic standards of the European Union. In a context of polycrisis, the difficulty to find compromises – especially in highly normative issues – leads to the de-politicisation of the EU and reinforces the gap between EU institutions and its citizens. The COVID-19 pandemic is a window of opportunity for the EU, in which to choose between integration and disintegration; between values and inaction.

Download Full-text

EU Law’s Half-Hearted Protection of Religious Minorities Minority Specific Rights and Freedom of Religion for All

Religions ◽

10.3390/rel12100830 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 (10) ◽

pp. 830

Author(s):

Kristin Henrard

Keyword(s):

Case Law ◽

Fundamental Rights ◽

Freedom Of Religion ◽

Human Beings ◽

Special Issue ◽

Religious Minorities ◽

Definition Of ◽

Special Rights ◽

The Relationship ◽

The Eu

This article begins with some reflections on the definition of religious minorities, their needs and rights and how this relates to the discussion about the need for minority specific rights in addition to general fundamental rights as rights for all human beings irrespective of particular identity features. Secondly, an overall account of the ambiguous relationship between religious minorities and fundamental rights is presented. The third and most extensive section zooms in on the EU and religious minorities, starting with an account of the EU’s general approach towards minorities and then turning to the protection of fundamental rights of religious minorities in/through the EU legal order. First, the EU’s engagement with minority specific rights and the extent to which these norms have been attentive to religious themes will be discussed. Second, the CJEU’s case law concerning freedom of religion and the prohibition of dis-crimination as general human rights is analysed. The conclusion then turns to the overall perspective and discusses whether the EU’s protection of religious minorities’ fundamental rights can be considered ‘half-hearted’ and, if so, to what extent. This in turn allows us to return to the overall focus of the Special Issue, namely the relationship between the freedom of religion for all and special rights for religious minorities.

Download Full-text

JUDICIAL AND NON-JUDICIAL PROTECTION IN THE CONTEXT OF THE MULTI-LEVEL ADMINISTRATIVE SPACE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

Pravovedenie IAZH ◽

10.31249/rgpravo/2021.04.05 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 69-80

Author(s):

A.V. Chetvernina

Keyword(s):

Mutual Recognition ◽

German Law ◽

The European Union ◽

Special Issue ◽

Eu Legislation ◽

Recognition Systems ◽

Multi Level ◽

Judicial Protection ◽

Regulatory Models ◽

The Eu

The review is based on the publications of a series of articles in a special issue of the German Law Journal (German law journal. 2021. Vol. 22, N 3). It examines the complex of judicial and non-judicial problems that arise in the complex multi-level administrative structure of the EU. The main focus is on mechanisms of horizontal and vertical administrative cooperation, as well as new regulatory models that «generate» transnational administrative acts and mutual recognition systems, as well as multi-level inspection activities carried out to ensure compliance with EU legislation.

Download Full-text