Suchergebnisse

This study explores the formation of the European Union's tax policy and asks why member states did not raise objections to it. The author's analysis is enriched by two further levels of inquiry. Firstly, he examines the 'Europeanization' of domestic tax policy in Italy and the UK, asking how domestic policy has changed and what is meant by 'Europeanization'. Secondly, he puts the European Union tax policy in the wider context of tax globalization. Will the liberalization of capital movement, tax havens and the flexibility of multinationals in managing their taxable incomes wreck the European

Creating the framework for cross-border infrastructure cooperation often requires the active role of a third party, an honest broker, to forge convergence of interests. It is often argued that deep European Union (EU)-style integration is a necessary, though not sufficient, condition for successful cross-border infrastructural cooperation. The EU institutions, in particular the European Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB), have performed such a facilitating and enabling role, though not without encountering challenges along the way. However, this paper argues that the EU experience underscores the vital importance of national governments and good governance in the context of cross-border multinational infrastructure. Hence, the authors argue that deep EU-style integration is an enabling but not a strictly necessary condition for successful implementation of cross-border infrastructure projects. The authors take issue with the myth that transnational cross-border infrastructure cooperation is the result of supra-national decision-making at the EU level. For a particular cross-border infrastructure project to succeed requires tri-partite and multilateral initiatives. These may take the form of coordinators (akin to the European Coordinators for TEN-T projects) or special-purpose state-owned companies alongside the Asian (and/or other) Development Banks as co-owners. The second myth which this paper seeks to address is that the management of trans- national and cross-border infrastructure is primarily supra-national. Although additional co-financing may be sought from the European Community budget and/or the European Investment Bank, these resources always complement national budgetary allocations and private funding. Contingent liabilities always remain at the national and sub-national levels and never at the supra-national EU level. The implications for management of cross-border multinational infrastructure in Asia, where the framework for regional cooperation is not yet well articulated, are to some extent positive. Within the Asian context, the need for an honest broker can be fulfilled by multi-lateral institutions such as the Asian Development Bank and the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UN ESCAP). They can appoint coordinators drawing on the growing pool of top-level decision makers in Asia. Most importantly, these initiatives can be realized within the present-day context of Asia's shallow integration.

By adopting a political economy perspective to accounting, this paper provides an overall postimplementation assessment of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption relative to the European Union's (EU's) fundamental goal of sustainable development. The paper questions the consistency of the International Accounting Standards Board's business view with the EU's and provides some critical insights into the potential long-run effects of IFRS on the European economy and society. Therefore, it raises several doubts about unquestioned accounting standardization at a global level and makes some suggestions for future policymaking and research.

This study presents the history of European unity in the contemporary period and how the European federation project was being presented for the constitution of the United States of Europe. Then the way to a European Union with one voice, in the history of European integration, in a sovereignty shared by the States, not always uniting all the members, in the same integration, posing the question of a Europe at different speeds. At European crossroads, it is not always possible to reach an understanding among all nations, on how to achieve this European Union. It is here that the question arises of a Europe at various speeds, in which some states agree to further deepen, and others, or due to the lack of possibility of convergence, for economic reasons, as in the case of the Euro, are left out of certain integration policies. However, what we want to reflect on is that the process of European construction maintains its unity around its fundamental values, although policies can adjust to concrete situations, which do not invalidate their essential nature, ends and objectives, or that is, despite these different "speeds", depending on the situation and the will of the states, the project itself always maintains the European Union as a whole.

This article examines the extent to which economic or political factors shaped government preferences in the reform of the Economic Monetary Union. A multilevel analysis of European Union member governments' preferences on 40 EMU reform issues negotiated between 2010 and 2015 suggests that countries' financial sector exposure has significant explanatory power. Seeking to minimize the risk of costly bailouts, countries with highly exposed financial sectors were more likely to support solutions involving high degrees of European integration. In contrast, political factors had no systematic impact. These findings help to enhance our understanding of preference formation in the European Union and the viability of future EMU reform.

[Abstract editor: European Union law has developed a concept of Union citizenship based on a right of exit from one's country and a consequential right of entry in another Member State of the Union. 'Empowering' European citizens and enabling them to integrate into other Member States' territories is its main purpose. If we seek to analyse further the concept of Union citizenship, it is almost inevitable that we inquire into the social background of this construction, the individual skills and resources it entails, the state structures and collective goods it affects. This is the puzzle with which the most acute commentators engage. Looked at this way, Union citizenship is about integration of Union citizens into national communities, financial solidarity with other Member States' nationals and recognition of their personal identities. Ultimately it is about transnational integration and new forms of social justice within the Member States. There is, however, another way to engage with the concept. The focus on social integration is replaced by a somewhat more ambitious project: to empower the Union citizens to connect with Europe as a whole. This approach assumes that a proper regime of Union citizenship constitutes not only a right to free movement but a right to enjoy a common way of living. It would allow Union citizens to live, at least partially, in social and moral conditions which denote a far-reaching European society. If we take this project seriously, the problem, then, is as follows: how are we going to shape this project within a conceptual framework based on transnational integration? What does it mean practically to create ties between individuals who have been allowed to disaffiliate from their country of origin? To which 'whole' shall we refer that is not a structured state and yet does not boil down to a mere sphere of individual interests and particular social interactions? The essays presented here suggest two ways to approach this problem. The first explores the concept of 'the territory of the Union' enshrined in the EU legal discourse as a possible venue for this shift in understanding the project of European citizenship. The second approach tells the story of an individual who feels strongly about being a 'European' with the right to be recognized everywhere in Europe without being part of any definite community. The first paper is an academic article which was commissioned by Dimitry Kochenov for a forthcoming edited volume on EU Citizenship and Federalism: The Role of Rights (CUP, 2015). The second is more of a narrative or a tale and is written in French. The first essay builds upon the second. The reason for bringing them together is to show that the literary form may contribute to an understanding of complex legal issues simply by showing a state of legal affairs in its most stylised form.]

This article seeks to undertake a critical assessment of the changing position of public science in the entrepreneurial ecosystem of the countries on the periphery of Euro- pean research. These countries are driven by new innovation paradigm based on entrepreneurship, which are implemented within the European Smart specialization strategy (S3). This article argues that S3 is widely implemented in the cohesion coun- tries and, while it provides substantial resources for science, technology, and innova- tion, it fails to provide sustainability in the public research sector. This has direct implications for policies concerning innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems. In order to prove the thesis, the article provides theoretical argumentation for emer- gence of a new innovation paradigm, driven by the rise of the entrepreneurial ecosys- tem, its incorporation into S3, and a consequent retreat of science policy in favor of entrepreneurial policy. The empirical analysis is focused on the funding trends seen in the business and public research sectors over the last decade (2008–2017), which have clearly shown that S3 has not contributed, despite expectations, to an increase in public expenditure for science. This signifies S3's neglect of public research within entrepreneurial ecosystems and challenges the ability of S3 to reduce wide dispar- ities in research and innovation performance across the European Union. This ulti- mately endangers the innovation potential of the entrepreneurial ecosystem itself.

Decision-making within the EU has moved to a third (regional) level of government emerging in the EU policy process alongside the first (Union) and second (member state) levels. Multi-level governance can increasingly be identified. These papers describe and analyse this third level

Executive council Thirty-Fourth Ordinary Session 07 - 08 February 2019 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia ; The Heads of State and Government in 2016 adopted African Space Policy and Strategy through Assembly/AU/Dec.589(XXVI) Decision and requested the Commission to carry out consultations with a view to evaluating the legal, structural and financial implications for the creation of a continental African Space Agency. This was followed by the adoption, in January 2018 through Assembly/AU/Dec.676(XXX), the Statute of African Space Agency.