Suchergebnisse

"Drawing upon an incredible range of cutting-edge science, real-life examples, and personal experience, Simon Roberts explores the complexity of even the simplest of tasks that humans perform every day and explains how, with a greater awareness of the processes at work, we can tap into our full potential and excel in any area of our lives"--

Abstract
Food and agriculture accounts for around one-third of global emissions reflecting the effects of consumption in high-income countries on production and land use around the world. These effects include those transmitted through international trade such as in the constituents of animal feed for meat. African countries face a dual challenge of adapting to the growing effects of climate change in the shape of extreme weather, and increasing agriculture and food production as part of developing their economies. At the same time, there is increasing concentration in the production and trading of agriculture and food products, globally and within Africa. This article considers the interaction of concentration and responses to climate change in food markets through a focus on meat and animal feed, and the developments in maize and soybeans in East and Southern Africa. The possible role for competition policy as part of a wider reform agenda is proposed.

This article examines the United Kingdom's negotiating position on the revision of the EU Coordinating Regulations proposed by the European Commission in December 2016, in the context of Brexit and the negotiations on the Withdrawal Agreement. The Withdrawal Agreement contains provisions on the future coordination of social security for UK and EU nationals who have exercised their freedom of movement rights before the end of the transition period. The coordination envisaged by the Withdrawal Agreement has not been sealed at the point of the UK's departure but will continue to evolve and incorporate future changes in the EU Coordinating Regulations, including the reforms contained in the Commission's current legislative proposal. The UK had a seat at the negotiating table until it left the European Union on 31 January 2020, which it used to try to influence the reform of the Coordinating Regulations to reflect its future interests. The article finds that, while the UK participated in negotiating the current revision of the Coordinating Regulations and several of the revisions are in line with its aims, its influence is waning as the UK moves from being a rule maker to a rule taker in Europe.

This article examines the United Kingdom's negotiating position on the revision of the EU Coordinating Regulations proposed by the European Commission in December 2016, in the context of Brexit and the negotiations on the Withdrawal Agreement. The Withdrawal Agreement contains provisions on the future coordination of social security for UK and EU nationals who have exercised their freedom of movement rights before the end of the transition period. The coordination envisaged by the Withdrawal Agreement has not been sealed at the point of the UK's departure but will continue to evolve and incorporate future changes in the EU Coordinating Regulations, including the reforms contained in the Commission's current legislative proposal. The UK had a seat at the negotiating table until it left the European Union on 31 January 2020, which it used to try to influence the reform of the Coordinating Regulations to reflect its future interests. The article finds that, while the UK participated in negotiating the current revision of the Coordinating Regulations and several of the revisions are in line with its aims, its influence is waning as the UK moves from being a rule maker to a rule taker in Europe.

This article examines the negotiations to secure social security and healthcare rights after Brexit for people who have exercised their right to free movement or move between the EU and UK in the future. The analysis is based upon examination of drafts of the Withdrawal Agreement informed by interviews with senior policy makers involved in the Brexit negotiations. The article finds that while persons and benefits included in the Withdrawal Agreement mirror those of the current Coordinating Regulations the procedure for identifying eligibility is complicated and future arrangements might not provide comprehensive coverage and legal certainty.

The UK Coalition government introduced a raft of welfare reforms between 2010-2015. As part of its response to the financial crisis reforms were designed to cut public expenditure on social security and enhance work incentives. Policy makers are required by legislation to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity, and foster good relations between different people. This Public Sector Equality Duty is an evidence-based duty which requires public authorities to assess the likely effects of policy on vulnerable groups. This chapter explores the extent to which the Department for Work and Pensions adequately assessed the equality impacts of key welfare reforms when policy was being formulated. The chapter focuses on the assessment of the impact of reductions to welfare benefits on individuals with protected characteristics - age, disability, gender, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion and belief, and sexual orientation - including individual and cumulative impacts. It also considers mitigating actions to offset negative impacts and how the collection of evidence on equality impacts was used when formulating policy. The chapter shows that the impacts of the reforms were only systematically assessed by age and gender, and, where data were available, by disability and ethnicity with no attempt to gauge cumulative impacts. There is also evidence of Equality Impact Assessments finding a disproportionate impact on individuals with protected characteristics where no mitigating action was taken.

On 23 June 2016 the United Kingdom voted in a referendum to leave the European Union. On 17 January 2017, the UK Prime Minister, Theresa May, stated that what she is seeking is "Not partial membership of the European Union, associate membership of the European Union, or anything that leaves us half-in, half-out. We do not seek to adopt a model already enjoyed by other countries. We do not seek to hold on to bits of membership as we leave. No, the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union" (Reuters, 16 January 2017). It is by no means clear what "leaving" the EU will mean for the UK, the EU and the millions of European citizens who have exercised their right to free movement enshrined in the Treaty of Rome "with the legitimate expectation that their EU citizenship rights were irrevocable." (UK Citizens in Europe, "Towards an Alternative White Paper on the European Union (Notififi cation of Withdrawal) Bill", February, 2017). This article considers the implications of the UK's decision to leave the EU for mobile EU citizens' social security and healthcare rights in the UK and UK nationals' corresponding rights in the EU. It examines the rights at stake and possible arrangements to coordinate social security following Brexit. The article concludes that the most effective arrangement would look conspicuously similar to the current coordinating Regulations 883/04 and 987/09. However, in the event of a 'Hard' Brexit new institutional arrangements would have to be found to administer, review, revise, interpret, and provide consistency and legal certainty across at least 30 countries.

Special non-contributory benefits (SNCBs) include benefits intended solely for the specific protection of disabled people. SNCBs are not exportable under EU law. This paper asks whether SNCBs discriminate against disabled people exercising their right to free movement. The question whether the difference of treatment identified falls within the scope of EU law, including under obligations deriving from the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and whether any discrimination could be justified are considered, but left open. It is proposed that SNCBs are included in a review of the compatibility of EU legislation with the UN Convention.

Special non-contributory benefits (SNCBs) include benefits intended solely for the specific protection of disabled people. SNCBs are not exportable under EU law. This paper asks whether SNCBs discriminate against disabled people exercising their right to free movement. The question whether the difference of treatment identified falls within the scope of EU law, including under obligations deriving from the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and whether any discrimination could be justified are considered, but left open. It is proposed that SNCBs are included in a review of the compatibility of EU legislation with the UN Convention.