Search results

This article examines an important development in the field of corporate social responsibility, namely theadoption of a 2014 European Union Directive ("2014 EU Directive") mandating non-financial reporting by certain large companies. Such disclosure has traditionally been provided by businesses on a voluntary basis, but the 2014 EU Directive reflects an emerging global trends toward mandatory reporting. Such trend emerged in response to the perceived low quantity and poor quality of information disclosed voluntarily onsocial and environmental topics of importance to corporate stakeholders. The author analyzes the history and development of policy and legislation on this issue both at the European Union level and within two Member States that have been leaders in the area of corporate social responsibility reporting, namely France and Denmark. Such analysis draws on literature from the fields of both law and business and is conducted within the larger frame of the global growth of non-financial reporting and the role that such reporting plays as a mechanism to enhance socially responsible behavior by business. An important feature of the 2014 EU Directive is its regulatory approach, which has been called a "smart mix approach" because it introduces an element of government regulation while still allowing businesses to make significant choices about disclosure on a voluntary basis. The author concludes that the 2014 EU Directive may result in a greater quantity ofdisclosure, but it may not be as successful in achieving the goal of improved quality of such reporting due to fundamental weaknesses in the regulatory approach and content of the 2014 EU Directive, as well as to thelack of preconditions in Member States needed for improved corporate transparency on social and environmental issues. The lessons from the European Union experience detailed in this article may prove useful for countries like the United States, where the development of non-financial reporting has lagged behind other countries.

Chapter 11 ; The recent arrival of a large number of persons seeking international protection placed the matter of migration amongst the priority issues on the EU's political agenda. The influx was, however, distributed very unevenly among member states as some of them took in a disproportionate number of asylum seekers as a consequence of a number of factors, including their geographical location or the state of their economies. The European Union advocates responsibility, solidarity and partnership. As stated in Article 80 of the Lisbon Treaty; "The policies of the Union set out in this Chapter and their implementation shall be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member States." Responsibility-sharing is therefore one of the key principles on which a common migration and asylum policy should be built in order to address the unequal distribution of asylum seekers. [excerpt] ; peer-reviewed

The purpose of the research is to highlight problematic issues and ways of reforming the criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine in the context of European integration. Main content. The article analyzes the current criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine and that of European Union countries. Methodology: The methodological basis of the research is the dialectical method of scientific knowledge, through the application of this method considered were legal, functional, organizational and procedural aspects of methodological approaches to understanding of problematic issues and ways of reforming criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine in the context of European integration were considered. Conclusions. Shortcomings of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine have been highlighted. Prospects of their reforming were outlined and changes to the current legislation in the context of European integration were proposed.

The purpose of this policy paper is to analyse and propose ideas about how the European Union could have a greater impact on reducing poverty in Latin America through its trade policy, in conjunction with other policy instruments. To do this, the authors analyze the experience of the EU's Generalized System of Preference (GSP), a scheme aimed to help poor countries adapt to the international trading system. Overall, this regime has not proven effective for this purpose nor is there any evidence that it has had a significantly positive impact on reducing poverty in developing countries in general or in Latin America. This paper starts with an overview of the context affecting this issue, including a review of the literature on the link between trade and poverty, an analysis of the contemporary situation in Latin America, focusing on poverty and inequality, reasons why it is important to look at the GSP presently, this region's trade and development experience and overall ties between the EU and Latin America. The second section of the paper begins with a review of EU trade policy towards developing countries, stressing the GSP. Following that, it analyzes how the Latin American countries have used the GSP, with what results and what obstacles. This general treatment is complemented by two case studies, Bolivia and Costa Rica, which illustrate the problems more specifically. The final chapter provides conclusions and policy recommendations that should be taken into consideration in the current process of reform of the GSP.

"The European Industry Committees are receiving increasing attention because
of their crucial role in the Social Dialogue within the European Union, which was
strengthened by provisions of the Single European Act. Yet much of their work
remains undocumented and inaccessible to the general public. This paper
concentrates on the policies and programmes of one of the two Industry Committees
operating in the public sector, the European Trade Union Committee for Education.
Workers in education, like those in the public sector more generally, were excluded
from many of the provisions of the Treaty of Rome because of their special status as
state functionaries; education itself, like many other public services, was considered
the proper concern of Member States and lay outside the competence of the European
Community. This has never prevented trade unions in education from acting at the
European level, however, and new provisions of the Treaty of Maastricht have
widened opportunities for their common action within Europe and a more significant
role in social dialogue." (author's abstract)

This chapter considers the legal status of labour rights as human rights within the European Union (EU) and the implications that this may have for free movement provisions under European Community (EC) law. This is not by any means a new subject for analysis and reflection, but has been of particular concern since the fifth enlargement of the EU which commenced in 2004. It is in this context that we have witnessed significant litigation before the European Court of Justice concerning the scope of the right to strike, and widespread protest concerning the adoption of a new Directive on Services in the Internal Market.

Does European Union membership influence coalition patterns in national parliaments? For governments in the Scandinavian countries – with their relatively high share of minority governments requiring external parliamentary support to form parliamentary majorities – the question of 'coalition management' is highly relevant. This article provides an empirical test of three central arguments in the Europeanisation literature on the impact of EU membership on national parliaments when political parties pass legislation in the Danish Folketing. The effect of EU content in a law on coalition patterns is compared across policy areas and four electoral periods from 1998 to 2011 encompassing 2,894 laws. The data provide support for the argument that the loss of national agenda‐setting over the legislative process has an impact on coalition patterns in the Danish parliament. It is shown that the coalition patterns on Europeanised legislation are both broader and more stable compared to national, non‐EU‐related legislation. The focus on Europeanisation of legislative coalitions goes beyond previous analysis with an institutional focus, and demonstrates an example of how the EU systematically has an effect on legislative coalition formation in a national parliamentary system.