scholarly journals Common Fisheries Policy and its impact on the fisheries sector in Croatia

2018 ◽  
Vol 76 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ornella Mikuš ◽  
Magdalena Zrakić ◽  
Tihana Kovačićek ◽  
Mateja Jež Rogelj
Keyword(s):  
Technical Assistance ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Budget Support ◽  
Fisheries Policy ◽  
Environmental Measures ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The aim of the paper is: 1) to determine the key changes in the evolution process of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and the Croatia’s fisheries policy and 2) to describe the structure and dynamics of macroeconomic and budget performance related to Croatian fisheries in the period 2007-2016. Two methods were used: the historical method and the descriptive analysis of macroeconomic performance and budget structure. The CFP was officially introduced in 1983, bringing the management of fisheries in all EU member states under one system. Its aims were: to resolve sea conflicts between member states, to provide stability to the fisheries sector, to prevent a total collapse of fish stocks and to provide higher quality of life to the fishermen. However, the CFP has constantly been criticized for poor enforcement of environmental measures and scientific recommendations, and for the lack of a common language between the EU institutions and local stakeholders. Both the European and Croatian fisheries sector faced many problems, especially during the transition period in the 1990s. Some of them included a serious decrease of catches, outdated technology and fisheries fleet, depletion of demersal species, lack of developmental trends in mariculture, absence of measures of rational exploitation and protection of economically significant species. The negotiation period was an opportunity for the fisheries sector in Croatia to adapt its goals, measures and stakeholders in order to achieve a more sustainable and internationally competitive fisheries sector in the future. The membership facilitates trade in the EU area, along with providing significant funding and technical assistance. The budget support structure and the existing policy framework point out an increase in the implementation of structural measures which should assist in an overall improvement of social, economic and environmental aspects of fisheries.

scholarly journals How Is Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals Measured? Comparing Four Approaches for the EU

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (18) ◽  
pp. 7675
Author(s):  
Guillaume Lafortune ◽  
Grayson Fuller ◽  
Guido Schmidt-Traub ◽  
Christian Kroll
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Methodological Choices ◽  
Data Gaps ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
The Eu

Evidence-based policymaking must be rooted in sound data to inform policy priorities, budget allocations, and tracking of progress. This is especially true in the case of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as they provide the policy framework that all 193 UN member states have pledged to achieve by 2030. Good data and clear metrics are critical for each country to take stock of where it stands, devise pathways for achieving the goals, and track progress. Current assessments of the EU’s performance on the SDGs, however, tend to reach different findings and policy conclusions on where the priorities for further action lie, which can be confusing for researchers and policymakers. In order to demystify the drivers of such differences and make them transparent, this paper compares and contrasts the results obtained by four SDG monitoring approaches. We identify three main elements that are responsible for most of the differences: (i) the use of pre-defined targets for calculating baseline assessments and countries’ trajectories; (ii) the inclusion of measures that track not only domestic performance, but also the EU’s transboundary impacts on the rest of the world; and (iii) the use of non-official statistics to bridge data gaps, especially for biodiversity goals. This paper concludes that there is not one “correct” way of providing an assessment of whether the EU and EU member states are on track to achieve the goals, but we illustrate how the different results are the outcomes of certain methodological choices. More “forward-looking” policy trackers are needed to assess implementation efforts on key SDG transformations.

If You Are Not Part of the Solution, You Are the Problem: Article 37 of the EU Charter as a Defence for Climate Change and Environmental Measures in Investor-State Arbitrations – Joint 2nd Prize Winner Essay competition 2020

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 265-295
Author(s):  
Florence Humblet ◽  
Kabir Duggal
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Environmental Measures ◽  
The Eu

Climate change is severely impacting the survival of humankind on earth. In the European Union (EU), the Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU Charter) codifies environmental protection as part of the EU’s corpus of fundamental rights protection and states that “a high level of environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment must be integrated into the policies of the EU and ensured in accordance with the principle of sustainable development”. By virtue of this article, the EU has elevated environmental protection to the level of constitutionality. Environmental concerns have played a critical role in investor-state arbitration. This article submits that Article 37 of the EU Charter might be a viable defence for Member States of the EU (Member States) that adopt climate change and environmental measures. Such defence would not consist of a jurisdictional challenge based on the Achmea decision but of a defence based on the applicable law which protects the notion of sustainable investment enshrined in the applicable international investment agreement. Article 37 of the EU Charter could, therefore, operate a powerful tool to foster environmental protection in investor-state disputes and, therefore, address one of the most widespread complaints in the backlash against investor-state arbitration.

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.

scholarly journals United Kingdom’s contribution to European research output in biomedical sciences: 2008–2017

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raoul Tan ◽  
Eric Sijbrands
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Scientometric Analysis ◽  
Biomedical Sciences ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The World ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

Background: On 31 January 2020, the United Kingdom (UK) formally left the European Union (EU). Only a short transition period, until 31 December 2020, is available to negotiate collaborations for research in biomedical sciences and health care. Within the European scientific community, two opinions are common: 1) Brexit is an opportunity to obtain more funding at the expense of the departing British; and 2) UK colleagues should continue to collaborate in EU scientific efforts, including Horizon Europe and Erasmus+. To provide evidence for more informed negotiations, we sought to determine the contribution of the UK to EU&rsquo;s research in biomedical sciences. Methods: We performed a macro level scientometric analysis to estimate the contribution of the UK and EU member states, including those associated with EU-funding (EU+) namely Albania, Armenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Faroe Islands, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, and Ukraine, to preclinical, clinical and health sciences. We searched the Web of Science database to count the total number of scientific publications and the top 1% most cited publications in the world between 2008 and 2017, calculated the performance efficiency by dividing the top 1% by the total number, and calculated the odds ratios to create a ranking of performance efficiency. We then compared the contribution of the UK to all the EU+ -based publications and the top 1% to the contributions of the ten EU member states with the largest biomedical research output and also compared the respective contributions to EU+ publications that resulted from collaborations with other regions in the world. Results: We found 2,991,016 biomedical publications from EU+ during 2008&ndash;2017, of which 19,019 (0.64%) were in the world&rsquo;s top 1% of the most cited publications. The UK produced 665,467 (22.3%) of these publications and had over two and a half times more top 1% most cited publications than the EU+ (odds ratio 2.79, 95% CI 2.71&ndash;2.88, p< 0.001). The UK&rsquo;s share in the EU+ co-publications with regions outside Europe ranged between 23.0% for the Arab League and 50.6% for Australia and New Zealand and its share of the top 1% ranged between 48.6% for the USA and Canada and 70.7% for the African Union. Conclusions: The UK contributed far more highly cited publications than the rest of the EU+ states and strongly contributed to European collaborations with the rest of the world during 2008&ndash;2017. This suggests that if the UK ceases to participate in EU scientific collaborations as a result of Brexit, the quantity and quality of EU&rsquo;s research in biomedical sciences will be adversely affected.

scholarly journals Slovak agriculture heading for the EU membership

2012 ◽  
Vol 49 (No. 3) ◽  
pp. 120-127
Author(s):  
G. Blaas
Keyword(s):  
Rural Development ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Terms Of Trade ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
The Future ◽  
Direct Payments ◽  
The Eu

The paper analyses the economic and policy gap between the agriculture in Slovakia and the EU member states from the perspective of the future accession of this country to the Union. As it concludes, the deterioration of terms of trade during the transition period creates also problems for the accession negotiations, because this fact seems to legitimate the equitable implementation of the CAP in all member countries after the East-enlargement of the Union. The paper is arguing, on the basis of income simulation, that that the Commission proposal on reduced direct payments for the newly admitted countries would, in case of Slovakia, generate an improvement of the sectoral income only if they are topped by rural development measures.

BIOECONOMY DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL BASED ON MORE EFFICIENT LAND USE IN THE EU

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irina PILVERE ◽  
Aleksejs NIPERS ◽  
Bartosz MICKIEWICZ
Keyword(s):  
Green Growth ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Growing Stock ◽  
Europe 2020 ◽  
Europe 2020 Strategy ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
Key Industries ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Production Resource

Europe 2020 Strategy highlights bioeconomy as a key element for smart and green growth in Europe. Bioeconomy in this case includes agriculture, forestry, fisheries, food and pulp and paper production, parts of chemical, biotechnological and energy industries and plays an important role in the EU’s economy. The growth of key industries of bioeconomy – agriculture and forestry – highly depends on an efficient and productive use of land as a production resource. The overall aim of this paper is to evaluate opportunities for development of the main sectors of bioeconomy (agriculture and forestry) in the EU based on the available resources of land. To achieve this aim, several methods were used – monographic, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, statistical analysis methods. The findings show that it is possible to improve the use of land in the EU Member States. If all the Member States reached the average EU level, agricultural products worth EUR 77 bln would be annually additionally produced, which is 19 % more than in 2014, and an extra 5 billion m3 volume of forest growing stock would be gained, which is 20 % more than in 2010.

THE STANDARD OF LIVING OF HOUSEHOLDS IN POLAND COMPARED TO OTHER EU MEMBER STATES

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 634-638
Author(s):  
Joanna Szwacka Mokrzycka
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Economic Condition ◽  
Standard Of Living ◽  
Consumption Expenditure ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Financial Condition ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Structure Of Consumption ◽  
The Eu

The objective of this article is to present the standard of living of households in Poland in comparison with other EU member states. The starting point for analysis was the economic condition of Poland against the background of other EU member states. The next step consisted of assessment of the standard of living of inhabitants of individual EU member states on the basis of financial condition of households and the structure of consumption expenditure. It was found that the differences within the EU in terms of economic development and the standard of living of households still remain substantial.

Political aspects of security of the European Union Member States

2020 ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Kusztykiewicz-Fedurek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Political Security ◽  
New Institutions ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
The Eu

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.

Determinants of socio-economic transformations of technological systems: theoretical and methodical aspects

2020 ◽  
pp. 102-111
Author(s):  
Svitlana Shults ◽  
Olena Lutskiv
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Member States ◽  
Social Transformations ◽  
Technological Basis ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Technological Paradigm ◽  
Technological Paradigms ◽  
The Eu

Technological development of society is of unequal cyclic nature and is characterized by changing periods of economic growth, stagnation phases, and technological crises. The new wave of technological changes and new technological basis corresponding to the technological paradigm boost the role of innovations and displace the traditional factors of economic growth. Currently, intellectual and scientific-technical capacity are the main economic development resources. The use of innovation and new knowledge change the technological structure of the economy, increase the elements of the innovative economy, knowledge economy, and digital economy, i.e. the new technological paradigm is formed. The paper aims to research the basic determinants of technological paradigms’ forming and development, and determining their key features, as well as to analyze social transformations of the EU Member States and Ukraine. The paper focuses attention on the research of the features of social transformations. The structural transformations are analyzed based on the Bertelsmann Transformation Index that estimates the quality of democracy, market economy, and political governance. The transformation processes are assessed on the example of the EU Member States and Ukraine. The authors argue that social transformations and structural changes in the economy are related to the change of technological paradigms that boost the economic modernization and gradual progressive development of humanity in general. The nature and main determinants of 5 industrial and 2 post-industrial technological paradigms are outlined. Their general features and main areas of basic technologies implementation emerging in the realization of a certain technological paradigm are explained. The conclusions regarding the fact that innovative technologies and available scientific-technological resources define the main vector of economic development are made. The new emerging technological paradigm is of strategic importance for society development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document