Suchergebnisse

Cover; Resolving Controversy in the European Union; Title; Copyright; Contents; Figures; Tables; Acknowledgements; 1: Introducing the political system of the European Union; 1.1 Diversity and controversy in the European Union; 1.2 Analysing contemporary EU decision-making as a political system; 1.3 Legislative decision-making in the EU: actors and decision-making procedures; 1.4 An institutional approach to analysing decision-making; 1.5 Outline of the book; 2: Research design: measuring controversy spatially.

European legislation affects countless aspects of daily life in modern Europe but just how does the European Union make such significant legislative decisions? How important are the formal decision-making procedures in defining decision outcomes and how important is the bargaining that takes place among the actors involved? Using a combination of detailed evidence and theoretical rigour, this volume addresses these questions and others that are central to understanding how the EU works in practice. It focuses on the practice of day-to-day decision-making in Brussels and the interactions that take place among the Member States in the Council and among the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament. A unique data set of actual Commission proposals are examined against which the authors develop, apply and test a range of explanatory models of decision-making, exemplifying how to study decision-making in other political systems using advanced theoretical tools and appropriate research design

This report analyses labour and environmental regulation in Australia and Argentina. The two countries are economically more similar than one would initially expect. Argentina and Australia are both important agricultural and mineral exporters, stemming from their mineral wealth and extensive arable land. These products are now in demand by the emerging markets of Asia, particularly China. The report focuses on Australia and Argentina's shared export products: wheat, beef and gold. The report analyses labour and environmental regulation of these industries because This report analyses labour and environmental regulation in Australia and Argentina. The two countries are economically more similar than one would initially expect. Argentina and Australia are both important agricultural and mineral exporters, stemming from their mineral wealth and extensive arable land. These products are now in demand by the emerging markets of Asia, particularly China. The report focuses on Australia and Argentina's shared export products: wheat, beef and gold. The report analyses labour and environmental regulation of these industries because these areas differ most between the two countries. The scope of the report does not allow it to undertake a global analysis of the regulation, so it focuses on provinces and states in which the most production of these products takes place: Queensland in Australia, and Buenos Aires and San Juan in Argentina. In the area of labour regulation, the report focuses on conditions, salaries and employer contributions. In both Australia and Argentina, this is regulated at the national level. Australia regulation provides more flexible arrangements for employers and promotes capacity improvement by tying salaries to workers' improvement. Argentine regulation promotes a more traditional work model by limiting weekend work and overtime, as well as requiring more employer contributions. In Australia, workers are subject to different regulation according to the sector in which they work. Mining-sector workers receive similar treatment to their agricultural counterparts, yet they have different arrangements these areas differ most between the two countries. The scope of the report does not allow it to undertake a global analysis of the regulation, so it focuses on provinces and states in which the most production of these products takes place: Queensland in Australia, and Buenos Aires and San Juan in Argentina. In the area of labour regulation, the report focuses on conditions, salaries and employer contributions. In both Australia and Argentina, this is regulated at the national level. Australia regulation provides more flexible arrangements for employers and promotes capacity improvement by tying salaries to workers' improvement. Argentine regulation promotes a more traditional work model by limiting weekend work and overtime, as well as requiring more employer contributions. In Australia, workers are subject to different regulation according to the sector in which they work. Mining-sector workers receive similar treatment to their agricultural counterparts, yet they have different arrangements depending on whether they are a shift-worker or not, and have access to a large number of allowances. In the area of environmental regulation, the report focuses on the use of water, as well as farm chemicals and environmental approval for mining. In both Argentina and Australia, water is regulated at the regional level. In Queensland, a market-based system is used to determine water access, whereas in Buenos Aires, water access is regulated centrally by the government. The release of waste to water is treated more similarly in the two countries. Waste releases are approved on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the type of waste, its concentration, and the receiving water course. In Argentina and Australia, farm chemicals are regulated at both the national and regional level. The national government is responsible for registration of the chemical, and the regions are responsible for how it is applied. Mining is subject to general areas of regulation, such as water use, once it is operational, yet the environmental approval process is quite different in Australia and Argentina. In Queensland, there are specific guidelines to be taken into account before seeking the government's approval. In San Juan, rather, there are no guidelines and more consultation takes place for each individual project.

The main objective of EVERSAFE is to facilitate integration of electrical vehicles (EVs) into European vehicle traffic. Customer acceptance increases when EV safety is guaranteed for normal operation or an accident. The EVERSAFE project had three main areas of research to ensure a robust market for EVs: The perceptions of electric vehicles from a user point of view Investigations of vehicle safety encompassing both active and passive vehicle safety implications that are part of the vehicle's design Developing guidelines and recommendations for post-crash handling of electric vehicles that are not addressed in the practice for conventional (internal combustion) drivelines The research plan was developed to identify the most high risk scenarios, investigate their potential consequences, and identify any corrective actions in terms of further research, industry standards, or government regulations. The project used focus groups of consumers to identify perceived issues as well as expert judgement to identify specific research cases. The main findings of the active safety investigations suggested that the potential failures for regenerative braking and wheel hub motors could be compensated by the drivers. Passive safety investigations used component tests of battery cells, full scale crash tests, and numerical simulations to study the risks during a crash. The safe handling of electric vehicles after a crash requires updates to the conventional rescue operations. The results of the EVERSAFE project indicate that the general level of EV safety is quite high and that no critical safety issues have been identified. ; EverSafe

Are member states less likely to transpose a European Union directive correctly if they disagreed with the directive at the decision-making stage? Existing research provides mixed answers to this question. Most of this research does not consider the role of the enforcement agent, the European Commission, and uses aggregate measures. By contrast, this study considers the impact of the Commission, and focuses on specific provisions in directives. It combines detailed information on states' disagreement with each provision at the decision-making stage and the quality of national transposition of each provision. The descriptive analysis shows that protracted non-compliance in national transposition is a rare event. The explanatory analysis indicates that states' policy preferences significantly affect the likelihood of transposition problems, and that this is conditioned by the behaviour of the Commission.