Suchergebnisse

Este archivo incluye un template research protocol. ; Qualitative political science research can significantly increase its credibility if researchers take robust steps toward replicability and enhanced transparency. Making explicit decisions on planning and implementing research, together with commitment to comprehensive reporting, improves transparency. Three instruments serve to this objective: in the planning stage, research protocols map prospective actions in the implementation of research. In the implementing stage, research notebooks permit recording all decisions, deviations and events affecting research. Practical and ethical considerations may prevent the full disclosure of these research notebooks, and, hence, carefully drafted research implementation records provide, in the publication stage, a useful instrument to convey this information. Increased transparency (as created by the use of these three instruments) will lead to better options for replicability, and this, in turn, will increase the validity of qualitative research and dispel some of the concerns about its methodological soundness. ; Peer reviewed

Peer Reviewed ; [EN] Commission's expectations on eventual compliance explain its different behaviour when dealing with Rule of Law (RoL) crises in Hungary and Poland. Whilst the Commission activated the first stage of the procedure of article 7 against Poland in December 2017, it resisted to launch the same procedure against the Hungarian government despite mounting criticism and demands from both academics and EU institutions. The Commission considers that compliance depends, on last instance, on the cooperation of domestic authorities. Accordingly, it prefers to engage with them in dialogue and persuasion rather than activating enforcement mechanisms. If engagement strategies fail to obtain compliance, the Commission anticipates the consequence of activating article 7 enforcement: whether it can rely or not on Council support and the effects of not having it and it also anticipates negative consequences such as the future attitude of the affected member state vis-á-vis the EU. This paper is part of the project Institutional design in comparative regional integration (InDeCRI) (CSO2016-76130-P) https://www.researchgate.net/project/Institutional-Design-in-Comparative-Regional-Integration-InDeCRI which is supported by a grant from the Spanish Research Agency. I presented a former version of this paper with the title The Commission and article 7. Explaining inaction … praising action? at EUSA, Miami 4-6 May 2017 and the ECPR General Conference, Oslo 6-9 September 2017. I thank Tanja Börzel, Johannes Pollack and the participants in both panels for their insightful comments; to Elin Helquist for her insights into sanctions literature to her and Daniela Vintila for their kind comments on an earlier draft. Two JEPP anonymous referees have also provided excellent feedback on the article.

Arguments in favour of a more explicit and clearer EU stance on secession from a member state – two different cases for secession and their implications – the inadmissibility of unilateral secession within the EU – consensual secession does not create a legal entitlement for automatic membership – the need to follow the route of Article 49 TEU – no need for a specific secession provision in EU treaties ; Peer reviewed

Memory has become an object of dispute in the EU. Different groups and states do not have a full convergence of views and this raises the question as to whether the EU should or should not be involved. A pluralist conception of justice would argue that the recognition of memory is not excluded as a form of justice. Adopting this view, this paper argues that the recognition of memory can be addressed at the EU level if the different components of justice are allocated to the proper spheres (recognition, retribution and recognition) and levels (national and European). ; This paper was written thanks to a grant from the Spanish Ministry of Education (Grant PR2010-0077) under the Programm for stances of senior professors and researchers in foreign research institutions. ; Peer reviewed

During the last years, several subjects have advanced claims for developing within the EU specific elements of what is often referred to as policies of memory. Whilst this trend could be perceived as one more instance of transference of domestic issues to the EU level, the distinctive trait of these claims is that claims on memory are associated both to justice and identity and, hence, they appeal to an underlying structure of normative justification. This paper examines these claims and discusses the normative argument supporting them. The argument revises, firstly, what are the policies of memory and, secondly, it discusses the relation between policies and politics towards the past in order to unveil the subjective component associated to recognition. The subjective dimension of recognition paves the way for asserting the location of victims as the most legitimate bearer of claims for recognition. The third section describes the very limited policies and politics of memory in the EU in order to enter, fourthly, into a deeper analysis of the new claims emerging in the post 2004 scenery. The argument elaborates then a theoretical frame which draws on the notion of "recognition order" of Honneth in order to establish the normative foundation for EU policies of memory. Being the EU a recognition order, claims referring memory cannot be legitimately excluded from the EU agenda. Nevertheless, legitimacy of claims for recognition does not mean that policies and proposals linked to these claims have automatic validity. Rather, policies must derive from EU wide deliberation on the claims and the proper policies to pursue having in mind a number of requirements. The conclusion sums up the argument. ; Peer reviewed

retrospectively, 2007 could be remembered positively in the future as the year in which the process of European integration was given a significant new impetus. This would be confirmed by the facts as follows: first, European leaders signed the Berlin Declaration in March, marking the 50th anniversary of one of the most important events in Europe's history: the signing of the Treaties of Rome. But above all, 2007 was the year in which the Member States managed to lift the European Union (EU) out of the impasse in which it was following the failure to ratify the European Constitution, through the negotiation and conclusion of a new agreement: the Treaty of Lisbon. ; Peer reviewed ; retrospectively, 2007 could be remembered positively in the future as the year in which the process of European integration was given a significant new impetus. This would be confirmed by the facts as follows: first, European leaders signed the Berlin Declaration in March, marking the 50th anniversary of one of the most important events in Europe's history: the signing of the Treaties of Rome. But above all, 2007 was the year in which the Member States managed to lift the European Union (EU) out of the impasse in which it was following the failure to ratify the European Constitution, through the negotiation and conclusion of a new agreement: the Treaty of Lisbon. ; De forma retrospectiva, el 2007 podría ser recordado en el futuro de forma positiva como el año en que el proceso de integración europea sufrió un nuevo y significativo impulso. Los hechos acaecidos así lo confirmarían: en primer lugar, los líderes europeos firmaron en marzo la Declaración de Berlín, que servía para conmemorar el 50 aniversario de uno de los acontecimientos más importantes de la historia de Europa: la firma de los Tratados de Roma. Pero sobre todo, el 2007 fue el año en que los Estados miembros lograron sacar a la Unión Europea (UE) del impasse en el que se encontraba a raíz del fracaso en la ratificación de la Constitución Europea, a través de la ...

Spain has traditionally been one of the EU Member States most identified with the EU's orthodoxy. From 1992 onwards, however, the Spanish attitude seems to be a defence of narrowly defined national interests. Has Spain's policy towards the EU changed substantially? Of course, there are signs of certain changes in traditional behaviours, such as progressively more sceptical and even critical public opinion with the EU and the integration process, or the dissolution of consensus between political parties on European politics. However, the fundamental reason for this change must be sought in redefining the priorities of the EU itself, which are increasingly diverging from Spanish interests. In this new context, the defence of national interests must now be based on traditional negotiating instruments. ; Peer reviewed ; Spain has traditionally been one of the EU Member States most identified with the EU's orthodoxy. From 1992 onwards, however, the Spanish attitude seems to be a defence of narrowly defined national interests. Has Spain's policy towards the EU changed substantially? Of course, there are signs of certain changes in traditional behaviours, such as progressively more sceptical and even critical public opinion with the EU and the integration process, or the dissolution of consensus between political parties on European politics. However, the fundamental reason for this change must be sought in redefining the priorities of the EU itself, which are increasingly diverging from Spanish interests. In this new context, the defence of national interests must now be based on traditional negotiating instruments. ; España ha sido tradicionalmente uno de los estados miembros de la UE más identificado con la ortodoxia comunitaria. A partir de 1992, sin embargo, la actitud española parece ser de una defensa a ultranza de intereses nacionales estrechamente definidos. ¿Ha cambiado sustancialmente la política española ante la UE? Evidentemente, existen señales de ciertos cambios en comportamientos tradicionales, tales ...

The accessibility & transparency of the Convention & its 'listening' to civil society stimulated the mobilization of intellectuals in Spain, but failed to reach out to society & the general public. The Convention also failed to mobilize new categories of intellectuals. Interaction took place mainly between academic & political elites, & the former contributed to shape the perceptions of politicians engaged in the Convention -- although not to a major extent. Spanish intellectuals contributed by framing debates within concepts & arguments broadly discussed throughout the European Union. 20 References. Adapted from the source document.