scholarly journals The Unexpected Negotiator at the Table: How the European Commission’s Expertise Informs Intergovernmental EU Policies

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meng-Hsuan Chou ◽  
Marianne Riddervold
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Maritime Security ◽  
Security Strategy ◽  
Alternative Hypotheses ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
Military Mission ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Intergovernmental Policy ◽  
External Migration ◽  
The Eu

How, if at all, does the Commission’s expertise inform intergovernmental decision-making within the EU? In this article, we aim to capture the relationship between the Commission’s expertise and its influence within intergovernmental policy-areas through a study of Commission influence in two least likely sectors: security and defence policies (military mission <em>Atalanta </em>and EU Maritime Security Strategy) and external migration (EU mobility partnerships with third countries). In these cases we observe that the Commission strongly informs policy developments even though it has only limited formal competences. To explore whether and, if so, how this influence is linked to its expertise, we develop and consider two hypotheses: The <em>expert authority hypothesis </em>and the <em>expert arguments hypothesis. </em>To identify possible additional channels of influence, we also consider the relevance of two alternative hypotheses: The <em>strategic coalition hypothesis</em> and the <em>institutional circumvention hypothesis</em>. We find that the Commission’s use of its expertise is indeed key to understanding its <em>de facto</em> influence within policy-areas where its formal competences remain limited. Our findings add to the existing literature by revealing how expertise matters. Specifically, our cases show that the Commission informs intergovernmental decision-making by successfully linking discussions to policy-areas where it holds expert authority. However, the Commission also informs EU policies by circumventing the formal lines of intergovernmental decision-making, and by cooperating with member states that share its preference for further integration.

scholarly journals The EU’s Maritime Security Strategy: a Neo-Medieval Perspective on the Limits of Soft Security?

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (75) ◽  
pp. 9-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brendan Flynn
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Approach ◽  
Trade Flows ◽  
Maritime Security ◽  
Maritime Trade ◽  
Security Strategy ◽  
Security Regime ◽  
Critical Interpretation ◽  
Maritime Strategy ◽  
Soft Security ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This paper offers a critical interpretation of the EU’s recent Maritime Security Strategy (MSS) of 2014, making distinctions between hard and soft conceptions of maritime security. The theoretical approach employed invokes the ‘EU as neo-medieval empire’ (Bull 1977: 254-255; Rennger 2006; Zielonka 2006). By this account, the main objectives of EU maritime strategy are stability and encouragement of globalised maritime trade flows to be achieved using the classic instruments of ‘soft maritime security’. While replete with great possibilities, the EU’s maritime security strategy is likely to be a relatively weak maritime security regime, which suffers from a number of important limits.

5. Democracy and the EU

2020 ◽  
pp. 101-118
Author(s):  
Tapio Raunio
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
European Level ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Input Legitimacy ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the relationship between European integration and democracy. The continuous transfer of policy-making powers from European Union (EU) member states to the European level has raised serious concerns about democratic legitimacy. The chapter assesses the claims that European integration undermines national democracy, and that decision-making at the EU level is not sufficiently democratic. It argues that while significant challenges remain, European integration has definitely become more democratic over the years. But there is perhaps a trade-off, with stronger input legitimacy potentially an obstacle to efficient European-level decision-making. It also underlines the multilevel nature of the EU polity and the importance of public debates about European integration.

It’s (just) Chemistry, Stupid! Or Not?

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-425
Author(s):  
Justo Corti Varela
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Value Chain ◽  
Institutional Dynamics ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Risks And Benefits ◽  
Modern Biotechnology ◽  
National Attitudes ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Food Value ◽  
The Eu

This section aims to update readers on decisions related to marketing products of modern biotechnology (e.g., GMOs, animal clones) at EU level and on national measures concerning their production. Special attention is devoted to problems of competence between Member States and the EU in regulating biotechnology issues; the institutional dynamics of decision making regarding products derived frommodern biotechnology; the relationship between the EFSA and the EU institutions on green biotech-related issues; the evolution of EU regulatory framework and of national attitudes towards the risks and benefits of biotechnology derived products and their production. This section will also delve into the interaction between the EU legislation and WTO law regarding advances in the application of biotechnology within the agri–food value chain.

At Europe's Edge

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ċetta Mainwaring
Keyword(s):  
Critical Role ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
Migration Flows ◽  
The Mediterranean ◽  
Migration Politics ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
The Eu

The Mediterranean Sea is now the deadliest region in the world for migrants. Although the death toll has been rising for many years, the EU response remains fragmented and short sighted. Politicians frame these migration flows as an unprecedented crisis and emphasize migration control at the EU’s external boundaries. In this context, At Europe’s Edge investigates (1) why the EU prioritizes the fortification of its external borders; (2) why migrants nevertheless continue to cross the Mediterranean and to die at sea; and (3) how EU member states on the southern periphery respond to their new role as migration gatekeepers. The book addresses these questions by examining the relationship between the EU and Malta, a small state with an outsized role in migration politics as EU policies place it at the crosshairs of migration flows and controls. The chapters combine ethnographic methods with macro-level analyses to weave together policymaker, practitioner, and migrant experiences, and demonstrate how the Mediterranean is an important space for the contested construction of ‘Europe’. At Europe’s Edge provides rich insight into the unexpected level of influence Malta exerts on EU migration governance, as well as the critical role migrants and their clandestine journeys play in animating EU and Maltese migration policies, driving international relations, and producing Malta’s political power. By centring on the margins, the book pushes the boundaries of our knowledge of the global politics of migration, asylum, and border security.

Biotechnology

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-71
Author(s):  
Justo Corti Varela
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Value Chain ◽  
Institutional Dynamics ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Risks And Benefits ◽  
Modern Biotechnology ◽  
National Attitudes ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Food Value ◽  
The Eu

This section aims to update readers on decisions related to marketing products of modern biotechnology (e.g., GMOs, animal clones) at EU level and on national measures concerning their production. Special attention is devoted to problems of competence between Member States and the EU in regulating biotechnology issues; the institutional dynamics of decision making regarding products derived from modern biotechnology; the relationship between the EFSA and the EU institutions on green biotech-related issues; the evolution of EU regulatory framework and of national attitudes towards the risks and benefits of biotechnology derived products and their production. This section will also delve into the interaction between the EU legislation and WTO law regarding advances in the application of biotechnology within the agri-food value chain.

Methods of Governance in the European Union

2015 ◽  
pp. 49-60
Author(s):  
N. Kaveshnikov
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Policy Coordination ◽  
System Level ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Ideal Types ◽  
Subsystem Level ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
The Eu

Most of existing researches on the methods of governance in the European Union (EU) are rather narrow in scope. Many of them investigate particular policies of the EU for the purpose of identifying and describing the details of the governance mode in use. Other researches provide a comparative analysis of the application of a particular method of governance in several EU policies. However, there is a clear lacuna in the field of systematization of all methods of governance usable in the EU. This article reveals a comprehensive system of EU methods of governance. They are based on six key principles: 1) EU methods of governance are not reducible to combinations of communitarian and intergovernmental approaches. 2) Methods of governance are linked with the level of decision-making (super-system, system and subsystem decisions). 3) There are seven basic methods of governance in the EU. Classic intergovernmental method is used to make “historic” decisions at the super-system level. Communitarian approach and intensive trans-governmentalism are the most common methods at the system level. One can distinguish four methods of governance at the subsystem level: regulation, distribution, policy coordination and executive method. 4) There is no univocal correspondence between methods of policy setting (system level) and policy implementation (subsystem level). 5) Identified methods of governance are the ideal types. In practice, implementation of particular policy in the EU is usually a combination of various governance methods. 6) Methods of governance used at the level of policy implementation could change in the course of time. The concept proposed reflects the inter-coupling between the level of decision-making and a method of governance in the EU. It offers a consistent systematization of EU methods of governance, and discloses the correspondence between methods of governance and EU policies. Developed theoretical concept can be used as a methodological basis for the research of EU activities in particular policy areas, of decision-making process in the EU, of the evolution of governance in particular policy areas.

scholarly journals The UK and EU Foreign, Security and Defence Policy after Brexit: Integrated, Associated or Detached?

2016 ◽  
Vol 238 ◽  
pp. R43-R50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard G. Whitman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
The Future ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

None of the existing models for the future trade policy relationship between the UK and the EU come with a predetermined foreign and security policy relationship. This article assesses how the future EU-UK foreign and security policy relationship might be organised post-Brexit. It provides evaluation of the current EU-UK interrelationship in the fields of the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and assesses the degree to which the UK is presently integrated into EU decision-making and implementation. It highlights that the UK needs to determine the degree to which it wants autonomy or even divergence from existing EU policies. The article concludes by rehearsing the costs and benefits of three possible future relationships between the UK and EU foreign, security and defence policy: integrated, associated or detached.

scholarly journals Some considerations on the relationship between economic and social cohesion and implementation of the cohesion policy

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Dziembała
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Social Cohesion ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Socio Economic Development ◽  
Territorial Cohesion ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The processes of deepening economic integration and regional development contribute to the intensification of inter-regional disparities. The EU’s efforts to achieve cohesion are intended to contribute to lifting the level of socio-economic development, improving the quality of life of residents, and also solving emerging problems, including social ones, so that the benefits of growth spread evenly across the EU. This inevitably has the implication, in the name of solidarity principle, of the need to provide support to countries and regions at a disadvantage to achieve cohesion within the EU. The Union promotes economic, social and territorial cohesion among Member States (MS) through grants of financial assistance and in the many benefits achieved from the implementation of EU policies. One of these policies is the cohesion policy, the aim of which is to achieve a social, economic and territorial cohesion within the Union. This paper aims to identify current perceptions of cohesion in the EU. Here we will argue that there is no conflictual relationship between economic and social cohesion; that both dimensions are self-reinforcing, and economic cohesion presupposes social cohesion. The paper also discusses the socio-economic cohesion of Poland and its regions against the background of the new EU MS. It will also assess the contribution of EU cohesion policy in the socio-economic development of Polish regions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document