scholarly journals Forest Protection in the European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 80 (4) ◽  
pp. 253-262
Author(s):  
Adriana Kalicka-Mikołajczyk

AbstractAn estimated 5% of the world’s forests are located in the EU and these forests have continuously expanded for over 60 years, although recently at a lower rate. Forests and other wooded land now cover 155 million hectares and 21 million hectares, respectively, together more than 42% of the EU land area. Although the treaties in the European Union contain no provisions for a common forest policy, there is a long history of EU measures supporting forest and forest-related activities coordinate dwith member states, mainly through the Standing Forestry Committee. For several decades now, environmental forest functions have attracted increasing attention mostly in relation to the protection of biodiversity and, more recently, in the context of climate change. The main objective of this paper was twofold: first, to identify the EU legislation directly and indirectly connected to forest protection, and second, to determine its legal character and effectiveness. In conclusion, in recent years the EU has adopted numerous regulations that are directly and indirectly connected to forests and they can be divided into two groups: internal and international acts. Moreover, we can distinguish legally binding acts such as regulations, directives as well as international agreements and soft law acts including strategies, green books, communications, action plans or declarations.

2021 ◽  
pp. 60-68
Author(s):  
E.V. Skurko

The article presents an analysis of theoretical concepts of ‘soft law’ in the European Union, as well as the practice of using ‘soft law’ tools in legal regulation, the issues of legitimacy and effectiveness of ‘soft law’ in the EU. Today, soft law instruments account for about 10% of the EU legislation, and the role of soft law in legal regulation is growing. At the same time, problems arise in connection with the use of soft law instruments in Europe, the most relevant of which are presented in this review.


2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inga Daukšienė ◽  
Arvydas Budnikas

ABSTRACT This article analyzes the purpose of the action for failure to act under article 265 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The statements are derived from the analysis of scientific literature, relevant legislation, practice of the European Union Court of Justice (CJEU) and the European Union General Court (EUGC). Useful information has also been obtained from the opinions of general advocates of the CJEU. The article of TFEU 265, which governs the action for failure to act, is very abstract. For this reason, a whole procedure under the article 265 TFEU was developed by the EU courts. The original purpose of the action for failure to act was to constitute whether European Union (EU) institution properly fulfilled its obligations under the EU legislation. However, in the course of case-law, a mere EU institution’s express refusal to fulfill its duties became sufficient to constitute that the EU institution acted and therefore action for failure to act became devoid of purpose. This article analyzes whether the action for failure to act has lost its purpose and become an ineffective legal remedy in the system of judicial review in the EU. Additionally, the action for failure to act is compared to similar national actions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (01) ◽  
pp. 65-83
Author(s):  
Laode Muhamad Fathun

This paper describes the phenomenon Brexit or Britain Exit on the future of EU regionalism and its impact on Indonesia. This paper will explain in detail the reason for the emergence of a number of policies Brexit. Brexit event caused much speculation related to Brexit in the European Union. The policy is considered full controversial, some experts say that Brexit in the European Union (EU) showed the independence of Britain as an independent state. Other hand, that Britain is the "ancestor" of the Europeans was struck with the release of the policy, meaning European history can not be separated from the history of Britain. In fact the above reasons that Britain came out associated with independence as an independent state related to EU policies that are too large, as a result of the policy model is very holistic policy while Britain desire is wholistic policy, especially in the economic, political, social and cultural. In addition, the geopolitical location of the EU headquarters in Brussels who also became the dominant actor in a union policy that demands as EU countries have been involved in the formulation of development policy, including controversial is related to the ration immigrants. Other reason is the prestige associated with the currency. Although long since Britain does not fully adopt the EU rules but there is the possibility in the EU currency union can only occur with the assumption that the creation of functional perfect integration.


2021 ◽  
pp. 001041402110473
Author(s):  
R. Daniel Kelemen ◽  
Kathleen R. McNamara

The European Union’s institutional development is highly imbalanced. It has established robust legal authority and institutions, but it remains weak or impotent in terms of its centralization of fiscal, administrative, and coercive capacity. We argue that situating the EU in terms of the history of state-building allows us to better understand the outcomes of EU governance. Historically, political projects centralizing power have been most complete when both market and security pressures are present to generate state formation. With the EU, market forces have had a far greater influence than immediate military threats. We offer a preliminary demonstration of the promise of this approach by applying it to two empirical examples, the euro and the Schengen area. Our analysis suggests that the EU does not need to be a Weberian state, nor be destined to become one, for the state-building perspective to shed new light on its processes of political development.


Since the 1957 Rome Treaty, the European Union has changed dramatically - in terms of its composition, scope and depth. Originally established by six Western European States, the EU today has 28 Members and covers almost the entire European continent; and while initially confined to establishing a "common market", the EU has come to influence all areas of political, economic and social life. In parallel with this enormous geographic and thematic expansion, the constitutional and legislative principles underpinning the European Union have constantly evolved. This three-volume study aims to provide an authoritative academic treatment of European Union law. Written by leading scholars and practitioners, each chapter offers a comprehensive and critical assessment of the state of the law. Doctrinal in presentation, each volume nonetheless tries to present a broader historical and comparative perspective. Volume I provides an analysis of the constitutional principles governing the European Union. It covers the history of the EU, the constitutional foundations, the institutional framework, legislative and executive governance, judicial protection, and external relations. Volume II explores the structure of the internal market, while Volume III finally analyses the internal and external substantive policies of the EU.


2021 ◽  
pp. 27-47
Author(s):  
Renaud Dehousse ◽  
Paul Magnette

EU institutions have frequently been reformed since the origins of what is now the European Union (EU), and particularly so over the past twenty years. This chapter explains why and how this quasi-constant change has taken place. It begins by identifying five phases in this history: the founding, consolidation, relaunch, adaptation, and the current phase of reaction to functional challenges. The chapter then assesses the respective weight of state interests, ideas, and institutions in the evolution of EU institutions. In retrospect, institutional change in the EU appears to have followed a functionalist logic, leading to complex compromises that, in turn, prompt regular calls for ‘simplification’ and democratization.


Author(s):  
Elspeth Berry ◽  
Matthew J. Homewood ◽  
Barbara Bogusz

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter discusses the history of the European Union. It covers the historical rationale for the EU; the aims of the EU; the four stages of economic integration; economic and political difficulties; expansion of membership; institutional developments; legal developments; closer European integration; the Treaty of Rome (1957), the Single European Act (1986); the Treaty on European Union (1992); the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997); the Charter of Fundamental Rights; the Treaty of Nice (2001); the Treaty of Lisbon (2007); and the potential process for and impact of ‘Brexit’.


Author(s):  
Sharon Pardo

Israeli-European Union (EU) relations have consisted of a number of conflicting trends that have resulted in the emergence of a highly problematic and volatile relationship: one characterized by a strong and ever-increasing network of economic, cultural, and personal ties, yet marked, at the political level, by disappointment, bitterness, and anger. On the one hand, Israel has displayed a genuine desire to strengthen its ties with the EU and to be included as part of the European integration project. On the other hand, Israelis are deeply suspicious of the Union’s policies and are untrusting of the Union’s intentions toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to the Middle East as a whole. As a result, Israel has been determined to minimize the EU’s role in the Middle East peace process (MEPP), and to deny it any direct involvement in the negotiations with the Palestinians. The article summarizes some key developments in Israeli-European Community (EC)/EU relations since 1957: the Israeli (re)turn to Europe in the late 1950s; EC-Israeli economic and trade relations; the 1980 Venice Declaration and the EC/EU involvement in the MEPP; EU-Israeli relations in a regional/Mediterranean context; the question of Israeli settlements’ products entering free of duty to the European Common Market; EU-Israeli relations in the age of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP); the failed attempt to upgrade EU-Israeli relations between the years 2007 and 2014; and the Union’s prohibition on EU funding to Israeli entities beyond the 1967 borders. By discussing the history of this uneasy relationship, the article further offers insights into how the EU is actually judged as a global-normative actor by Israelis.


Author(s):  
Roberto Dominguez ◽  
Joshua Weissman LaFrance

The history of the European Union (EU) is closely associated with the development of the United States. As the process of European integration has produced institutions and gained a collective international presence, the United States has been a close observer, partner, and often critic of the policies and actions of the EU and its member states. A steady progression of events delineates this path: the Marshall Plan, origins of European integration, the Cold War, the post–Cold War, 9/11 and its effects on the international system, the Great Recession, and the deterioration of global democracy. All throughout, the EU and the United States have both cooperated and collided with one another, in line with the combination of three main factors: (a) the evolution of the EU as an independent, international actor; (b) American strategies for engagement with Europe and then with the EU; and (c) the adaptive capacity and cohesion of the overall transatlantic relationship. The EU–U.S. relationship is significant not only for the influential role of the EU in world affairs but also because, as opposed to China or Russia, the transatlantic area hosts one of the most solid relationships around the world. Crises surely have been, and will be, a frequent aspect of the intense interdependences on both sides of the Atlantic; however, the level of contestation and conflict is relatively low, particularly as compared with other areas that smoothly allow the flow of goods, services, people, and ideas. Taken altogether, then, the transatlantic relationship possesses a strong foundation: it is integral, resilient, and enduring over a history of diplomatic disagreements and conflicts. The primary question remains just how this steady stream and confluence of shared challenges ultimately will fare in face of evolving crises and systemic disruptors. In any case, the answer is determined by the enduring nature, and foreign policy choices, of the primary actors on each side of the Atlantic.


2020 ◽  
Vol 82 ◽  
pp. 174-188
Author(s):  
Iuliia Lokshyna

The issue of the necessity of approximation, adaptation or harmonization of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legislation has been tackled by a number of scholars in Ukraine. A number of normative documents also paid considerable attention to this issue in general. However, there is still an issue of defining the most suitable term which would better purpose bringing legislation into conformity with the requirements of the EU. According to some scholars the notion “harmonization” could better reflect this process. This view is also shared by the author of this article. The article also discusses the importance and the need to pass new draft laws in the field of trade defence in Ukraine, in particular, regarding anti-dumping, countervailing measures and safeguards. Since some of the new articles correspond to similar provisions in the EU directives, this is viewed as an important step to harmonize the Ukrainian legislation with the legislation of the European Union in this sphere.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document