Search results

AbstractThis chapter provides a case study in regulatory multi-level governance within the European Union, with a substantive focus on the regime in place for the authorisation of cultivation of genetically modified crops. Whilst presenting a detailed account of the supranational level regime, it seeks explicitly to write in the subnational, regional dimension to our accounts of policy evolution in this highly controversial area. The chapter considers regions' 'upstream' engagement in the policy processes at EU level, through judicial challenge to EU measures as well as attempts to influence supranational level legislative reform, which is currently ongoing. In this regard, it looks both at the role of regions within this process, and within the terms of the resultant legislation. In addition, the chapter considers regions' 'downstream' engagement, in their implementation and application of the existing rules. As a number of regions have sought to declare themselves GM-free zones, this chapter explores the legality of such local and regional GM crop cultivation bans, as a matter of EU law. In short, the chapter contributes further to our understandings of the place held by regions within the EU system of governance demonstrating how regions may themselves be both legal and political actors of significance within the EU order, whose interests are not always congruent with that of their Member State.

The United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union (EU) is an assertion of UK nation-state sovereignty. Notwithstanding this state-centrism, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have distinct interests to protect as part of the Brexit negotiations. This article explores how the interests of one regional case, Wales, were accommodated in the pre-negotiation phase, at a domestic level—through intergovernmental structures—and an EU level through paradiplomacy. We explore the structures for sub-state influence, Wales' engagement with these structures and what has informed its approach. We argue that Wales' behaviour reflects its positioning as a 'Good Unionist' and a 'Good European'. Despite the weakness of intra-UK structures, Wales has preferred to pursue policy influence at a UK (not an EU) level. In Brussels, regional interests inform the context for Brexit. Here, Wales has focused on awareness-raising, highlighting that the UK Government does not command the 'monopoly on perspectives' towards Brexit in the United Kingdom.

This contribution seeks to overcome the isolation of evaluation studies fromthe broader field of public policy analysis. Using as a case study the hybrid regulatory tool of cross compliance under the Common Agricultural Policy, the article charts the ongoing incorporation of ex ante and ex post evaluation processes over a ten year period, during which three major legislative reforms were undertaken. Anchoring its approach in the public policy work of Kingdon, the article emphasises the significance of the plurality of actors involved in the evaluation processes, the importance of timing, as well as the challenge to models of policy processes based on assumptions of rational linearity. In particular, the article demonstrates how the dis–ordering which may be observed in the stages of the policy process may equally be seen in the stages of policy appraisal. A particular focus is placed on the way in which objectives and indicators are defined and re–defined over time. The case study demonstrates that through policy appraisal, policy makers may learn what is, and what is not capable of being measured, which feeds back into the re–setting of objectives.

Cover -- Half Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Contents -- Preface and Acknowledgements -- Alphabetical List of Cases before the European Court of Justice -- Alphabetical List of Cases before the European Court of First Instance -- Cases before English Courts -- Numerical List of Cases before the European Court of Justice -- Opinions of the Court of Justice adopted on the basis of Article 300 EC -- Numerical List of Cases before the European Court of First Instance -- Part I Introduction -- 1 Law and Economic Integration in the European Union -- 1.1 Introducing this Book -- 1.2 The Approach Taken in this Book -- 1.3 Terminology, Treaty Articles and Reform Processes -- 1.4 Regional Systems of Economic Integration and Different Levels of Economic Integration -- 1.5 Key Terms in European Economic Integration -- 1.6 The Economic Benefits of Integration -- 1.7 Economic Integration and the Social Dimension -- 1.8 The Links between Socio-economic Integration and Political Integration in a Globalising Economy -- 1.9 The Objectives of the European Union and the Legal Framework for Policy-Making in the Socio-economic Domain -- 1.10 Overview of the Structure and Contents of this Book -- Summary -- Exercises -- Further Reading -- Key Websites -- 2 Law, Policy and Socio-economic Governance -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Market Economies, State Intervention and the Exercise of Governmental Power -- 2.3 The Concept of 'Governance' -- 2.4 Institutions of Socio-economic Governance -- 2.5 Instruments of Socio-economic Governance -- 2.6 Constitutional Principles underlying Economic and Social Law: Concepts of Competence -- 2.7 Principles Governing the Exercise of Powers by the EU -- 2.8 Flexibility, Enhanced Cooperation and Opt-outs -- Summary -- Exercises -- Further Reading -- Key Websites -- Part II The Internal Market.

In the June 2016 EU Referendum, Wales voted to leave the EU - in the face of strong political support to remain. Whilst Wales's vote puts it on the 'winning' Leave side, the process of leaving the EU will bring with it some tangible losses that will impact Wales differently from the rest of the UK. In the immediate aftermath of the vote, there was widespread consternation about why Wales, as a net beneficiary due to significant receipts of Structural Funds, would see a majority vote Leave. The reasons behind this, and also the potential for a new regional policy are discussed in this article. In addition, it looks at a possible 'win' for Wales with the potential expansion in regulatory competence which may come from the repatriation of competences back to the devolved administrations on Brexit, though recognising that this may not be straightforward and may carry a heavy price tag.