Mobilities against Prejudice: The Role of Social Transnationalism in Europe in Sentiments towards Immigration from Other EU Member States and from Outside the EU1

Author(s):  
Justyna Salamońska

Over the decades Europe has received many and diverse flows of people from around the world. Migrants coming from outside the EU along intra-European migrants have changed the landscape of migrations with their diverse mobility projects. At the same time European citizens residing in their countries of origin are mobile in multiple ways when they engage in travel and consumption across the borders or they connect to family and friends based in other countries. In this chapter I will argue that while European citizens themselves have become more mobile engaging in cross-border exchanges and interactions, these processes have also brought about the change in their thinking about mobility of others who migrate from other EU Member States and beyond. Using the Eurobarometer data I illustrate how attitudes towards intra- and extra-European migration differ, with largely positive sentiments towards migrants coming from within the EU and predominantly negative attitudes towards migrants from outside the EU. However, determinants of these attitudes remain similar, irrespectively if they are directed at European movers or third country nationals. Among examined determinants of sentiments, engagement in cross-border practices seems to coincide with more positive opinions about migration.

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-117
Author(s):  
Evgenia Kokolia

SOLVIT is an informal out-of-court dispute-resolution tool between the EU Member States and Norway, Lichtenstein and Iceland to practically help citizens and businesses when encountering problems in cross-border situations with their rights enshrined in EU legislation. In light of the recently adopted Commission Communication on the reinforcement of SOLVIT, 1 the authors analyse its key characteristics and challenges. The authors concludes that an enhanced role of SOLVIT can efficiently promote a culture of compliance and smart enforcement of EU law in the Single Market together with the Member States.


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.


Author(s):  
T. Romanova ◽  
E. Pavlova

The article examines how the normative power, which the EU puts forward as an ideological basis of its actions in the world, manifests itself in the national partnerships for modernization between Russia and EU member states. The authors demonstrate the influence of the EU’s normativity on its approach to modernization as well as the difference in the positions of its member countries. It is concluded that there is no unity in the EU’s approach to democracy, human rights and the rule of law, and the new classification of EU member states, which is based on their readiness to act in accordance with the Union’s concept of normative power, is offered.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristine Sørensen ◽  
Helmut Brand

Abstract A decade ago the European health literacy field was in its infancy. A comparable study among EU Member States was made to explore if health literacy was as much as a concern in Europe as elsewhere in the world. This article analyses the impact of the European Health Literacy project (2009–2012). Based on the outcomes new avenues for health literacy in Europe are proposed. In spite of progress there is still a strong call for actions to make health literacy a priority in the EU.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 36-48
Author(s):  
Olha Demedyuk ◽  
Khrystyna Prytula

In the recent decade, the EU Member States have been actively implementing the regional development policy based on innovative strategies of smart specialization. However, lately, European researchers have been paying increasing attention to the issues of regions’ capacity to overcome the boundaries of administrative units inside the country and abroad and to the need to consider regions in the context of their functioning among others, especially from the viewpoint of the growing role of their innovative networks in global value chains. That is why currently the EU is addressing the development of cross-border smart specialization strategies. The paper aims to study the European experience on the functioning of cross-border innovation systems and joint strategic planning of cross-border regions’ development based on smart specialization and to outline the opportunities to implement the EU experience of cross-border approach to smart specialization in cross-border regions of Ukraine with EU Member States. The paper analyzes the views of foreign researchers on the links between innovation systems in cross-border space that constitute the theoretical basis of the study of cross-border smart specialization strategies, namely regarding the dimensions and level of their development. The research of European scientists on cross-border innovation systems in specific cross-border regions is examined, in particular on Spanish-French and German-French borders. Directions of implementation of smart specialization projects in cross-border context under the EU programs and other EU instruments that support regions in cooperation for the elaboration of joint view of development with neighbouring economically, socially, culturally, and historically close regions are outlined. The experience and methodology of the first cross-border smart specialization strategy for Spanish and Portuguese regions are studied in detail. The opportunities to use the EU experience by several Western Ukrainian regions based on the joint smart specialization priorities with the neighboring EU states are outlined. For this purpose, 1) the RIS3 strategies of the regions of Poland and Romania adjoining Ukraine and Regional Development Strategies of respective Ukrainian regions were analyzed to detect similar smart specialization priorities; 2) the clusters in the mentioned regions were analyzed as main drivers of achievement of smart specialization goals to detect similar or complementary functioning areas.


2019 ◽  
pp. 16-51
Author(s):  
Anniek de Ruijter

This book looks at the impact of the expanding power of the EU in terms of fundamental rights and values. The current chapter lays down the framework for this analysis. Law did not always have a central role to play in the context of medicine and health. The role of law grew after the Second Word War and the Nuremberg Doctors Trials (1947), in which preventing the repetition of atrocities that were committed in the name of medicine became a guidepost for future law regarding patients’ rights and bioethics. In the period after the War, across the EU Member States, health law developed as a legal discipline in which a balance was struck in medicine and public health between law, bioethics, and fundamental rights. The role of EU fundamental rights protections in the context of public health and health care developed in relation with the growth of multilevel governance and litigation (national, international, Council of Europe, and European Union). For the analysis here, this chapter develops an EU rights and values framework that goes beyond the strictly legal and allows for a ‘normative language’ that takes into consideration fundamental rights as an expression of important shared values in the context of the European Union. The perspective of EU fundamental rights and values can demonstrate possible tensions caused by EU health policy: implications in terms of fundamental rights can show how highly sensitive national policy issues may be affected by the Member States’ participation in EU policymaking activities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-223
Author(s):  
Jean-Baptiste Farcy

Abstract This article critically assesses EU harmonisation in the field of labour immigration. It argues that EU directives are limited both in scope and intensity which explains their relatively low effectiveness and added value. Given the current political and institutional context, the article claims that a truly common labour immigration policy is unrealistic. Labour immigration remains a predominantly national prerogative and EU rules have done little to overcome normative competition between EU Member States. Looking forward, the EU should adopt complementary measures to Member States’ policies. The role of the EU in this sensitive policy area should be better defined and justified, in particular in relation to the principle of subsidiarity.


2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hrant Kostanyan

By applying the rational choice principal–agent model, this article examines the European Union member states’ principal control of the European External Action Service (eeas) agent. More specifically, the article applies mechanisms of agency monitoring, control and sanctions that are inherent in the principal–agent model to analyse the establishment and functioning of the eeas. These mechanisms aim to ensure the eeas’s compliance with its mandate, thereby curtailing its ability to pursue own objectives that are independent from the principal. The findings reveal that the eeas is tightly controlled by the eu member states. Moreover the European Commission has tools to exercise horizontal checks vis-à-vis the eeas. The application of the principal–agent model to control the eeas is not without its limits. The model falls short of conceptualizing the role of the European Parliament, which remains an outlier to this model.


2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jadranka Švarc ◽  
Jasminka Lažnjak ◽  
Marina Dabić

PurposeThis study, an exploratory one, aims to empirically investigate the association of national intellectual capital (NIC) with the national digital transformation readiness of the European Union's (EU’s) member states. Apart from building the conceptual model of NIC, this study explores the role of NIC dimensions in the digital divide between European countries.Design/methodology/approachBased on the literature review and the available EU statistical data and indexes, the theoretical framework and conceptual model for NIC were developed. The model explores the relation of NIC and its dimensions (human, social, structural, relational and renewable/development capital) on the readiness of European countries for digital transformation and the digital divide. Significant differences between EU countries in NIC and digital readiness were tested. Multiple linear regression was used to explore the association of each NIC dimension with digital transformation and digital divide within the EU.FindingsDespite a positive association between all dimensions of NIC and digital transformation readiness, the proposed model of NIC was not confirmed in full. Regression analysis proved social capital and working skills, a dimension of human capital, to be the predictors of digital transformation at a national level, able to detect certain elements of digital divide between EU member states. Structural capital, knowledge and education, as dimensions of human capital, were predictors of the digital divide in terms of the integration of digital media in companies.Research limitations/implicationsThis research has a limited propensity for generalisation due to the lack of common measurement models in the field of NIC exploration.Practical implicationsThis research offers policy makers an indication of the relationships between NIC and digital transformation, pointing out which dimensions of NIC should be strengthened to allow the EU to meet the challenges of digital economy and to overcome the digital divide between EU member states.Social implicationsThe use of digital technologies is key in creating active and informed citizens in the public sphere and productive companies and economic growth in the business sphere.Originality/valueThis study provides an original theoretical framework and conceptual model through which to analyse the relationship between NIC and digital transformation, which has thus far not been explored at the level of the EU. This research makes an original contribution to the empirical exploration of NIC and produces new insights in the fields of digital transformation and intellectual capital.


2016 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Keay

AbstractCross-border transactions and resultant legal proceedings often cause problems. One major problem is knowing which law should govern the transaction and any legal proceedings. Cross-border insolvencies in the EU are subject to the European Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings (EIR) but this legislation does not determine which substantive insolvency law rules apply in a given insolvency. There are many differences in the insolvency rules applicable in the various EU Member States and this has caused concern in relation to the avoidance of transactions entered into by an insolvent prior to the opening of insolvency proceedings. In light of this, the paper examines options to address divergence between national avoidance rules. One option, harmonization, is analysed as well as its possible benefits and drawbacks.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document