Suchergebnisse

This study is set out to identify feasible ways for immigrants&rsquo ; integration into the major ten host countries within the European Union (EU-10) and increased labor market performance. Eurostat, OECD, and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) official data was mainly used to capture essential international migration indicators (for both dimensions&mdash ; economic and humanitarian), along with education, socio-economic development and labor market credentials, as key variables for immigrants&rsquo ; integration into EU-10, compiled for 2000&ndash ; 2017. In this respect, spatial analyses, bootstrap estimations, structural equations (SEM), and Gaussian graphical models (GGM) are applied, to better grasp migrants&rsquo ; labor market outcomes. Significant positive consequences reflected through a reduction in the unemployment rate of the foreign population are generated by active labor market policies, jointly with an enhancement in the attainment for secondary education, and welfare advances. The opposite, a rise in income inequalities has negative effects, while additional support for R& ; D activities deployed within the business sector is required to entail migrants&rsquo ; labor market performance. The passive policies need to be redesigned and tailored to significantly downsize the foreign unemployment, since these are currently acting like a disincentive for an active participation of migrants on the European labor market, thus confining their integration.

The European Semester (Semester) was implemented a decade ago. Ample research has addressed the Semester's development, including some major changes in processes and content (Verdun & Zeitlin, 2018). The Covid-19 crisis seems to mark the next stage in the evolution of the Semester. It connects the Semester with the wider Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and links its country-specific recommendations to conditional financial support. Thus, the next stage of the Semester suggests a stronger and more deliberate interlinkage of different EU tools that jointly guide national socioeconomic policies. It should support both national public investment and reforms while focusing on meeting the EU priority of moving towards a climate-neutral, digitalized, and resilient Europe (De la Porte & Dagnis Jensen, 2021). This article addresses the question of what room the new-style Semester gives to the involvement of national-level actors, such as national parliaments. Therefore, it expands existing analytical frameworks in order to assess the RRF in connection to the Semester, focusing on the degree of obligation, enforcement, and centralisation. Jointly, this outlines the room the RRF gives to the participation of national actors in the Semester. The article concludes that although the national parliaments are not mentioned in the Regulation establishing the RRF, they could claim a role both in developing national plans for accessing financial support as well as in amending and approving reforms.

This paper examines the democratic legitimacy of Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) since the international financial crisis hit the euro area. From its inception, EMU has been marked by an asymmetry as its monetary pillar relied on output legitimacy while its economic pillar relied essentially on input legitimacy at the national level. The crisis severely challenged EMU's output legitimacy, which led to the establishment of new European-level institutions. We analyse the European Stability Mechanism, the European Semester, and Banking Union to take stock of their powers and the ways that these are balanced by mechanisms of legitimacy. Our main finding is that the intergovernmental and output-oriented approach that originally informed the legitimacy of EMU has remained prevalent after the crisis. However, as the three domains–in varying degrees–address questions that are essentially political, we argue that the channels for input legitimacy at the European level remain deficient.

Die vorliegende Arbeit beschäftigt sich mit der Überprüfung der Wirtschafts-, Haushalts- und Steuerpolitik im Rahmen des Europäischen Semesters. Ihr Ziel ist es, die wesentlichen Bereiche aufzuzeigen, in welchen es nötig wurde, Erneuerungen vorzunehmen, um die Zielrichtungen und Prioritäten einzuhalten, die während desselben vereinbart wurden. ; The current paper examines the supervision of economic, budgetary and fiscal policies of the Spanish State carried out within the framework of the European Semester, with the aim to identify the main areas were essential amendements have been introduced in order to comply with the guidelines and priorities issued from the EU level. ; El presente trabajo analiza la supervisióN de las políticas económicas, fiscales y presupuestarias del Estado español llevada a cabo en el marco del Semestre Europeo, con el objeto de identificar los principales ámbitos en los que ha sido necesario realizar reformas para cumplir con las orientaciones y prioridades acordadas en el mismo.

The notion of ownership is well known in relation to global governance.In the realm of EU macro-economic coordination, it hasbecome a buzzword since the revamping process of the EuropeanSemester in 2015. This article investigates how ownership by fourtypes of domestic actors (governments, administrations, parliamentsand social partners) manifests itself in the EuropeanSemester. We conceptualize three types of ownership, namelyinstitutional, political, and cognitive. Using network analysis, semistructuredinterviews, and a small-scale survey, we find that ownershipis strongest among governments and administrations whichare able to shape the outputs of the European Semester (institutionalownership) with little political disagreement (political ownership).While national parliaments display low levels of all types ofownership, employers and unions exhibit relatively strong cognitiveownership. We conclude that the European Semester remains abureaucratic process contributing to building a multi-level administrativespace rather than an arena for political debates. ; SCOPUS: ar.j ; info:eu-repo/semantics/published

In recent years, decision-making on economic performance policies – macroeconomic stability and structural reforms – has evolved from a system based on Broad Economic Policy Guidelines into a full-fledged part of the European Semester, including the possibility to sanction Member States. This suggests an increased role for national parliaments to ensure the democratic legitimacy of EU decision-making. But this need for democratic legitimacy is qualified by the impacts of economic performance policies in and on the Member States. This contribution assesses these impacts by reviewing arguments derived from (a) the applicable legal framework and prior research that has been carried out and (b) by conducting a comparative analysis of the policy dialogues with Germany, France, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands in 2014 (based primarily on National Reform Programmes and Country Specific Recommendations). Next, an assessment is made of how parliaments in these countries have been involved concretely in economic performance policies.

Before the crisis, flexicurity was a leading European Union (EU) policy concept, which aimed to balance labor-market flexibility and security. The recent focus on austerity measures to reduce public deficits might be thought to have reduced attention to the 'security' component of flexicurity. Accordingly, a 'farewell to flexicurity' has been claimed to have occurred. This paper challenges that claim and explores the role of flexicurity within the European Semester. It analyses the European Semester's policy goals between 2007 and 2016, as well as the country-specific recommendations (CSRs) to member states between 2009 and 2015. The analysis shows that the EU flexicurity concept has been revitalized, while its definition changed to encompass more social concerns. Even at the peak of the crisis, CSRs continued to devote attention to elements of both flexibility and security, although the precise details differed across countries and have changed over time.

Data from member states' Stability and Convergence Programmes from 2011 to 2018 are used to assess the cyclicality of government consumption in the EU after the European Semester took effect. Econometric estimations, which address endogeneity issues, find the intended (ex-ante) fiscal policy to be pro-cyclical in nature. Government consumption is also found to be pro-cyclical ex-post but to a much lesser extent than ex-ante. This appears to be largely owing to a forecasting bias on the part of official forecasters occurring, despite the purported improvements to EU member states' surveillance and forecasting mechanisms that have been put in place in recent years to address such bias.

Published online: 29 August 2017 ; The paper analyses Latvian economic policy during the period 2008-2014 when the country was simultaneously subject to three European Union (EU) economic governance frameworks - the European Semester, the Balance-of-Payments programme and the Maastricht convergence criteria (for euro adoption). Through in-depth process tracing based on public policy documents, interviews with senior officials in Riga and Brussels and the press, the paper finds that the Latvian government cherry-picked and instrumentalized EU economic policy targets and overachieved in them. In contrast to the literature depicting the European Commission as a neoliberal actor which systematically undermines social protection, the paper shows that against the backdrop of fiscally austere national authorities, the Commission instead played the role of social policy advocate, repeatedly calling for stronger measures to help the poor. Shedding light on the limits of one-size-fits-all governance, the findings of the Latvian case have significant implications for EU economic governance more generally.

Chapter on the European Semester in the a book "The Uses of Social Investment", which provides the first study of the welfare state, under the new post-crisis austerity context and associated crisis management politics, to take stock of the limits and potential of social investment. It surveys the emergence, diffusion, limits, merits, and politics of social investment as the welfare policy paradigm for the 21st century, seen through the lens of the life-course contingencies of the competitive knowledge economy and modern family-hood.

The European Semester (Semester) was implemented a decade ago. Ample research has addressed the Semester's development, including some major changes in processes and content (Verdun & Zeitlin, 2018). The Covid-19 crisis seems to mark the next stage in the evolution of the Semester. It connects the Semester with the wider Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and links its country-specific recommendations to conditional financial support. Thus, the next stage of the Semester suggests a stronger and more deliberate interlinkage of different EU tools that jointly guide national socioeconomic policies. It should support both national public investment and reforms while focusing on meeting the EU priority of moving towards a climate-neutral, digitalized, and resilient Europe (De la Porte & Dagnis Jensen, 2021). This article addresses the question of what room the new-style Semester gives to the involvement of national-level actors, such as national parliaments. Therefore, it expands existing analytical frameworks in order to assess the RRF in connection to the Semester, focusing on the degree of obligation, enforcement, and centralisation. Jointly, this outlines the room the RRF gives to the participation of national actors in the Semester. The article concludes that although the national parliaments are not mentioned in the Regulation establishing the RRF, they could claim a role both in developing national plans for accessing financial support as well as in amending and approving reforms.

Tax compliance is an important indicator for the proper functioning of the tax authority, influencing the budget revenue level. In this study, a Vector Error Correction Model (VECM) analysis was developed to identify the long-term relationships between the compliance in individual income taxation (taxpayer's behavior), public trust in politicians (trust in authorities), and rule of law (power of the authorities), using unbalanced panel data for the European Union (EU28) during the 2007–2017 period. The results underline the causality of the long-run relationships between the variables. The results of the VECM analysis underline the need for various support measures for voluntary tax compliance, with the trust variable having an important impact on tax compliance. In addition, a Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis was employed using an improved data set with variables such as the compliance in corporation taxation (taxpayer's behavior), wastefulness of government spending, and quality of the education system. The results of the SEM analysis underline the positive and significant influences of the variables on tax compliance.

The 16th IAEE European Conference, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 25-28 August 2019 ; Electricity market design is evolving with the increase in electricity generated from renewable sources. The market system was originally designed for dispatchable fossil fuel electricity generation with high marginal costs rather than renewable electricity generation with nearly zero marginal costs and high upfront capital costs. When short term prices no longer cover long term investment costs, new market design is needed. An alternative is to increase interconnection to facilitate increased trade between markets (Pollitt and Chyong, 2018). Economic theory would suggest that eliminating barriers to trade across a regional market will decrease consumer costs and producer profits in areas that increase imports, while increasing producer profits and consumer costs in areas that increase exports (Dahlke, 2018). Trade through interconnectors can exploit differences in wind and sun conditions across regions and so reduce supply variability; higher shares of renewable electricity raises the value of market integration even further (Newbery et al., 2018). In this context, the EU has been progressively harmonizing national and regional electricity markets, to form a single market that includes more than 500 million people. The Multi-Regional Coupling organized through European power exchanges coordinates the clearing of day-ahead markets and determines day-ahead prices across the countries involved (Politico, 2018). In the 1996, 2003 and 2009 EU electricity directives, the development of integrated wholesale power markets across the continent was encouraged in order to incentivise market-driven investment in generation across Europe. The Internal Energy Market (IEM) in Europe provides for free trade across border and non-discrimination between internal and cross-border transactions. On October 1st 2018, Ireland was one of the final countries to integrate with this market due to the small isolated nature of this synchronous system which required additional precautions to put in place new market arrangements. The Irish electricity market has been a wholesale all-island market (including Northern Ireland, called the SEM) since 2007. The integration of the all-island electricity market with European electricity markets was expected to increase the use of the interconnector with Great Britain which should "deliver increased levels of competition which should help put a downward pressure on prices as well as encouraging greater levels of security of supply and transparency" (EirGrid, 2016). In addition to integration with Europe, other features were included in the new I-SEM market, such as changes to how energy is bought and sold; how generators are remunerated for availability; forward trading arrangements and market liquidity; market power controls; and the systems, policies and procedures that are required to operate the market (EirGrid, 2016). This has led to new balancing, capacity, and intraday markets that did not previously exist in the Irish market. With the integration of the Irish market, the IEM now comprises 20 countries, with 38 interconnectors and a total generating capacity of over 3,000 TW (EirGrid, 2016). The European Target model sets out the common rules and arrangements for market coupling in Europe. It includes a common price coupling algorithm for scheduling day-ahead markets and determining flows between geographic regions. The energy transactions involving sellers and buyers from different bidding zones are centrally collected to maximise the most efficient and effective trades. In theory, unless the network is congested, markets should converge to a single price. When the network is congested, prices diverge. The integration of the Irish electricity market with the IEM provides a natural experiment with which to test economic theory relating to the benefits of interconnection, regional electricity trade, and market rule changes for consumers,producers and markets. While there is an extensive literature on electricity market design and theory, it is rare to find empirical data such as this with which to test the theory. This integration is relatively recent, yet it provides an ideal opportunity to examine in detail several features over the period directly before and after the change. Ireland, as an isolated market. Ireland has been identified as a country at the forefront of market change due to the high share of renewable electricity and its isolated market (Polllitt and Chyong, 2018). It also serves as a good case study, as there are less confounding factors in an analysis of market design, compared with more geographically integrated countries. ; Science Foundation Ireland ; Department of Communications, Climate Action & Environment

The Semester of Code initiative organised virtual placements for university students around Europe, working on authentic business problems using open source software. The project was welcomed by stakeholders, and many companies and open source foundations became involved. However, the response from students was disappointing. In this paper we examine the reasons for this, discussing the results of the evaluation work carried out. Finally, we consider the implications of our work for student placements and the Knowledge Alliance European Union programme.

How has the new structure of European Union (EU) economic governance affected the ability of parliaments (national and European) to scrutinize and control economic policy? Departing from the premise that executive power needs to be matched by appropriate parliamentary control, this contribution argues that parliamentary powers have been compromised in EU economic governance. Although budgetary powers remain formally at the national level, governments' decisions have become constrained and national parliaments find themselves on the losing side of a reinforced two-level game. This loss in parliamentary powers is not compensated at the European level, as at that level political authority is effectively left suspended between the national governments, who are unaccountable as a collective, and the European Commission, which lacks a political mandate of its own. Against this background, a final section identifies guidelines for organizing parliamentary accountability in settings, like EU economic governance, in which executive power has come to be shared across levels.