Search results

European integration is process that has rules which must be followed from all aspirant countries, as well as with a great dedication to the process. Kosovo and its integration into the European Union, has in front very difficult road to be passed. Main objectives of Kosovo is being member of European Union. To achieve that, threshold mentioned in articles 49 and 6 of European Union Treaty should be passed. Being part of European Union, Kosovo must respect all principles mentioned in article 6. Function of rule of law system is very important for economic development of Kosovo and its integration in European Union. Even there exists commitment from Governmental institutions of Kosovo for empowering rule of law, problems and challenges that Kosovo faces in this field are complex and much more in number, and much more must be invested in all types of resources in order to achieve requested corrections. Legal system of Kosovo still can be described as one of the most complex systems and that represents obstructions for security and legal clearance. As multidimensional process, complex and dynamic, integration process is based in the fact that even European Union together with its institutional structures are in ongoing reforms. Reforms process is requested for the reason of continuously integrations processes of new countries in European Union structures. European Union today faces big challenges, in one side there is challenge of democratic, politic and economic control of candidate countries and in other side internal reforms for its own structures. Today, very important issue of Kosovo is European Integration process. Based in main objectives and achievements that Kosovo has made in this direction, large institutional commitment exists for this process. Especially there are many economic challenges for Kosovo including implementation of CEFTA Agreement, as pre-entrance instrument in European Union.

The European Union has a unique institutional framework aimed at promoting its values, pursuing its objectives and supporting its interests, its citizens and Member States, as well as ensuring the coherence, effectiveness and continuity of its policies and actions. The first Community institutions were created by the Treaty establishing the Coal and Steel Economic Community (from 1952, which established the coal and steel market), respectively the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (from 1958, which established a generalized European common market) to the entire economy and to the field of atomic energy). Each treaty subsequent to the institutional treaties of the European Communities has contributed to the development of community institutions and the elimination of trade barriers between Member States with the aim of increasing economic prosperity and contributing to a "deeper union between the nations of Europe".

Having established itself as a robust level of governance, the European Union now potentially affects its member states in more ways than ever before. Road haulage policy is an area in which a strong impact of European Union policy-making can be expected. Liberalisation at the European level contradicts widespread interventionist transport policy traditions of the member states. In this article we ask how France, Germany, and Italy, three countries with an interventionist transport policy tradition, are affected by European liberalisation. We find that all of the three countries have abandoned their policy traditions. However, domestic factors were more important than European factors in bringing about this change. European influence did not severely curtail national policy-making autonomy. In transport policy, Europeanisation is elusive because national institutional intermediation largely muffled the impact of European policy-making.

In May 2011, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) passed Resolution 65/276 that enhances the European Union (EU) institutional mode of representation in the UNGA and other multilateral fora operating under its auspices. This followed an earlier, failed attempt that caused much embarrassment and political turmoil in the EU. The article examines the politics of this resolution, tracing its background logic, its origins and the political interactions in the UN that eventually led to its almost consensual embracement. It accounts for the failure in the first stage of the negotiations and how the EU responded to it, adjusting its bargaining strategy accordingly. This case study contributes to the better understanding of the links between intra-EU coherence and EU effectiveness as an international actor. We posit that there is one additional dimension of EU coherence not fully captured in the relevant literature. We distinguish between genuine coherence and generated coherence. The former entails homogeneity, or at least a significant degree of a priori convergence among EU member-states. The latter refers to EU positions that have emerged after hard and protracted intra-EU negotiations. The two types differ in the degree of flexibility bestowed on the EU in international negotiations.

ABSTRACT: Political economy concerns historical, legal and heterodox economics analysis of complex systems. This article attempts to analyze the current state of the European Union from historical, legal and interdisciplinary economics perspectives. Historically, the ancient Athenian democracy, the Holy Roman Empire and the early formation of the United States serve as examples of early innovative legal constructs of their times that were sui generis and share key features with the current European Union. Regarding legal developments, this paper discusses the bicameral parliamentary structure, electoral processes and populist pressures. The future of the European Union economy is likely to see an AI (r)evolution shaping markets and rising big data revenues. This develop necessitates the creation of a fifth fundamental freedom of data transfer within the European Union, as well as taxation of growth generated by big data. Heterodox economic growth theories will increasingly have to account for this growth. KEYWORDS: Ancient Athenian democracy, Artificial Intelligence (AI), Bicameral parliament, Big data, Electoral system, European Union, Holy Roman empire, market disruption, political economy, Populist pressures, Taxation, United States

Strong rhetorical differences between the European Union and the United States on climate matters have been evident for almost two decades. Since the mid-2000s, such differences are becoming visible in their respective climate policies as well. We propose three explanations for differences in climate policy outcomes in the EU and the US. First, the agenda-setting privileges of their policy-makers are significantly different, influencing how agenda setters shape policies and link issues, such as energy and climate policy. Second, while issue linkage has helped overcome distributional obstacles in the EU, it has led to more complexity and greater policy obstacles in the US. Finally, legislative rules, procedures, and norms have constrained the coalition-building efforts of lawmakers in the two systems in different ways, affecting negotiation processes and outcomes. Such differences in agenda-setting privileges, potential for issue linkages, and legislative procedures in the EU and the US have left them wide apart in international climate negotiations.

Cover title. ; "October 1994"--P. [i]. ; Includes bibliographical references (p. 14). ; Mode of access: Internet.