Search results

This article examines both the place of the social dimension in past and on-going debates about the United Kingdom's membership of the European Union and the reciprocal influence of EU and UK institutions on developments in the social policy field. It explores fluctuations in the relationship between economic and social policy, the divisiveness within, between and across political parties, the role of key policy actors in shaping the social agenda, and the failure of attempts to harmonise social welfare systems as enlargement intensified their diversity. We argue that, although difficult to predict, the implications of Brexit for future social policy in the UK and EU may not be so far-reaching as in some other policy areas, due largely to the maintenance of unanimous voting and the subsidiarity principle in many social domains, combined with the shift towards soft law and the widespread resistance of member states to tighter social integration.

The history of European transport policy can be broadly divided into two main periods: the first covers the period from the '50s to the '80s, and the second from the late '80s onwards. At the early stage, transport policies were mainly within the competence of Member States, and their evolution followed national priorities. As in the other network industries, up to the 1980s transport operators were generally publicly owned, they enjoyed (local, regional and national) monopolies and their operations were strongly influenced by public service oriented policies. After the 1980s network industries were challenged by neo-liberal ideas of competition, technological progress (mainly in the telecommunications sector) and, most of all, by the European Union that, in the meantime, had acquired new powers in matters of infrastructures in general and of transport in particular. After some 30 years of relative paralysis of the European institutions in matters of infrastructures, the European Union endeavoured, as of the middle of the 1980s, to create the single European market also in the different infrastructures, including transport.

Albania's local governments are characterized by significant disparities in size and capacity. The challenge of fragmentation includes not only economic efficiency but also the administrative and technical capacities of local governments to provide services in an efficient and effective way. As international experience proves, the fragmentation of local government systems is related to the extent of financial decentralization. It is apparent that larger municipalities are able to carry out a wider scope of functions than smaller municipalities. The regional development policy is a new area of public policy in Albania. This research will focus on the examination of the system of local government in Albania, which show that the requirement of the regional level is also supported by the need for better coordination and planning in the framework of the EU policy enlargement. Albania need an integrated, coherent regional policy based on its growing concern over the widening gaps in socio-economic performance and fortunes between different parts of the country. As Albania seeks to fully integrate its economy and its markets in the global context and, in particular in the EU single market, there is an imperative to ensure that all areas of the country are capable of competing

This policy briefing aims at highlighting areas of polar change that have profound societal, environmental, economic and political impacts – both locally and for Europe at large – that need urgent attention from both European scientists and policy makers. These insights are retrieved from five recently published White Papers, which have been developed on behalf of EU-PolarNet with a team of multidisciplinary polar experts, stake- and right holders.

AbstractThis paper reviews the EU's development policy in relation to the Pacific members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific group (ACP). It considers the particular characteristics and challenges faced by these island economies before turning to their trade relations with the EU and the Community's aid programme. It considers both the regional assistance programme and the particular experience of Fiji, the largest economy of the South Pacific. Finally, it attempts to draw some more general conclusions as to the effectiveness of EU aid administration and to identify those issues that remain to be addressed including monitoring, performance criteria, deconcentration and policy coherence. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Instruments for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) are one of the most important instruments fo EU development and regional policy avaliable to the candidate countries for EU accession. Enlargement of EU can cause, what already can be seen, considerable problems. Especially when the level of economic development is lower in some new member states and candidate countries than in " old " EU member states. Amon these countries are also western Balkan countries which use IPA funds (IPA I and IPA II) to solve problems caused by lack of money on national, regional nad city level as well as for the citizens.

The aim of this paperwork is to explain what the European Commission has done by analyzing experiences in the utilizing IPA I funds. In the paper work we try to explain the new conditions, beside indispensable Stabilisation and Association Agreement, for programming and absorbing IPA funds that should increase impacts of financial and technical support for achievement of reform goals, particulary emphasising EU 2020 Strategy for smart, suinstable and inclusive 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.