scholarly journals State of the art data exchange in agriculture in the EU27 & Switzerland: survey of the agriXchange project

2012 ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick Teye ◽  
Henri Hoslter ◽  
Liisa Pesonen
Keyword(s):  
Data Integration ◽  
Data Exchange ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
The State ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Member States ◽  
Data Harmonization ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

Within the agricultural knowledge-based bio-economy, information sharing is an important issue. Information systems for agricultural supply food chain network are not standardized. This reduces efficiency in the exchange of information in agri-business processes. To address these problems, agriXchange, an EU-funded coordination and support action was setup to develop a sustainable network system for common data exchange in the agricultural sector. The overall objectives are to: a) establish a platform on data exchange in agriculture in the EU, b) develop a reference framework for interoperability of data exchange, and c) identify the main challenges for harmonizing data exchange. Analysis of the situation concerning data exchange in agriculture in individual EU member states (including Switzerland) is an integral component of this harmonization support action. In this paper the results of the investigation of the state-of-the art around agricultural data exchange in EU member states is reported. This research on data exchange and data integration was carried out in 27 EU member states and Switzerland. The investigation employed experts to quantitatively and qualitatively inquire about agricultural data exchange in the EU. A framework was developed to inquire the different integration levels, within as well as between enterprises in agriculture. Based on the analysis of the state of the art, the challenges for future research and trends data exchange in European agriculture were identified. The results showed that there are substantial differences across the EU in relation to the level of data integration and standardization. Member states can be divided into different groups from; none or hardly any data integration to quite well developed infrastructures such as France, Germany, The Netherlands and Denmark. The most important findings identified were with the aging population of farmers which manifests itself through the lack of adaption and investments in new technology, especially in Southern and Eastern countries. Availability of mobile and broadband infrastructure was a major problem in rural areas for most countries in a quantitative sense, but for ICT developed agricultural countries more of a quality of service problem. Cost of acquiring data exchange capable equipment, data exchange formats, proprietary data formats and complexity in machines was also a major concern. As a recommendation, it was noted that open networks with flexible relationships between network partners will facilitate successful integration of systems. The importance of agricultural data exchange in the EU has broadly been recognized, however all service providers and users need to be convinced about the benefits. Finally, focus should be on putting research information into practice to demonstrate how data harmonization processes can work, however, this should be kept flexible and hence keep the rigidity of (formal) standardization processes minimal in agricultural data harmonization.

scholarly journals Features of transformation of legal entities in the conditions of Brexit

2021 ◽  
pp. 531-538
Author(s):  
Olha Ovechkina
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
The State ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Actual Location ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Legal Entities

In connection with the decision to withdraw the UK from the EU a number of companies will need to take into account that from 1 January 2021 EU law will no longer apply to the United Kingdom and will become a "third country" for EU Member States, unless the provisions of bilateral agreements or multilateral trade agreements. This means that the four European freedoms (movement of goods, services, labor and capital) will no longer apply to UK companies to the same extent as they did during the UK's EU membership. The purpose of the article is to study, first of all, the peculiarities of the influence of Great Britain's withdrawal from the European Union on the legal regulation of the status of European legal entities. Brexit results in the inability to register European companies and European economic interest groups in the UK. Such companies already registered before 01.01.2021 have the opportunity to move their place of registration to an EU Member State. These provisions are defined in Regulations 2018 (2018/1298) and Regulations 2018 (2018/1299).British companies with branches in EU Member States will now be subject to the rules applicable to third-country companies, which provide additional information on their activities. In the EU, many countries apply the criterion of actual location, which causes, among other things, the problem of non-recognition of legal entities established in the country where the criterion of incorporation is used (including the United Kingdom), at the same time as the governing bodies of such legal entities the state where the settlement criterion is applied. Therefore, to reduce the likelihood of possible non-recognition of British companies, given the location of the board of such a legal entity in the state where the residency criterion applies, it seems appropriate to consider reincarnation at the actual location of such a company. Reducing the risks of these negative consequences in connection with Brexit on cross-border activities of legal entities is possible by concluding interstate bilateral and multilateral agreements that would contain unified rules on conflict of law regulation of the status of legal entities.

scholarly journals Difference of application of VAT in EU member states during the supply of goods including installation

2008 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 47-56
Author(s):  
Petr David ◽  
Danuše Nerudová
Keyword(s):  
Czech Republic ◽  
Member State ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
The State ◽  
Member States ◽  
Standard Methods ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

There still exist the differences in provision of VAT, in interpretation of VAT provisions and application of the rules in practice between the EU member states. Application of VAT during the supply of goods with installation to other EU member state, both during the existence of establishment in the state of customer and also without it, is considered to be one from the problematic field. Other discrepancies are created by inclusion of the sub suppliers, who can come from other EU member state or from the same state as customer, to this transaction. Questions of VAT application during the supply of goods with installation to other EU member state were processed by using standard methods of scientific work in the frame of five selected EU countries – Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Czech Republic.

Towards an Ever Closer Union Between Residents and Citizens?

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (01) ◽  
pp. 78-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michèle Finck
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Voting Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Traditional Concept ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Domestic Reform ◽  
The Eu

Alien suffrage in Luxembourg – The traditional concept of the electorate – Link between nationality and voting rights – From the national to the resident worker? – The decoupling of nationality and citizenship – The transformation of the state as a consequence of European integration – Comparison to other EU member states – Consequences for EU law of domestic reform – The intertwinement of constitutional spheres in the EU

scholarly journals VAT in the frame of providing management services to the subsidiary in the selected EU member states

2008 ◽  
Vol 54 (NO. 7) ◽  
pp. 333-342
Author(s):  
D. Nerudová ◽  
P. David
Keyword(s):  
Czech Republic ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
The State ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Standard Methods ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Management Services

There still exist the differences in the legal frame of VAT, its interpretation and application of the rules in practice between the EU member states. The application of VAT during providing management services to an enterprise in other EU state directly or through a subsidiary in the state of the recipient is different as well. Questions of the VAT application during the provision of management services were searched by using standard methods of the scientific work in the frame of five selected EU countries – Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and the Czech Republic.

scholarly journals THE EU COMMISSION'S PROPOSAL TO REVISE THE BRUSSELS IIa REGULATION: SHORTCOMINGS OF THE “OVERRIDING RULE”

TEME ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 901
Author(s):  
Sanja Marjanovic
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Member States ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Eu

As the procedure for the revision of the Brussels IIa Regulation is currently pending in the European Union, this paper focuses on the two issues which are correlated through the so-called “overriding rule” mechanism. The first problem concerns the proceeding on the return of the wrongfully removed or retained child involving two EU Member States – the State of refuge and the State where the child was habitually resident immediately before the abduction. The second one tackles the proceeding, currently regulated in the Brussels IIa, on the rights of custody (parental responsibility) when the return of the child was refused in the EU State on the grounds of Art. 13 of the Hague Child Abduction Convention. The proposals for the revision of the Brussels IIa Regulation heavily involve these issues. In that respect, the author indicates certain shortcomings and inconsistencies of the amendments proposed by the European Commission in the Proposal to Revise the Brussels IIa Regulation (2016) and the latest compromise solutions suggested by the Presidency to the Council in the General Approach to the Recast of Brussels IIa (2018). At the same time, the paper suggests two possible ways in which the balance between the principle of mutual trust between the EU Member States and the principle of the child's best interest could be better balanced. From the perspective of Private International Law of the Republic of Serbia, the revision of the Brussels IIa Regulation is important in view of Serbia’s candidate status for EU membership and the need to keep an eye on changes to the secondary EU legislation.

EU Climate Law: Largely Uncharted Legal Territory

Climate Law ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 137-147
Author(s):  
Marjan Peeters
Keyword(s):  
State Of The Art ◽  
The State ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Dynamic Nature ◽  
Emission Reductions ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Huge Challenge ◽  
The Eu

EU climate law has come to consist of many rules and court decisions. Given its breadth, complexity, and dynamic nature, it is a huge challenge for scholars to acquire a good overview, let alone develop a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the law. It should not be taboo to concede that hard-working scholars may fall short of having a thorough appreciation of the “state of the art” of EU climate law. Because of this, not only prioritization but also cooperation among scholars is necessary. While legal research can point to problems and shortcomings in EU climate law, it should at the same time delve on the importance of having a body of EU climate law leading to emission reductions that most likely would not have been achieved if the EU member states had had to decide on this objective individually.

scholarly journals Ustrojowe znaczenie konstytucyjnego ustanowienia stolicy w państwach członkowskich Unii Europejskiej

2017 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 225-235
Author(s):  
Radosław Grabowski
Keyword(s):  
Political System ◽  
The State ◽  
Dominant Model ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
State Capital ◽  
The Eu

SYSTEMIC IMPORTANCE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CAPITAL IN THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNIONThe practice of placing in the constitution provisions relating to state symbols emblem, flag, anthem is satisfactory. Often accompanying such regulation standards is the task to indicate the center of which is the state capital. The desirability of such regulations is questionable, hence the question whether it is acommon practice. The analysis covers the EU Member States. It is ain­homogeneous group, which should be considered an advantage, because it allows to review the solu­tions. The aim is to answer the question whether in the EU countries there is awidespread practice of the constitutional establishment of the state capital, whether it is the dominant model, is it possible there are different solutions in this area, when such adjustments are redundant, whether such cases allow conclusions that can be applied in practice of Polish political system.

scholarly journals EUROPEAN LESSONS OF DECENTRALIZATION

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (11) ◽  
pp. 175-184
Author(s):  
Evgeny Grigoryevich Kartashov
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The State ◽  
National Unity ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Role Of The State ◽  
Decentralization And Centralization ◽  
The Eu

The role of the state in the processes of European integration and decentralization is analyzed, the factors of threats for it are determined. The fol- lowing common features of decentralization processes in the EU member states are highlighted as strengthening the role of the regional level, the need to choose between different models of separation of powers between different levels of go- vernment (exclusive or joint authority) and the search for ways to adequately fi- nance transferred powers. Decentralization also actualizes the problem of territo- rial inequality and patronage for European countries. It is proved that the national state is a central actor in the process of decentralization, despite the fact that this process creates certain threats to the state itself. On the one hand, the EU as a supranational organization has already limited some aspects of the sovereignty of its member states, in particular, in the area of monetary policy. With the deepening of European integration, the powers of national states and in other areas are in- creasingly limited. On the other hand, the gradual increase in the share of powers conveyed by the state to decentralized and regional authorities further weakens its role. Moreover, the increasing influence of liberalism on state policy and the introduction of competition among the main providers of public services also li- mits the possibility of the state’s influence on its internal policies. Such a dynamics gives grounds for questioning the ability of states to effectively manage their ter- ritories. At the same time, it was noted that in most EU member states, the bodies of state power have long been the guarantor of national unity in both social and territorial terms. Such a “unity of opposites” (decentralization and centralization) is unlikely to change in the medium term.

scholarly journals The practice of imposing administrative fines by the State Data Protection Inspectorate in the context of other EU Member States

2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-169
Author(s):  
Aurimas Šidlauskas
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
The State ◽  
General Context ◽  
Member States ◽  
State Data ◽  
General Data Protection Regulation ◽  
Supervisory Authority ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

The implementation of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter referred to as the Regulation), which, among other things, aims to eliminate disparities between national systems and to alleviate unnecessary administrative burdens, began on 25 May 2018. Each Member State is to ensure that there is one or more independent public authorities (hereinafter referred to as the supervisory authority) responsible for monitoring the implementation of the Regulation. In Lithuania, personal data protection is supervised by two authorities, namely by the State Data Protection Inspectorate (hereinafter referred to as the SDPI) and by the Office of the Inspector of Journalist Ethics. The powers conferred on the supervisory authorities by the Regulation are greater and broader in scope than those granted under previous data protection legislation. Organizations which process personal data must ensure compliance with the requirements laid down in the Regulation. A supervisory authority that violates the provisions of the Regulation may be faced with heavy administrative fines and other sanctions. This article analyzes the practice of imposing administrative fines in the EU and in Lithuania as compared to other EU Member States. The author of the article believes that evaluating the practice of imposing administrative fines by the SDPI within the general context of the EU shall enable one to search for the reasons behind the current situation, as well as to improve the processes the SDPI employs to perform functions associated with data protection supervision. The article uses generalization and comparative analysis of scientific literature, legal documents and statistical data.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document