Suchergebnisse

Agricultural policy in the EU project was one of the most important parts. That caused several reasons.Intensively supported EU agriculture devoloped very fast, what caused, that setted tasks were achieved and EUfaced surpluses of agricultural products. In the same time there come into being very influencive lobby grouprepresenting interests of farmers, which actively opposed to any more radical reform.Created market organisation measures caused, that EU market of agricultural products were isolated fromcheapest products of the rest of the world and surpluses could be sold only with hight subsidies. That made EUagrucultural policy very expencive and dissatisfaction rose inside EU and from trade partners. It was obvious, thatEU common agricultural policy needs reforms.First significant and efective reforms were in 1992. Later – "Agenda 2000", which was based on previosreforms, but more radical with clear link to rural development.

AbstractThis article focuses on the Lisbon strategy, the latest 'moment' in EU social policy. Following developments up to the end of 2005, it seeks to assess the significance of the poverty/social inclusion open method of co‐ordination in terms of what it indicates about the EU's engagement with social policy. The article proceeds by interrogating a series of arguments for and against significance. It considers in turn different interpretations of: the functions and rationale of the EU policy process on poverty and social inclusion; the application and unfolding of the method of open co‐ordination in this particular policy domain; and the politics underlying it. In elaborating the sui generis aspects of EU social policy especially as associated with Lisbon, the analysis discusses the possibility that social policy is developing its own dynamic at EU level. However, although significant elements can be identified, the relative fragility of poverty and social exclusion within the EU policy portfolio is highlighted. It is there but lacks firm foundation.

The authors are specific attention to the development of the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union. The Common Agricultural Policy is viewed from the sixties of the twentieth century. It starts from Mansholt plan continues with expansions in 1973, 1981 and in 1986 years to finally come to the first reform of the CAP advocated by the then Commissioner for Agriculture MacSharry. The reform was carried out according to the proposal MacSharry only increase the cost of the CAP and has led to new reforms contained in the Agenda 2000th. During the 2003rd and the 2006th year has come again to reform the CAP. The very need for such frequent reforms, especially in the last twenty years lets us know that the importance of the CAP in the agricultural development of the European Union's big. It could be said that there was no CAP there would be no EU. Almost all agricultural activities in the EU are covered by the CAP. Subsidies are an essential tool for CAP. The Common Agricultural Policy could hardly function without import restrictions and export subsidies, various supplements and restrictions.

Juan Delgado discusses the economic impact of climate change policies. The EU has committed to an ambitious climate change agenda. The challenge facing Europe now is how to meet the targets at a minimum cost and how to allocate the cost in such a way that it has a neutral impact on competitiveness. This note was presented in August 2007 to the Economic Policy Committee of the EU.

AbstractEurope 2020 and the European Semester signal a major change of direction in EU social policy with new governance arrangements, policy orientations and politics. This paper analyses 290 Country Specific Recommendations and 29 interviews to answer two questions: 1) What type of social policy is being advanced by the EU at present? 2) How are EU social actors able to advance EU social policy under current conditions? It argues that the degree of progress in EU social policy in the European Semester (2011–15) has been conditional and contingent. EU social policy is more oriented to supporting market development than it is to correcting for market failures. We explain these developments by a combination of factors including the strong agency exerted by some social actors in a context of constraint, the moderation of expectations and the adoption of strategic practices by key actors, and political divisions among the Member States.

In the context of international migration, social security coordination is a technique used primarily by states in order to build bridges between their social security systems for securing the rights of migrants. Migrants who have careers in multiple countries risk losing their acquired rights when moving from one country to another. Currently, the key instruments in EU social security coordination are Regulations 883/2004, 987/2009 and 1231/2010. Contrary to this uniform system, the social security coordination rules applicable to persons moving from a third country to an EU Member State (or vice-versa) can be found in several instruments. This book aims to identify the different instruments of the external dimension of EU social security coordination and proposes two policy options for improving the current patchy solution while developing a common EU approach: the inclusion of social security coordination clauses in agreements with third counties and the draft of a model agreement for future use in bilateral agreement negotiations regarding social security.

Examination of the common EU asylum standards so far adopted suggests that there is still a long way to go before asylum policy & practice are harmonized & that this process may undermine the principles enshrined in the Refugee Convention. Adapted from the source document.

Since the mid-1990s, several steps have been taken towards an integration of social policy in the EU. Yet there is reluctance in many quarters to go further. This article introduces the special issue on integration of EU social policy and explores the case for more comprehensive `Europeanization'. We argue that the norms that underlie the European model provide the rationale for integration, and that the usual focus on the undoubted differences between countries in the approaches to, and delivery mechanisms of, the welfare state are not as great an obstacle as is often assumed. With the advent of EMU and with many common problems to confront, the EU countries have good reasons to adopt a common approach to social policy, even if implementation remains at the national level. The open method of coordination provides the means of reconciling these aims and the article concludes with a discussion of how it might evolve to achieve a more integrated EU policy.

The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is widely blamed both for the poor state of Europe's fish stocks and the woes of its fishermen. This book lays out in detail the varied roles and responsibilities of the EU under the CFP,examining both the law and the policy issues crucial to understanding its operation

What drove the preferences over institutional choices of EU Constitutional Convention delegates in the area of foreign policy? We examine delegate preferences and find strong evidence that partisan identity rather than government positions drove delegates' preferences for both the role of the Commission and the voting rule in the Council. We also find evidence that delegates' party positions on an EU foreign policy are better predictors than delegates' personal preferences of their preferred role for the Commission and the voting rule in the Council. If government and national interests would dominate any policy area, it would be foreign policy. We contend that our finding in this critical case underscores the importance of partisan effects in European integration.