scholarly journals ПРОСУНУТА СПІВПРАЦЯ, ДИФЕРЕНЦІАЦІЯ І СУБСИДІАРНІСТЬ В ПРАВОВІЙ ОСНОВІ ІННОВАЦІЙНОГО РЕГУЛЮВАННЯ В КРАЇНАХ — ЧЛЕНАХ ЄС

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 283-293
Author(s):  
М. Д. Василенко
Keyword(s):  
Individual Member ◽  
Innovative Development ◽  
Freedom Of Choice ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Eu

Стаття присвячена розгляду, яким чином посилена співпраця, диференціація та суб-сидіарність впливають на інноваційний розвиток окремих країн-членів та ЄС в цілому. Доведено, що в ЄС існує свобода обрання кожною країною засобів і форм реалізації узгодження власного інноваційного права з правом Союзу. В ЄС і країнах-членах ство­рюються умови для зміцнення інноваційного наддержавного і національного законодав­ства з гнучким використанням просунутої співпраці, диференціації і субсидіарності для максимальної ефективності коштів сторін, які витрачаються на реалізацію інноваційних програм і підтримку інноваційних структур.   In the paper it is shown, how the advanced cooperation, the differentiation and subsidiarity impact on the innovative development of the individual member states and the EU as a whole. It is proved that in the EU there is a freedom of choice for each state of the means and forms of realization of harmonization of their own innovative law with law of the Union. In the EU and member states there were created the conditions for strengthening the innovative legislation on the suprastate and national levels with the flexible use of advanced cooperation, differentiation and subsidiarity in order to maximize the effectiveness of monetary funds of the parties, spent on the implementation of the innovative programs and support of the innovative structures.

scholarly journals Sailing the seven seas

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 204-216
Author(s):  
Gijsbert Vonk
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Member States ◽  
Bilateral Agreements ◽  
Global Standards ◽  
The Social ◽  
Security Relations ◽  
Alternative Approaches ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of this final contribution is to offer a broad schematic overview of ‘mechanisms’ that can be used to strengthen the social security protection of persons moving in and out of the EU. Seven mechanisms have been selected for discussion: national unilateral standards, EU unilateral standards, bilateral agreements, EU coordination of bilateral agreements, EU third country agreements, multilateral co-operation and global standards. The existence of this plethora of mechanisms, each with its own merits and shortcomings, casts a shadow over the possibility of a uniform EU regime for external social security relations. Any attempt to introduce such an approach can immediately be contradicted by alternative approaches and mechanisms which can be used both by the EU and by the individual Member States. It is suggested that more coherence in external EU social security coordination can perhaps be found in a conceptual way, by layering the seven mechanisms in a logical manner.

Analysis of the Dutch Crisis Response System in the Context of the Common European Union Resilience

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-64
Author(s):  
Chris van Duuren ◽  
Tomasz Zwęgliński
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
System Development ◽  
Crisis Response ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Civil Protection ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Future Challenges ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Eu

The increasing integrity of the European Union member states is more and more regarding the security and civil protection aspects. On the other hand the priority in responsibility for the safety and security is still in the domain of the sovereign states. It means that the individual states of the EU are responsible for designing and managing their own security and civil protection systems. However, the integration processes within the EU trigger a significant need for an increase of common understanding of the individual member states’ philosophies, approaches and systems utilized in the domain of security and civil protection. Only then if we understand how the others work, we are able to assist them in a crisis or disaster. Therefore, it is highly important to share and understand each other’s systems between member states. The article presents the Dutch approach to national risk assessment as well as organizational aspects of internal security system applied in the Netherlands. It also suggest the future challenges which are at the near horizon of the system development.

Critical Analysis of the Zero Risk Weight Privilege for European Sovereign Debt in Light of Art. 124 TFEU

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Hauser
Keyword(s):  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Sovereign Debt ◽  
Banking System ◽  
Financial System ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Capital Adequacy ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Credit Institutions

AbstractThe zero risk weight privilege for European sovereign debt in the current capital adequacy requirements for credit institutions incentivises credit institutions to acquire and hold sovereign debt. However, it also poses a significant risk to the stability of the banking system and thus the financial system as a whole. It is argued that this privilege should not only be abolished due to the risk it entails but that it is also non conformant with EU primary law. Art. 124 TFEU prohibits privileged access of the EU and Member States' public sector to financial institutions except for prudential considerations. The protective purpose of Art. 124 TFEU to ensure sound budgetary policies by subjecting public borrowing to the same rules as borrowing by other market participants is thwarted by the uniform zero risk weight privilege. Further, as this privilege does not take into account the varying creditworthiness of the individual Member States it does not promote the soundness of financial institutions so as to strengthen the soundness of the financial system as whole, but rather endangers systemic stability. The zero risk weight privilege is therefore not based on prudential considerations and hence violates Art. 124 TFEU.

scholarly journals The European Union's policy on human rights and Chinese sovereignism: The case of Xinjiang

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-86
Author(s):  
Dragan Trailovic
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
The Other ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The One ◽  
Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region ◽  
Rights Issues ◽  
The Eu

The article explores the European Union's approach to human rights issues in China through the processes of bilateral and multilateral dialogue on human rights between the EU and the People's Republic of China, on the one hand. On the other hand, the paper deals with the analysis of the EU's human rights policy in the specific case of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, which is examined through normative and political activities of the EU, its institutions and individual member states. Besides, the paper examines China's response to the European Union's human rights approaches, in general, but also when it comes to the specific case of UAR Xinjiang. ?his is done through a review of China's discourse and behaviour within the EU-China Human Rights Dialogue framework, but also at the UN level and within the framework of bilateral relations with individual member states. The paper aims to show whether and how the characteristics of the EU's general approach to human rights in China are reflected in the individual case of Xinjiang. Particular attention shall be given to the differentiation of member states in terms of their approach to human rights issues in China, which is conditioned by the discrepancy between their political values, normative interests and ideational factors, on the one hand, and material factors and economic interests, on the other. Also, the paper aims to show the important features of the different views of the European Union and the Chinese state on the very role of Human Rights Dialogue, as well as their different understandings of the concept of human rights itself. The study concluded that the characteristics of the Union's general approach to human rights in China, as well as the different perceptions of human rights issues between China and the EU, were manifested in the same way in the case of UAR Xinjiang.

The EU and the European Other: the Janus face of EU migration and visa policies in the neighbourhood

2018 ◽  
pp. 167-180
Author(s):  
Igor Merheim-Eyre
Keyword(s):  
Single Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Free Access ◽  
Member States ◽  
Norms And Values ◽  
The Eu

Igor Merheim-Eyre examines an area where EU values and interests appear to be currently in real tension – migration. Once again, while the EU institutions themselves may wish to promote values, individual member states are protecting their interests. He examines the ways in which the development of the single market and internal free movement has led to the need for greater control of the EU’s external borders. In this context the neighbours are seen as having a responsibility to help protect the EU from migration from further afield. In acquiescing in this they are promised visa-free access. We see the application of conditionality by the EU, referred to in several chapters, used not to just to promote norms and values but to defend the EU’s security interests. The EU may wish Turkey to be EU-ised but more immediately it needs Turkey to stop migration into the EU from Syria.

Migration, Social Protection, and the (Re)Production of Inequalities in the European Union

2018 ◽  
pp. 134-153
Author(s):  
Thomas Faist
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Protection ◽  
Social Space ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
High Degree ◽  
Transnational Social Space ◽  
The Eu

Europe, and the European Union in particular, can be conceived as a transnational social space with a high degree of transactions across borders of member states. The question is how efforts to provide social protection for cross-border migrants in the EU reinforce existing inequalities (e.g. between regions or within households), and lead to new types of inequalities (e.g. stratification of labour markets). Social protection in the EU falls predominantly under the purview of individual member states; hence, frictions between different state-operated protection systems and social protection in small groups are particularly apparent in the case of cross-border flows of people and resources. Chapter 5 examines in detail the general social mechanisms operative in cross-border forms of social protection, in particular, exclusion, opportunity hoarding, hierarchization, and exploitation, and also more concrete mechanisms which need to be constructed bottom-up.

Comment on Risk versus Hazard – How to Regulate in the 21st Century

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-195
Author(s):  
Dennis Paustenbach ◽  
Julie Panko
Keyword(s):  
21St Century ◽  
Regulatory Process ◽  
Regulatory Framework ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Technical Knowledge ◽  
Market Place ◽  
Current State ◽  
European Regulatory ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Eu

In this issue of the journal, Dr. Ragnar Lofstedt examines the current state of the EU regulatory framework with respect to chemicals and illustrates how the hazard-based approach sealed the fate of two important chemicals in the EU market-place. He also explores how the attitudes, technical knowledge and economic influences of the individual member states determine the outcome of environmental and chemical regulations. Lastly, Dr. Lofstedt provides some recommendations to improve consistency in the European regulatory process and ensure greater scientific, as well as, risk-based regulations.

Politics in the European Union

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Bache ◽  
Simon Bulmer ◽  
Stephen George ◽  
Owen Parker
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eurozone Crisis ◽  
Member States ◽  
Treaty Of Lisbon ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Eu

Politics in the European Union examines the theory, history, institutions, and policies of the European Union. The EU is a unique, complex, and ever-changing political entity which continues to shape both international politics and the politics of its individual member states. The text provides a clear analysis of the organization and presents a well-rounded introduction to the subject. Complete and detailed in its coverage, with a consolidated and updated history section, this text weaves together material on key contemporary concerns including the eurozone crisis and the implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon with a thorough consideration of the workings and remit of the EU.

Communicating with the European Composite Administration

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 883-906 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Reichel
Keyword(s):  
International Organizations ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Union Citizenship ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

One of the reasons for introducing a “Union” citizenship in the 1993 Maastricht Treaty was to provide a direct channel between the citizens of the Member States and the EU. In contrast to many other international organizations, the role of the individual has been central to the European project since its inception. In its famous 1962 judgment given inVan Gend en Loos,1 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) underscored the importance of the “vigilance of individuals concerned” seeking to protect their European rights in the new legal order through judicial control.2 The right to directly vote on the representatives of the European Parliament had already been introduced in the 1970s. The citizens of the Member States were thus equipped with two classic forms of political participation even prior to the introduction of Union citizenship: law making and the legal adjudication of individual cases. Nonetheless, whether these channels are sufficient to guarantee the citizens effective democratic means to influence legislation and exercise control of EU institutions in the rather complex multilevel legal system of the EU has been continuously debated.

EU immigration policy prospects dim further on crisis

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Economic Effects ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
Demographic Ageing ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Economic Developments ◽  
National Governments ◽  
The Eu

Subject EU immigration policy. Significance The EU has previously legislated to encourage the immigration of workers into the bloc, to counter the negative economic effects of demographic ageing. However, immigration policy is largely determined by individual member states. The results of EU pro-immigration schemes have been weak. National responses to the current influx of refugees and migrants have highlighted underlying member states differences over immigration, driven by economic, demographic and cultural divergences. Consequently, impetus for further EU pro-immigration action had largely stalled even before the current crisis. Impacts Asymmetric economic developments across the continent will continue to impede a common immigration strategy. Any opening of more legal avenues to convert asylum-seekers into economic immigrants will remain a matter for national governments. The current crisis will increase distrust and frictions among member states, while boosting populist forces. The crisis will bring into sharp relief the distinction between extra- and intra-EU immigration as a way of filling labour market gaps.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document