The EU Justice Scoreboard - Judicial Evaluation as a New Governance Tool

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriani Dori
Keyword(s):  
New Governance ◽  
The Eu

scholarly journals Energy Policies at Crossroads − Will Europe's 2030 targets and framework be in line with the Paris Climate Agreement?

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 4
Author(s):  
Rainer Hinrichs-Rahlwes
Keyword(s):  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Energy Policies ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Regulatory Frameworks ◽  
Legislative Proposals ◽  
Paris Climate Agreement ◽  
The Eu

In November 2016, the European Commission presented the Clean-Energy-for-all-Europeans Package. It consists of eight legislative proposals which should define targets and policy and regulatory frameworks for the EU's climate and energy policies up to 2030 and beyond. Recasts of the existing Renewable Energies Directive and the Energy Efficiency Directive, as well as proposals for a new energy market design, which should be fit for renewables, are among the key elements of the package, which aims at replacing the existing 2020-framework. The package includes 2030-targets for Greenhouse Gas Reduction (at least 40%), Energy Efficiency (at least 27/30%), and the share of Renewables in Gross Final Energy Consumption (at least 27%). In contrast to the 2020-framework, the EU-wide renewables-target would no longer be underpinned by binding national targets but should be reached in a joint effort with a new governance system. Since the proposal was submitted to the European Parliament and the European Council for the legislative procedures which must end in an agreement before the next elections for the European Parliament in 2019, controversial debates are taking place. The intention is to finalise the legal procedures before the end of 2018. Parliament and Council had planned to decide about their respective opinions about the various pieces by February 2018. Afterwards, probably not finished before the end of 2018, compromise negations will take place, before the whole package will eventually be accepted by both bodies. Among the most controversially discussed topics is the ambition level of the proposals and whether or not it is in line with the commitments signed by the EU and all its Member States in the context of the Paris Agreement. Industry stakeholders not only from the renewable energy sector and environmental NGOs have proposed significantly higher targets in order to stay “well below 2 °C” of global warming before the end of the century. They also suggested continuing binding national targets or − as a compromise − enacting a very strict governance system. I shall present and evaluate the state of play of the 2030-framework decision process. And I shall end with some policy recommendation still to be considered in the ongoing debate.

EU Soft Law in Domestic Legal Systems: Flexibility and Diversity Guaranteed?

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia Korkea-Aho
Keyword(s):  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Member States ◽  
Regulatory Instruments ◽  
Modes Of Governance ◽  
Judicial Recognition ◽  
The Eu ◽  
New Modes Of Governance

New modes of governance are proliferating at all levels, most prominently in the EU. One main characteristic of new governance is adjustability and revisability in the form of soft law. The non-binding nature of soft law is said to contribute to flexibility and diversity in Member States and to secure national autonomy. However, this article argues that while soft law may not be legally binding, it nevertheless has legal effects that throw flexibility and diversity of national action into doubt. Beginning by demonstrating that soft law may have discernible effects on practices in Member States, at the same time restricting Member State choices, the article goes on to develop a categorisation of those effects and to document them in detail. These are: judicial recognition by the European courts, explicit terms of soft law instruments, which demand special types of national implementing measures, the role played by non-state actors, and hybrid forms of regulatory instruments comprising soft and hard law provisions. The analysis shows a need to add variety to existing research on EU soft law, which has traditionally focused on the role of the judiciary in giving legal effects to soft law. Instead, we should be more attentive to the other three factors when discussing soft law. Besides the more holistic approach, research should also analyse soft law in a more case-specific manner in order to fully grasp the implications of choice of soft law in a domestic legal system.

14. Policy-making in the European Union

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralf Drachenberg ◽  
Alex Brianson
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
State Action ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Governance Tools ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the process of policy-making in the European Union. It first considers how the EU originally made policy decisions before tracing the evolution of the formal balance between the EU institutions over time, with particular emphasis on the increasing legislative power of the European Parliament. It then describes the Community method, which remains the core of the EU policy process but is now complemented with a range of ‘new governance tools’ designed to produce coordinated member state action through iterated processes of standard-setting, best practice identification, and knowledge transfer. One of these processes is the open method of coordination (OMC). The chapter concludes with an analysis of the implementation of EU policy decisions by and in the member states, along with current trends in EU decision-making after the EU enlargements of the 2000s and the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.

scholarly journals Social Innovation as a Driver for New Educational Practices: Modernising, Repairing and Transforming the Education System

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 1070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonius Schröder ◽  
Daniel Krüger
Keyword(s):  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Social Innovation ◽  
Educational Practices ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Social Innovations ◽  
Global Mapping ◽  
Learner Perspective ◽  
The Eu

Based on the results of the EU funded Social Innovation – Driving Force of Social Change (SI-DRIVE) project the major challenges and needs of education and lifelong learning worldwide are revealed, focusing on solutions via new educational practices delivered by social innovations and embedding civil society. Against this background, a more learner-oriented approach instead of institutional improvements is presented. Based on the results of SI-DRIVE’s global mapping of more than 200 innovative education initiatives and 18 in-depth case studies, the article spotlights the relevant settings and success factors of social innovations in education, leading to a system related typology of social innovation. New ways of repairing, modernising and transforming education as well as separated approaches are illustrated showing the underdeveloped, unexploited and unrecognised potential of this kind of innovation. For setting up a more innovation friendly environment, it is particularly important to realise a paradigm shift towards a learner perspective and rationality. More leeway and new governance structures for integrating and fostering social innovations and unfolding the potential of all societal sectors for enhancing education are necessary. This especially includes a more active and new role of universities in enabling, exchanging, moderating and researching social innovation.

From Hard to Soft: Governance in the EU Internal Market

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 101-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vassilis Hatzopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Chronological Order ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Three Generations ◽  
Soft Governance ◽  
Delegation Of Powers ◽  
The Eu

AbstractAt least three generations of governance methods have been—and are still being—used for the regulation of the internal market: the classic EU method, leading to harmonisation and (more rarely) unification; the ‘new approach’ based on mutual recognition and the use of standards; and ‘new governance’ which does not entail any formal delegation of powers to the EU and operates through self-regulation, the creation of EU agencies and networks, administrative cooperation and other means of open coordination. It is impossible to establish either a hierarchy or a clear chronological order between these methods, while it is also quite difficult to reach a clear conclusion as to their efficiency. What is certain is that all methods of governance are under constant adjustment and that they all feed into one another in order to secure the smooth operation of the internal market. The interaction between these methods is the topic of the present chapter.

scholarly journals Energy Policy and European Union Politics

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Herranz-Surrallés
Keyword(s):  
Energy Policy ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Policy Domain ◽  
Energy Union ◽  
European Energy Policy ◽  
The Eu

Energy policy has been considered as a “special case of Europeanization,” due to its tardy and patchy development as a domain of EU activity as well as its important but highly contested external dimension. Divergent energy pathways across Member States and the sensitivity of this policy domain have militated against a unified European Energy Policy. And yet, since the mid-2000s cooperation in this policy area has picked up speed, leading to the adoption of the Energy Union, presented by the European Commission as the most ambitious energy initiative since the European Coal and Steel Community. This dynamism has attracted growing scholarly attention, seeking to determine whether, why and how European Energy Policy has consolidated against all odds during a particularly critical moment for European integration. The underlying question that emerges in this context is whether the Energy Union represents a step forward towards a more homogenous and joined-up energy policy or, rather a strategy to manage heterogeneity through greater flexibility and differentiated integration. Given the multilevel and multisectoral characteristics of energy policy, answering these questions requires a three-fold analysis of (1) the degree of centralization of European Energy Policy (vertical integration), (2) the coherence between energy sub-sectors (cross-sectoral integration), and (3) the territorial extension of the energy acquis beyond the EU Member States (horizontal integration). Taken together, the Energy Union has catalyzed integration on the three dimensions. First, EU institutions are formally involved in almost every aspect of energy policy, including sensitive areas such as ensuring energy supplies. Second, the Energy Union, with its new governance regulation, brings under one policy framework energy sub-sectors that had developed in silos. And finally, energy policy is the only sector that has generated a multilateral process dedicated to the integration of non-members into the EU energy market. However, this integrationist dynamic has also been accompanied by an increase in internal and external differentiation. Although structural forms of differentiation based on sectoral opt-outs and enhanced cooperation have been averted, European Energy Policy is an example of so-called “micro-differentiation,” characterized by flexible implementation, soft governance and tailor-made exemptions and derogations.

7. Decision-Making and New Forms of Governance

EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 194-216
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
White Paper ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Governance Reform ◽  
Reform Initiatives ◽  
Better Regulation ◽  
Apparent Shift ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter introduces the debate over new modes of decision-making and governance in the EU, and provides an account of the apparent shift towards greater use of these over time. The language of ‘new’ forms of governance in the EU refers to the move away from reliance on hierarchical modes towards more flexible modes as the preferred method of governing. A number of examples of new governance instruments and methods are provided, in particular the ‘new approach to harmonization’ and the ‘open method of coordination’. A number of other EU governance reform initiatives related to the new governance debate are also discussed, such as the subsidiarity and proportionality principles, the ‘better regulation’ initiative, and the Commission White Paper on Governance and its follow-up. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues of new governance in relation to the UK post-Brexit.

From ‘Old’ to ‘New’ Governance in the EU: Explaining a Diagnostic Deficit

2010 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 154-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriaan Schout ◽  
Andrew Jordan ◽  
Michelle Twena
Keyword(s):  
New Governance ◽  
The Eu
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document