scholarly journals The Denationalization and Agencification of Net Neutrality Policy in Lithuania

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 29-43
Author(s):  
Deimantas Jastramskis
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Political Process ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
The Political ◽  
Net Neutrality ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Communications Policy ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
Stream Model

This paper focuses on the making of communications policy in Lithuania, specifically regarding net neutrality. The study employs a multiple stream model to analyze the conditions of the political process and the activity of political actors. The paper claims that the Lithuanian communications policy has become essentially denationalized since the country’s accession to the European Union. The issue of net neutrality policy has been framed in the context of EU policy, while the national agenda of net neutrality policy lost its significance. The denationalization of the net neutrality policy-making was harmonized with the agencification of policy formulation stage.

scholarly journals Legislative Activity and Gridlock in the European Union

2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 477-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christophe Crombez ◽  
Simon Hix
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Majority Voting ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
Legislative Procedures ◽  
Qualified Majority ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Legislative Activity

This article develops a game-theoretical model of European Union (EU) policy making that suggests that the amount of legislative activity depends on the size of the gridlock interval. This is consistent with Krehbiel's study of US politics. This interval depends on two factors: (1) the preference configuration of the political actors and (2) the legislative procedures used in a particular period. Actors’ preferences and procedures are not expected to have any effect beyond their impact on the gridlock interval. The study predicts smaller gridlock intervals, and thus more legislative activity, under the co-decision (consultation) procedure when the pivotal member states and the European Parliament (Commission) are closer to each other. More activity is expected under qualified majority voting in the Council than under unanimity. The results find support for these propositions in an empirical analysis of EU legislative activity between 1979 and 2009.

scholarly journals Crisis?: What (Type) of Crisis? The overlapping problems of the European Union

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (50) ◽  
pp. 33-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai Lehmann
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Crisis ◽  
Future Development ◽  
Political Process ◽  
European Population ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Eu

It is common today, even in the European media, to treat the current crisis of the European Union almost exclusively as an economic crisis. The present article pretends to show that such a focus is not only wrong but is indeed dangerous for the future development of the European Union as a whole. The article will argue that the present economic crisis simply aggravated – and a lot – a crisis of legitimacy through which the European Union has been passing for some time. Showing that the anti-European tendencies which are spreading throughout the countries of the continent threaten the very future of the European project, the article will make suggestion on reforms for the future development of the EU, alerting to the necessity to finally elaborate once again a coherent argument for the continuation of the European integration process which puts the European population at the heart of the political process instead of just austerity.

scholarly journals Media support and its influence on the results of the referendum in Britain’s exit from the EU

2020 ◽  
pp. 102-114
Author(s):  
Yana Kybich
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Driving Forces ◽  
Political Process ◽  
British Society ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Binary Oppositions ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

June 2016 was marked by a landmark event - the so-called Brexit (literally from Britain’s exit ) – a referendum in which 52% of the population voted for the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and only 48% - against. The significant changes that took place in the UK in the summer of 2016, finally split British society into those who are for and against leaving the European Union. The British media acted as a platform for political debates and discussions on the key issue of Britain’s stay in the EU. The most powerful media conglomerate, of course, had a decisive influence on the mood of those who voted, intensifying social polarization, which was reflected in the results of the fateful referendum. Elements of the British media played a key role in the debate over the referendum on the country’s membership in the European Union. The exit vote was influenced by a long campaign against the EU and against migration from EU countries. Throughout the campaign, virtually all media are in flagrant violation of journalistic standards of objectivity, fairness, and accuracy, becoming essentially propaganda bodies. The relevance of the study is due to the fundamental changes in British society related to the Brexit process, as well as the importance for politicians and the public of understanding public opinion and the media about Brexit. In addition, it is important to see how the view of Brexit has changed. It is necessary to find out the benefits, priorities and understanding of different scenarios, the driving forces behind these attitudes, and whether they change in response to statements and remarks by politicians and public figures. Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union is important for the whole world, as it affects the changing geopolitics of the whole of Europe. This topic is important for understanding the study of the political preferences of British society and the British media during the Brexit process. It can be stated unequivocally that both Brexit and the subsequent US election campaign in 2016 showed another example of skillful speculation in facts and figures, the successful creation and dissemination of unverified “viral information” through the media, which in the era of telecommunications has become a particularly effective tool for manipulation of public sentiment. The example of Brexit has demonstrated how to take the success of such campaigns to a new level, using all types of media (from traditional to electronic, including social networks), through which you can introduce into society binary oppositions that divide it, to introduce into the information space certain political figures, to popularize the necessary moods and slogans, to simplify the political process to the level of a show.

Subsidiarity as a Subject of Battle in European Union Politics

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kees van Kersbergen ◽  
Bertjan Verbeek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Political Process ◽  
Maastricht Treaty ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Over Time ◽  
The Eu

Since the Maastricht Treaty (1993), subsidiarity has guided the political process surrounding the distribution of competences between administrative layers in the European Union (EU). The EU’s subsidiarity regime affects the politics and governance of the EU, because the notion of subsidiarity allows for continuous negotiation over its practical use. The constant battle over subsidiarity implies that the notion changes its meaning over time and alters the power relations between different actors within the EU. Since the Lisbon Treaty (2009), subsidiarity has mainly strengthened the position of member states at the expense of the Commission.

scholarly journals The populist politics of Euroscepticism in times of crisis: A framework for analysis

Politics ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea LP Pirro ◽  
Paul Taggart
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Great Recession ◽  
Political Process ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Great Recession ◽  
Introductory Article ◽  
Multiple Shocks ◽  
Analytical Tools

The European Union has been recently exposed to the multiple shocks of the Great Recession, the migrant crisis, and Brexit. Populist parties have been, either directly or indirectly, considered the principal beneficiaries of these crises in light of their Eurosceptic profiles. In this introductory article, we lay out the conceptual and analytical tools necessary to identify populist Eurosceptic actors, and systematically tackle the under-explored link between populist Eurosceptic framing and the unfolding of the different European crises. While we provide a framework to assess (alleged) changes in the framing of these parties, we also contend that these parties may have released effects in the political process by conditioning shifts in the positions on Europe of their mainstream competitors. In doing so, we define a set of possible interactive scenarios.

Open Access in Practice

2020 ◽  
pp. 128-172
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Open Access ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
European Countries ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Specific Policy ◽  
European Institutions

The basic scope of the European Union is the political and economic unification through harmonisation of European Member States' national regulations and associated frameworks. Should the European Union aim to harmonise and unify these national regulations, it is only reasonable to do so through copyright-specific policy provisions implemented by the European countries. The European copyright regime could potentially facilitate open access practice, should this practice be tailored to policy-making actors regarding the European copyright law framework. This chapter examines efforts and initiatives made by the European institutions (e.g., European Commission, European Parliament) in order to construct a coherent copyright framework for the European Union Members.

scholarly journals Geopolitical Competition of World Political Actors for Influence on Contemporary Serbia

2020 ◽  
pp. 12-20
Author(s):  
Andrey Vladimirovich Baranov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Full Control ◽  
Political Interests

The author of the paper finds out the manifestations of the geopolitical competition of world political actors (the United States, NATO, the European Un-ion) for influence on Serbia in 2008–2020. The study focuses on the political interests of these actors and strategies for their implementation. Serbia is strate-gically important for Western countries as the miss-ing link for full control over the Balkans and isola-tion of Russia. Turkey, which is pursuing a neo-Ottoman course, is interested in restoring its control over the Balkans, which is being hindered by Serbia. Ethnopolitical and confessional conflicts in Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina are used by the United States, NATO, and the European Union to increase pressure on the Serbian leadership. Serbia’s geopo-litical orientations remain inconsistent, reflecting attempts to maneuver between competing world players. The possibilities for such a policy are steadily shrinking, leaving Serbia with a geopolitical choice to make.

scholarly journals Functioning of government institutions and development of processes in the political space of the European Union

2019 ◽  
pp. 32-40
Author(s):  
Iryna Butyrska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Political Competition ◽  
Political Process ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Space ◽  
Political Debate ◽  
National Sovereignty ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
The Eu

The author analyzes the political space of the EU as an environment of functioning of political objects and development of political processes, a system of political differences, which strengthen the political hierarchy in the organization and the differentiation of political positions. Legislation adopted at the supranational level should be implemented by member-states or, if it is a directive, converted into national legislation. It is proved that the political and institutional structure of the hierarchy in the EU is relatively weak; it is based not on the independence of European authority, but on selective and overly conditioned transfer of authority of States to supranational institutions; part of national sovereignty is delegated to the States, although the States are sovereign within the EU; national sovereignty is limited to a certain extent and this is a serious obstacle that prevents the development of the authority vertical in the EU. The author emphasizes that this leads to failures in compliance with the rules of hierarchical subordination. Negotiations and cooperation of EU institutions are more organized than at the state level, which indicates the EU as a «Treaty order» or «competitive order». After all, the functioning of the European Single Market creates a pressure of competition on economic entities and on States with their political and economic regimes. The author believes that the solution of problems depends on the clarity of decisions and actions of the EU, which should become more open to political competition. This will promote innovation, highlight developments with the EU and enable citizens to decide who rules in the EU and take sides in the political debate. Institutional reforms have already changed the EU to a more competitive political institution. This approach should take the main place in the development of the EU policy, at least in the short term. Keywords: European Union, political space, political process, European authority institutions.

18. Policy Making and Policies in the European Union

2020 ◽  
pp. 337-359
Author(s):  
Simon Bulmer ◽  
Owen Parker ◽  
Ian Bache ◽  
Stephen George ◽  
Charlotte Burns
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Policy Cycle ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Policy Dynamics ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common

This chapter examines policies and the patterns of policy making in the European Union (EU). First it surveys the range of EU policy responsibilities, and identifies ways in which policy dynamics differ between them, the most striking difference in policy making relating to the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and its defence affiliate, the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). It then explores the different stages in the EU policy cycle: the passage of policy issues from agenda-setting stage through policy formulation and decision making to the implementation stage and feedback loops. In a final section, it identifies some important policy areas that are worth being aware of but where space precludes chapter-length treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document