scholarly journals A Presidência rotativa do Conselho e a governança multinível europeia: a peça-chave no processo de decisão intergovernamental

2020 ◽  
pp. 21-38
Author(s):  
José Magone ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Integration Theory ◽  
Small States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Ministers ◽  
Legislative Processes ◽  
Crucial Part

In the post-Lisbon constitutional architecture, the rotating presidency of the Council of Ministers of the European Union remains a vital part of intergovernmental decision-making. Its leadership activity is mainly behind closed doors to avoid the politicization of legislative processes. This study aims to contextualize the presidency as a crucial part of European integration due to its position between formal and informal processes. Informality gives the presidency time to create consensus and be flexible in its negotiation. Despite large countries’ attempts to reduce the importance of the rotating presidency, small states have resisted this temptation. In this contribution, the rotating presidency is seen from the point of view of European integration theory which is discussed in depth. Some notes follow on what can be expected in terms of the behaviour of the German and Portuguese presidencies in the new 2020-21 team presidency cycle.

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and the Committee of the Regions (CoR)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Panke
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
Eu Directives ◽  
Council Of Ministers ◽  
Committee Of The Regions

In the European Union (EU), there are two consultative committees, the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and the Committee of the Regions (CoR). Both, the EESC and the CoR are involved in EU decision-making but lack formal competencies to influence European secondary law directly. Instead of having votes or veto rights concerning EU directives or regulations, the two consultative committees provide recommendations to the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers. In addition to providing advice to the two EU legislative chambers, the two consultative committees can also approach the European Commission and give input into the drafting of EU policies at the very early stage.

scholarly journals Euro-sceptical or Euro-phile? A critical analysis of the jurisprudence of the German Federal Constitutional Court on the process of European integration and decision-making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bernadette Sangmeister
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

<p>On 14 January 2014, for the first time in its history, the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) decided to refer a decision to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This referral, which concerned the issue of the legality of the European Central Bank’s bond-buying practices, must be seen as “historic” with regard to European integration and the relationship between European Union law and German constitutional law, forming part of important decisions of the FCC in this field since its first euro-critical judgment, Solange I, 40 years ago. Considering the high influence the German Federal Constitutional Court has had on the process of European integration, this paper aims at identifying and critiquing the lines of argumentation developed by the FCC in recent years in the field of European integration and decision-making before and after the Lisbon judgment in 2009, paying particular attention to the currently suspended OMT Decision proceedings in order to answer the question if a shift in the jurisprudence of the FCC from a euro-sceptical to a euro-phile approach has taken place.</p>

scholarly journals How Covid-19 impacted the European integration processes? The case of EU Cohesion Policy and budget

2021 ◽  
pp. 30-43
Author(s):  
Ida Musiałkowska ◽  
Piotr Idczak
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Valuable Insight ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Member States ◽  
Future Evolution ◽  
Financial Framework ◽  
The Times

Purpose: The current pandemic crisis caused by Covid-19 significantly impacted the processes of European integration. The European Union decided to act within and beyond existing competences and instruments to support the efforts of its Member States, along with regional and local authorities, in the fight against Covid-19. Our study sheds light on the instruments and solutions proposed within the framework of the cohesion and budget policy to tackle the problems related to Covid-19 in Europe. The analysis focuses on two strands: 1) EU assistance offered through cohesion policy (CP) instruments toward above areas; 2) the future evolution of EU budget, and therefore integration shifts, provoked by the Covid-19 crisis. Design/methodology/approach: The study analyzes statistical data with regard to the use of instruments of the Cohesion Policy under the Covid-19 pandemic, but also the amendments introduced to legal acts and decision-making processes that refer to the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for 2021–2027. Findings: We notice a strong shift of priorities regarding environment transformation, digitalization, and health protection, reflected in the MFF. The coordinative role of European institutions and the redirection of different financial instruments to health care follows the neofunctionalist paradigm and represents a spillover effect resulting from integration. The crisis analyzed from the institutional perspective is seen as a chance to reform the decision-making process, while on the other hand, as a threat to the inclusive integration of all Member States. Originality and value: The paper is an original contribution on the overall use of both financial and legislative instruments in the times of unprecedented health and economic crisis caused by Covid-19 in the European Union. The text can be a valuable insight for both researchers and practitioners in the field of broadly understood European studies.

scholarly journals Transparency and the efficiency of multi-actor decision-making processes: an empirical analysis of 244 decisions in the European Union

2020 ◽  
pp. 002085232093675
Author(s):  
Gijs Jan Brandsma ◽  
Albert Meijer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Systematic Research ◽  
Complex Relationship ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Complexity ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The One ◽  
Legislative Processes

Studies into decision-making suggest the existence of a tension between transparent and efficient decision-making. It is assumed that an increase in transparency leads to a decline in the efficiency of decision-making processes; however, this assumption has not been tested empirically. This study provides a starting point for investigating the complex relationship between transparency and efficiency on a set of 244 European Union legislative processes between 2014 and 2019. It finds that transparency neither speeds up nor slows down decision-making processes, and that the efficiency of the lawmaking process depends on political complexity. Our results call for further systematic research into the causes and consequences of decision-making transparency. Points for practitioners In decision-making processes, transparency is widely seen as both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, it is seen as a virtue that fosters legitimacy and participation; on the other hand, it is said to reduce decisional efficiency. However, our study of 244 European Union legislative processes shows that transparency has no effect on their duration. This calls for a re-appreciation of the effects of transparency in decision-making processes.

2. The Origins, Institutions, and Development of the Union and the Legislative Processes

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Treaty ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Legislative Processes ◽  
The Eu

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offer the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and illustrative diagrams and flowcharts. This chapter presents sample exam questions along with examiner’s tips, answer plans, and suggested answers about the origins, institutions, and development of the European Union and its legislative processes. Key debates noted are the questions raised by the changes brought about by the Lisbon Treaty, and concerns raised by Member States about the EU assuming too many competences. Sample exam questions cover topics such as the concept of European integration and the motivations behind it, reform of the EU, the powers of the Court of Justice of the European Union and its impact, and analysis of the 2007 Lisbon Treaty and the abandoned Constitutional Treaty which it effectively replaced.

11. Normative Theory and the EU: Between Contract and Community

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Bellamy ◽  
Claudia Attucci
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Social Contract ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Integration Theory ◽  
Nation State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the input of normative theory to European integration theory. It first provides a historical background on social contract theory in Europe, followed by an analysis of John Rawls’s work as a way to explore the contribution of contractarian thinking to the normative dilemmas confronting the European Union. In particular, it considers Rawls’s two principles of justice. It also discusses three approaches that emphasize the centrality of democracy and have informed normative assessments of the democratic credentials of the EU, focusing on the writings of Jurgen Habermas, the national limits to the EU, and the normative position that makes sense of the EU’s character as ‘betwixt and between’ the nation state and a supranational institution. The chapter concludes with an assessment of how enlargement illustrates both the appeal of the normative approach and the difficulties it faces.

scholarly journals The Committee of the Regions: A Springboard for the Citizens

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 38-49
Author(s):  
Javier Mendoza Jiménez
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Current Situation ◽  
The Political ◽  
Democratic Deficit ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Committee Of The Regions ◽  
Different Levels

AbstractThis study focuses on the relation between the Committee of the Regions (CoR), an advisory institution of the European Union defined as the political assembly of holders of a regional or local electoral mandate serving the cause of European integration, and the democratic deficit, understood as the effective ways of citizens’ participation in the institutional decision making. The work hypothesis is that the CoR, in spite of being mostly unknown to citizens, could be an effective tool for tackling the democratic deficit. Through qualitative interviews and surveys at different levels, the article analyzes the current situation and the potential opportunities of the CoR in its relation with citizens.

1. Why EU institutions matter:

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Dermot Hodson ◽  
Uwe Puetter ◽  
Sabine Saurugger
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
New Institutionalism ◽  
Integration Theory ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Five Dimensions ◽  
Institutional Politics

The European Union (EU) cannot be understood without reference to its institutions. But scholars differ on the questions of what precisely EU institutions are, what they do, and why they matter. This chapter defines EU institutions as decision-making bodies. It refers to the notion of EU institutional politics as the sphere of informal and formal rules, norms, procedures, and practices that shape such decision-making. The chapter explores how different theoretical traditions—international relations, integration theory, new institutionalism, the separation of powers, governance, public policy and administration approaches, and critical perspectives—think about EU institutions. Drawing on these traditions, this chapter encourages readers to think about EU institutions along five dimensions: intergovernmental versus supranational, international versus transnational, separated versus fused power, leaders versus followers, and contested versus legitimate. Seeing how the Union’s decision-making bodies move within and between these dimensions offers a deeper understanding of why EU institutions matter.

14. Coreper: National interests and the logic of appropriateness

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Institutional Environment ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Council Of Ministers

This chapter examines the role of the Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper) in the European Union. Coreper originated as a diplomatic forum to meet regularly and prepare meetings of the Council of Ministers. It evolved into a locus of continuous negotiation and de facto decision-making, gaining a reputation as ‘the place to do the deal’. Coreper is the site in EU decision-making where national interests and European solutions interact more frequently, more intensively, and across more issue areas than any other. The chapter first provides an overview of the origins of Coreper before discussing its structure and powers. It then considers how Coreper, as an institutional environment, gives rise to what neo-institutionalists call ‘logic of appropriateness’, which informs bargaining behaviour and influences everyday decision-making outcomes.

The National Co-ordination of EU Policy: The Domestic Level. Edited by Hussein Kassim, B. Guy Peters, and Vincent Wright. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. 269p. $72.00.

2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 691-692
Author(s):  
Maria Green Cowles
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
European Integration ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Domestic Level

In recent years, scholars of the European Union (EU) have looked increasingly at the impact—administrative, institutional, legal, societal—of European integration on the member states. Some of this earlier literature on “Europeanization” viewed the Brussels–member state relationship in a rather static, one-way, top-down dimension. For this reason, the editors of The National Co-ordination of EU Policy take pains to eschew Europeanization as an organizing concept. But perhaps the editors doth protest too much. The National Co-ordination of EU Policy, in fact, fits nicely in the current literature on Europeanization, which views the Brussels–member state relationship in more dynamic terms. Indeed, the book provides a welcome and valuable addition by examining the domestic coordination processes through which “governments arrive at the position that they defend in EU decision making” (p. 235).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document