scholarly journals Zastoupení členských zemí v Evropském parlamentu po volbách 2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Jakub Charvát

Modern democratic political systems are hardly conceivable without political representation. This also applies to the European Union, a unique international organisation with a directly elected and fully-fledged assembly representing the EU citizens. Because geography is central to the operation of almost all electoral systems and the European Parliament is the first transnational assembly based on the Member States representation, the paper explores the spatial aspect of the composition of the European Parliament resulting from the 2019 election. The representation in the European Parliament may be degressively proportional, which implies malapportionment of seats across the EU Member States. The paper, thus, seeks to quantify the malapportionment in the 2019 election at both the aggregate level (by the adaption of Loosemore and Hanby´s distortion index) and individual level (advantage ratio and the value of a vote). It concludes malapportionment was just below 14,5% of the total seats in 2019 while the 2019 election did not bring the degressively proportional representation in the European Parliament as required by the Lisbon Treaty.

Author(s):  
Andrii Martynov

The politics of the European Union are different from other organizations and states due to the unique nature of the EU. The common institutions mix the intergovernmental and supranational aspects of the EU. The EU treaties declare the EU to be based on representative democracy and direct elections take place to the European Parliament. The Parliament, together with the European Council, works for the legislative arm of the EU. The Council is composed of national governments thus representing the intergovernmental nature of the European Union. The central theme of this research is the influence of the European Union Political system the Results of May 2019 European Parliament Election. The EU supranational legislature plays an important role as a producer of legal norms in the process of European integration and parliamentary scrutiny of the activities of the EU executive. The European Parliament, as a representative institution of the European Union, helps to overcome the stereotypical notions of a “Brussels bureaucracy” that limits the sovereignty of EU member states. The European Parliament is a political field of interaction between European optimists and European skeptics. The new composition of the European Parliament presents political forces focused on a different vision of the strategy and tactics of the European integration process. European federalists in the “European People’s Party” and “European Socialists and Democrats” consider the strategic prospect of creating a confederate “United States of Europe”. The Brexit withdrawal from the EU could help the federalists win over European skeptics. Critics of the supranational project of European integration do not have a majority in the new composition of the European Parliament. But they are widely represented in many national parliaments of EU Member States. The conflicting interaction between European liberals and far-right populists is the political backdrop for much debate in the European Parliament. The result of this process is the medium term development vector of the European Union.


2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 162-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo Shaw

What is a ‘European’ Parliament and who should vote for it? Should it be the ‘citizens’ of the European Union alone? If so, should it be all EU citizens, or only those who are resident in the member states? Or should the electorate include potentially all residents in the member states which comprise the EU and who are thus affected by decisions taken in the Parliament? Does anyone have a ‘right’ to vote for the European Parliament? And who should decide who votes for the European Parliament – the member states, or the EU itself? In other words, is there a single European concept of the European Parliamentary demos, or twenty-seven separate, but overlapping, national concepts?


2018 ◽  
pp. 798-801
Author(s):  
Serhii Braha

The article analyses in detail the 2018 political season in Europe. The author recalls how the year began: the European Union extended sanctions against the Russian Federation for violating the territorial integrity of our state. It is noted that ensuring strict compliance in the European Union and in companies of EU member States with the policy of non-recognition and the sanctions regime is very important for Ukraine. The author highlights the areas of Ukrainian national interest. Describes the vicissitudes of relations between Ukraine and the European Union. Reveals the content of cooperation between Ukraine and NATO. Notes that the Ukraine–EU Summit confirmed the strategic nature of the development of relations with the European Union, as well as the desire of both sides to further develop a dialogue with the EU on the integration of Ukraine into the EU Customs Union, the EU Energy Union, the common digital market and Association with the Schengen area. The Summit also analysed the topic related to the activities of the member States of the European Union and the United States to prevent the implementation of the Nord stream 2 project. Further, the author of the article examines the functioning of the free trade zone and the visa-free regime. Clarifies that more than a million of our compatriots have already used the visa-free regime, becoming true lobbyists for the European integration of Ukraine. The author also notes that one of the most noticeable factors that will affect the lives of leading European States will be the beginning of the election campaign for the European Parliament. The approach of the active phase of the campaign is beginning to change the attitude of European deputies of Ukraine. The author of the article notes that the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union may affect the “Ukrainian file” in the future composition of the European Parliament. Keywords: European Union, NATO summit, “Ukrainian issue”, dialogue, visa-free regime, European Parliament.


Author(s):  
Jana Gláserová ◽  
Milena Otavová ◽  
Anna Bušovová ◽  
Eliška Dřínovská

The European Union has published the Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings for reasons of increasing of the competitive advantage and productivity of small and medium‑sized enterprises. The EU Member States have to incorporate the rules of the Directive with their national law by 20 July 2015 at the latest during the year 2016. The intention of this paper is to determine and to evaluate the impacts of transposition of the Directive into the Czech Accounting Law and into the national accounting laws of EU Member States chosen. There is an identification of main differences of Czech Accounting Law and of amended Czech Accounting Law issued 1st of January 2016. There is an impact of implementation of the Directive 2013/34/EU on financial statements and at the same time on requirements of audit for individual categories of Czech accounting entities. In this paper, there is also an analysis of impact of the Directive 2013/34/EU on national accounting laws V4 States and on several further EU Member States. On the basis of comparison of differences recognized, there is an deduction of findings for companies falling into the same group.


2021 ◽  
pp. 75-84
Author(s):  
Arseniy V. KIRGIZOV-BARSKIY ◽  

Since 2008, the European Union has unsuccessfully tried to obtain permanent observer status in the Arctic Council, the central cooperation forum in the Arctic. The analysis shows that the EU's failures in this area are connected both with its location mostly outside of the region and remoteness from the northern realities, as well as global geopolitical tensions. However, the EU has had de facto observer ad hoc status since 2013, allowing it to participate in almost all formats of interaction in the Arctic Council. Considering this fact, the permanent observer status has rather a symbolic meaning and is equivalent to joining a kind of “privileged Arctic club”. An analysis of the EU's functioning in its relations with the Arctic Council and its members shows that the EU is ready to adapt and listen to the opinion of the Arctic countries in order to become a legitimate Arctic actor. The Arctic Council is of uneven importance for the different EU member states: Denmark, Finland and Sweden are full members, several countries are permanent observers, but most EU countries are not interested in the Arctic issues. Because of this multifaceted nature, the collective EU is more of an extra-regional player on the platform, but one with serious Arctic claims. The EU is actively working on a common Arctic policy. It is represented in the Arctic Council by the Ambassador-at-Large for Arctic Affairs, introduced in 2017, who acts in coordination with the European Commission and the member states concerned. The EU's overall approach is not unsuccessful: it has managed to engage more member states on the Arctic vector, and European expertise and input on sustainable development issues is already becoming an integral part of the AC's work and promises to evolve further.


2020 ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Kusztykiewicz-Fedurek

Political security is very often considered through the prism of individual states. In the scholar literature in-depth analyses of this kind of security are rarely encountered in the context of international entities that these countries integrate. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to key aspects of political security in the European Union (EU) Member States. The EU as a supranational organisation, gathering Member States first, ensures the stability of the EU as a whole, and secondly, it ensures that Member States respect common values and principles. Additionally, the EU institutions focus on ensuring the proper functioning of the Eurozone (also called officially “euro area” in EU regulations). Actions that may have a negative impact on the level of the EU’s political security include the boycott of establishing new institutions conducive to the peaceful coexistence and development of states. These threats seem to have a significant impact on the situation in the EU in the face of the proposed (and not accepted by Member States not belonging to the Eurogroup) Eurozone reforms concerning, inter alia, appointment of the Minister of Economy and Finance and the creation of a new institution - the European Monetary Fund.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 6278
Author(s):  
Lars Carlsen ◽  
Rainer Bruggemann

The inequality within the 27 European member states has been studied. Six indicators proclaimed by Eurostat to be the main indicators charactere the countries: (i) the relative median at-risk-of-poverty gap, (ii) the income distribution, (iii) the income share of the bottom 40% of the population, (iv) the purchasing power adjusted GDP per capita, (v) the adjusted gross disposable income of households per capita and (vi) the asylum applications by state of procedure. The resulting multi-indicator system was analyzed applying partial ordering methodology, i.e., including all indicators simultaneously without any pretreatment. The degree of inequality was studied for the years 2010, 2015 and 2019. The EU member states were partially ordered and ranked. For all three years Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Austria, and Finland are found to be highly ranked, i.e., having rather low inequality. Bulgaria and Romania are, on the other hand, for all three years ranked low, with the highest degree of inequality. Excluding the asylum indicator, the risk-poverty-gap and the adjusted gross disposable income were found as the most important indicators. If, however, the asylum application is included, this indicator turns out as the most important for the mutual ranking of the countries. A set of additional indicators was studied disclosing the educational aspect as of major importance to achieve equality. Special partial ordering tools were applied to study the role of the single indicators, e.g., in relation to elucidate the incomparability of some countries to all other countries within the union.


Energies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (14) ◽  
pp. 4209
Author(s):  
Rita Remeikienė ◽  
Ligita Gasparėnienė ◽  
Aleksandra Fedajev ◽  
Marek Szarucki ◽  
Marija Đekić ◽  
...  

The main goal of setting energy efficiency priorities is to find ways to reduce energy consumption without harming consumers and the environment. The renovation of buildings can be considered one of the main aspects of energy efficiency in the European Union (EU). In the EU, only 5% of the renovation projects have been able to yield energy-saving at the deep renovation level. No other study has thus far ranked the EU member states according to achieved results in terms of increased usage in renewable sources, a decrease in energy usage and import, and reduction in harmful gas emissions due to energy usage. The main purpose of this article is to perform a comparative analysis of EU economies according to selected indicators related to the usage of renewable resources, energy efficiency, and emissions of harmful gasses as a result of energy usage. The methodological contribution of our study is related to developing a complex and robust research method for investment efficiency assessment allowing the study of three groups of indicators related to the usage of renewable energy sources, energy efficiency, and ecological aspects of energy. It was based on the PROMETHEE II method and allows testing it in other time periods, as well as modifying it for research purposes. The EU member states were categorized by such criteria as energy from renewables and biofuels, final energy consumption from renewables and biofuels, gross electricity generation from renewables and biofuels and import dependency, and usage of renewables and biofuels for heating and cooling. The results of energy per unit of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Greenhouse gasses (GHG) emissions per million inhabitants (ECO2), energy per capita, the share of CO2 emissions from public electricity, and heat production from total CO2 emissions revealed that Latvia, Sweden, Portugal, Croatia, Austria, Lithuania, Romania, Denmark, and Finland are the nine most advanced countries in the area under consideration. In the group of the most advanced countries, energy consumption from renewables and biofuels is higher than the EU average.


Buildings ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Belinda Brucker Juricic ◽  
Mario Galic ◽  
Sasa Marenjak

This paper reviews the recent literature on skill and labour shortages in the labour market with special emphasis on the construction sector in the European Union Member States, foreseeing the Construction 4.0 era. The free movement of people is one of the rights of all citizens of the EU which also includes the free movement of workers. Labour shortages in the EU are expected to increase in the future due to a declining population and an ageing workforce. In order to recognize and forecast labour shortages, EU Member states use a variety of instruments but they do not answer as to whether it is possible to use migrant labour to appease those shortages. There are several systems used to classify labour shortages in the EU Member states. Most of the countries classify labour shortages in relation to different sectors or occupation groups as well as by skill levels, but in some Member States, classification is made according to the type of employment. Instruments used to measure labour shortages significantly differ from country to country. Several criteria are used for creating lists of shortage occupations and most of the criteria include demand side and supply side criteria. A majority of the Member States are facing labour and skill shortages in various sectors and the construction sector is not an exception. As total employment in the construction sector decreased, so did the share of employed migrants. Labour shortages in the construction sector can be eased by the availability of a labour supply willing to accept unqualified and low-paying jobs. The construction sector seeks low-, medium-, and high-skilled individuals and is most likely the sector where most of the incoming migrants will be working, which has an impact on the development and implementation dynamic of Construction 4.0.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmytro S. Melnyk ◽  
Oleg A. Parfylo ◽  
Oleksii V. Butenko ◽  
Olena V. Tykhonova ◽  
Volodymyr O. Zarosylo

Purpose The experience of most European Union (EU) Member States has demonstrated effective anti-corruption practices, making the EU one of the leaders in this field, which can be used as an example to learn from in the field of anti-corruption. The purpose of this study is to analyze and identify the main features of anti-corruption legislation and strategies to prevent corruption at the national and supranational levels of the EU. Design/methodology/approach The following methods were used in the work: discourse and content analysis, method of system analysis, method of induction and deduction, historical-legal method, formal-legal method, comparative-legal method and others. Using the historical and legal method, the evolution of the formation of anti-corruption regulation at the supranational level was revealed. The comparative law method helped to compare the practices of the Member States of the EU in the field of anti-corruption regulation. The formal-legal method is used for generalization, classification and systematization of research results, as well as for the correct presentation of these results. Findings The main results, prospects for further research and the value of the material. The paper offers a critical review of key EU legal instruments on corruption, from the first initiatives taken in the mid-1990s to recent years. Originality/value In addition, the article analyzes the relevant anti-corruption legislation in the EU member states that are in the top 10 countries with the lowest level of corruption, namely: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document