2024-03-28T11:15:35Zhttp://aei.pitt.edu/cgi/oai2
oai:aei.pitt.edu:675
2011-02-15T23:44:02Z
oai:aei.pitt.edu:799
2011-02-15T22:16:19Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D67656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303031
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D61727469636C65
Step by Step Progress: An Update on the Free Movement of Persons and Internal Security
den Boer, Monica
free movement/border control
general
Amsterdam Treaty
[From the Introduction]. A New Title ‘Visas, asylum, immigration and other policies related to the free movement of persons’ (IIIa). In the ‘old’ Third Pillar construction, there are nine matters of common interest. Some of these matters have been found eligible for transfer to Community law, namely immigration, asylum, external borders (Visa Policy) and judicial cooperation in civil matters. This Title – in which communautarian instruments, methods of decision-making and legislation will apply. The new Treaty of Amsterdam has been characterized as extraordinarily difficult by dignitaries, journalists and academics alike. The tremendous complexity of the Amsterdam Treaty is largely due to the many changes that were made in the area of Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Cooperation. Before Amsterdam, cooperation in this field was already split between communautarian and intergovernmental action. In particular visa policy, fraud, money laundering, customs cooperation and drugs were topics that were scattered around in the Treaty. The fragmentation of some justice and home affairs issues will continue after Amsterdam. The three main ‘zones’ of cooperation will be: 1) A New Title ‘Free Movement of Persons, Asylum and Immigration’, which will eventually be subject to full Community competence; 2) The incorporation of the Schengen Acquis into the new Treaty; and 3) A revamped Third Pillar with provisions on Police and Judicial Cooperation.
1997
Article
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/799/1/Scop97_2_3.pdf
den Boer, Monica (1997) Step by Step Progress: An Update on the Free Movement of Persons and Internal Security. EIPASCOPE, 1997 (2). pp. 1-4.
http://aei.pitt.edu/799/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:810
2011-02-15T22:16:22Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666676F7665726E616E6365
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D61727469636C65
Who’s a National and Who’s a European? Exercising Public Power and the Legitimacy of Art. 39 4 EC in the 21st Century
Demmke, Christoph
Linke, Uta
governance: EU & national level
free movement/border control
[Summary]. The European Union has experienced dramatic internal and external changes within the last few decades. These changes have deeply affected and changed the traditional concepts, meaning and importance of the principles of sovereignty and nationality. The discussion about the pros and cons of the exception clause to the free movement of workers principle (Art. 39.4 EC) has to been seen from a national and European point of view. Although we agree that there is no reason to transfer to the EU tasks and functions which could be better dealt with on a national basis (e.g. competence to regulate national civil services), this does not apply to the provisions of Art. 39 EC. Today, the number of civil servants moving throughout the Union is very low – a situation which is unlikely to change in the future. This implies that even if Art. 39.4 were deleted there would be no massive increase in mobility in Europe. In addition, a number of developments have taken place in the past few decades which have rendered Art. 39.4 EC old fashioned. Today it poses artificial obstacles to the free movement principle and is more and more difficult to justify. We therefore propose that Member States should restrict its provisions to specific areas of the public sector.
2003
Article
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/810/1/scop2003_2_1.pdf
Demmke, Christoph and Linke, Uta (2003) Who’s a National and Who’s a European? Exercising Public Power and the Legitimacy of Art. 39 4 EC in the 21st Century. EIPSACOPE, 2003 (2). pp. 1-9.
http://aei.pitt.edu/810/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:1947
2011-02-15T22:20:40Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Maintaining Security within Borders: Towards a Permanent State of Emergency in the EU? CEPS Policy Briefs No. 41, October 2003
Apap, Joanna
Carrera, Sergio.
free movement/border control
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
This report carries out an assessment of the European measures and practices implemented within the scope of the Schengen borders regime after the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 in the United States. In particular we look at: the re-introduction of border checks on the basis of Art. 2.2 of the Schengen Convention, along with the plan to put protestors under surveillance and deny entry to suspected troublemakers; the policies on intrusive surveillance through the use of biometric technologies and databases, as well as the controversial EU/US bilateral relations on the transfer of Passenger Name Record information (PNR). We also evaluate to what extent security has taken precedence in the European agenda and how it undermines, among others, the fundamental right of free movement of persons within the EU (which is enshrined in the EC Treaty), and leads to a quasi-permanent ‘state of exception’ or ‘emergency’ within the European borders. The human rights considerations as well as the main human targets of these security policies also need special scrutiny.
2003-10
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/1947/1/PB41.pdf
Apap, Joanna and Carrera, Sergio. (2003) Maintaining Security within Borders: Towards a Permanent State of Emergency in the EU? CEPS Policy Briefs No. 41, October 2003. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/1947/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2061
2011-02-15T22:21:02Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"The Patten Report and the light at the end of the tunnel: A comparative study of Anglo-Irish and Anglo-French cross-border policing"
Cannon, Mathew.
U.K.
Ireland
free movement/border control
France
The recent publication of the Patten Report has focused attention on efforts to co-ordinate the policing of the Anglo-Irish border. The report calls for increased cross border policing and mentions Anglo-French police cooperation over the Channel Tunnel as a model for co-operative agreements between the Garda Síochána and the Royal Ulster Constabulary. Co-operation between authorities in the North and South of Ireland already exists, however that co-operation is largely informal, and a more institutionalised approach is called for by the Report. The emergence of meso-level policing in both areas plays an important role in understanding the comparative development of trans-national policing. The paper uses Anglo-Irish and Anglo-French police cooperation in order to create a comparative understanding cross-border policing. Using the model proposed by Benyon (1994), an examination of the levels of cross-border co-operation is made. The paper points towards the development of functional ties related to the emergence of meso-level as a key element in the success of Anglo-French co-ordination. Thus, successful co-operation across the Anglo-Irish border requires a more focused approach to co-ordination, which could create strong formal ties. These ties could then form the basis for the split-over into other areas of co-operation between police departments.
2001
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2061/1/001592_1.pdf
Cannon, Mathew. (2001) "The Patten Report and the light at the end of the tunnel: A comparative study of Anglo-Irish and Anglo-French cross-border policing". In: UNSPECIFIED, Madison, Wisconsin. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2061/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2086
2011-02-15T22:21:10Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D6173796C756D706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Migration policy in an integrating Europe"
Geddes, Andrew.
immigration policy
free movement/border control
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
asylum policy
This paper examines the Europeanisation of migration policy. It explores state-centered approaches to analysis of the development of EU free movement, immigration and asylum cooperation and integration that focus on institution formation and on the motives for member states to act collectively on migration policy issues at EU level. The paper then moves on to examine actual and potential consequences of policy cooperation and integration on laws, institutions, policies and collective identities in the member states. Thus the decisions by member states to cooperate at EU level are an important part of the story, but may well not be the whole story either now or in the future. The paper begins from the supposition that national policy models are likely to be resilient, particularly in older countries of immigration where these responses are well-established and connected to long-standing ideas associated with the nation and national belonging. Indeed, a school of thought has developed that sees European integration as a device for attaining national policy objectives and thus in a sense sustaining these national models in slightly amended form via an "escape to Europe" that allows for a European reconstruction of migration policy in line with the security and economic interests of member states.
2001
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2086/1/002103_1.PDF
Geddes, Andrew. (2001) "Migration policy in an integrating Europe". In: UNSPECIFIED, Madison, Wisconsin. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2086/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2322
2011-02-15T22:22:15Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D6173796C756D706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F706768646F63
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
“Harmonization of Migration Policies in the European Union: A State-Centric of Institutionalist Explanation?”
Lu, Chien-Yi.
free movement/border control
historical development of EC (pre-1986)
immigration policy
asylum policy
In an attempt to uncover answers, this paper traces the various initiatives for collective migration policy-making in the history of European integration and explores the rationale for these initiatives, the evolution of cooperation outside the EC institutions, and the relations between the Community and intergovernmental processes up until the Amsterdam Treaty. I argue that the reason border control, migration, and asylum policies have increasingly become in the common interests for Member States is to be found in functional spillover effects, elite advocacy and support of technocrats.
1999
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2322/1/002598_1.pdf
Lu, Chien-Yi. (1999) “Harmonization of Migration Policies in the European Union: A State-Centric of Institutionalist Explanation?”. In: UNSPECIFIED, Pittsburgh, PA. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2322/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2557
2011-02-15T22:22:57Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303132
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:73706469736372696D696E6174696F6E6D696E6F726974696573
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Ending borders: The politics separating law from policy on national discrimination"
Conant, Lisa.
free movement/border control
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
European Court of Justice/Court of First Instance
discrimination/minorities
Legal institutions offer very limited means to promote policy reforms and are difficult to access for many segments of society. These two characteristics render the policy effects of jurisprudence highly dependent on extra-judicial reactions. Responses from administrative and legislative institutions, other courts, individuals, and organized groups all operate to amplify or dilute judicial solutions. To illustrate the variable influence that the European Court of Justice exerts over policy outcomes in the EU, I discuss national discrimination as it relates to the free movement of persons.
1997
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2557/1/002844_1.PDF
Conant, Lisa. (1997) "Ending borders: The politics separating law from policy on national discrimination". In: UNSPECIFIED, Seattle, WA. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2557/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2558
2011-02-15T22:22:57Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6C6F626279696E67696E746572657374726570726573656E746174696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C6166666169727362706561
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303330
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Business, politics and the single market: Adjustment strategies in the regions"
Constantelos, John.
regional policy/structural funds
free movement/border control
Italy
France
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
lobbying/interest representation
business/private economic activity
The primary research question is whether these actors pursue multi-level lobbying strategies. A quantitative analysis of this research question generated statistically significant findings in support of the multi-level lobbying model (Constantelos 1996b). The approach in the present paper is to examine in greater qualitative depth the political strategies of economic actors undergoing the process of economic structural adjustment. Because groups face resource constraints we will want to pay particular attention to which governmental levels are favored by organized interests and how groups allocate their relatively scarce resources. The comparative case study is conducted in the border regions of Liguria, Italy and Provence-Alpes-CÙte díAzur (PACA), France. Liguria and PACA are remarkably similar in their economic structure (Statistical Office of the EC 1993). Their economies have centered around their ports, heavy industry, and tourism, and they continue to be important commercial centers. Both regions qualify for EU Objective Two structural funds, for "converting regions affected by industrial decline." They also display numerous other economic, social, and cultural similarities. This choice of case study regions provides several advantages when analyzing the factors which influence lobbying targets; such an analysis has been presented elsewhere.
1997
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2558/1/002843_1.PDF
Constantelos, John. (1997) "Business, politics and the single market: Adjustment strategies in the regions". In: UNSPECIFIED, Seattle, WA. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2558/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2668
2011-02-15T22:23:27Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"The sectoral dynamics of Germany’s role in the European Union"
Malhan, Nisha.
free movement/border control
Germany
agriculture policy
The unification of Germany gave a new impetus to the discussion about Germany and the EU, reopening the age-old debate about a ‘German Europe’ or a ‘Europeanized Germany.’ As the Intergovernmental Conference draws to a close and EU moves into a new phase of its development, German actions in the EU are still arousing suspicion amongst its partners. Germany’s role in the EU evokes a schizophrenic reaction from the other member states, whereby Germany’s partners in the EU expect greater leadership on the one hand, whilst fearing German dominance on the other. The mere idea of Germany with any coherent ‘national’ interests invokes a negative vision of Germany as a hegemon dominating the EU. Issue areas have largely been ignored in the analysis of German European policy. Scholars have tended to concentrate their analyses more broadly on German European policy objectives, focusing on integration rhetoric and declaratory policy. It could perhaps be argued that they have been drawing overly optimistic or overly negative conclusions about the nature of Germany’s role in the EU. The study propounds a sectoral approach to analyse specific policy areas in relation to Germany’s role in the EU. The analysis centres on two well chosen areas: agriculture and migration. It is implicit that this study cannot provide a complete picture or design a typical position. Nevertheless an analysis of specific policy sectors provides a fruitful insight into Germany’s role in the EU and has proved valuable in elucidating broader conclusions about Germany’s relationship with the EU.
1997
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2668/1/002555_1.pdf
Malhan, Nisha. (1997) "The sectoral dynamics of Germany’s role in the European Union". In: UNSPECIFIED, Seattle, WA. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2668/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2971
2011-02-15T22:24:51Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Player quotas, national eligibility restrictions, and freedom of movement under EU law"
McArdle, David.
free movement/border control
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
[T]he focus here is the question of whether national eligibility criteria-i.e., those regulations that govern who can be selected to play for a national side as opposed to a club side-are compatible with freedom of movement provisions. This paper locates that question within the context of the abolition of "quotas" pertaining to club sides. In various judgments both prior to and after Bosman, the ECJ has indicated that, were national eligibility criteria to be challenged, the Court would be minded to uphold them. But in this paper I contend that the legal basis upon which such a ruling would be made is far from watertight. The ECJ's intimations that national eligibility restrictions are matters of "purely sporting interest" and, as such, would be exempt from the rigors of EU are problematic. National eligibility criteria contain the "economic element" necessary to bring them within the purview of EU law in the wake of Bosman and other cases.
2003
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2971/1/173.pdf
McArdle, David. (2003) "Player quotas, national eligibility restrictions, and freedom of movement under EU law". In: UNSPECIFIED, Nashville, TN. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2971/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:4465
2011-02-15T22:31:56Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
Next in Line – Romanians at the Gates of the EU (emigrants, border control, legislation)
Simina, Ovidiu Laurian.
immigration policy
free movement/border control
Romania
The first of May 2004 marked an important date in the history of Europe as a political, geographic, and social entity. After years of negotiations, ten European countries joined the European Union, bringing in their potential and expectations, adding a total population of 75 million people and a territory of 738,000 square kilometres: Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Slovakia, Malta, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The EU will continue its enlargement under the Luxembourg Presidency. The membership treaty with Bulgaria and Romania will be finalised with a view to signature in 25 April 2005, in order to join the EU by 2007. Once it has been signed, this will mark the end of the current accession cycle. Membership negotiations with Croatia should commence on 17 March 2005. In mid-December 2004 EU leaders endorsed eventual Turkish entry into the EU, but said that there could be permanent restrictions on freedom of movement for Turkish workers; earlier, the EU Parliament voted 407-262 in favour of Turkey's entry. Romania feels and acts like a European country. You will rather notice a European flag in Bucharest than in London, for example. Romania is not only a country who makes effort to join the European family, by introducing the necessary legal provisions in the national legislation, but it is already part of one, whole Europe, ruled by law, an area of Freedom, Security and Justice. Romania fights against immigration flows targeting Western Countries and guards the external border of European Union. In the same time, Romanians are spread all over Europe, living there alike other Europeans. Until the European Union Member States will decide that Romania truly deserves to join the family, Romanians have to prove that they do not only feel and act as Europeans, but they truly are Europeans.
Simina, Ovidiu.
2005-05
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/4465/1/SDP_II%2D1%2D2005_Ovidiu_SIMINA.pdf
Simina, Ovidiu Laurian. (2005) Next in Line – Romanians at the Gates of the EU (emigrants, border control, legislation). [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/4465/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:4555
2011-02-15T22:32:15Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303132
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303130
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:436F6E7374346575726F7065
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D6F74686572
One Market, 25 States, 20 Million Outsiders?: European Union Immigration Policy
Luedtke, Adam.
free movement/border control
Constitution for Europe
immigration policy
European Commission
European Court of Justice/Court of First Instance
[From the Introduction]. Section Two of this paper will detail the evolution of the EU’s immigration regime, from Maastricht’s modest beginnings, to the ambitious European constitution. Since “immigration policy” is a very broad topic, covering diverse areas such as labor migration, family reunification, political asylum, social integration, and the fight against illegal immigration, the third and fourth sections will focus on one key policy area: the rights and freedoms of Europe’s nearly 20 million “third-country nationals” (TCNs), who are legally resident in an EU member state, but do not hold citizenship in any member state. Despite calls by the European Commission, the Parliament, and several of the member states, TCNs do not possess the same rights as EU citizens to move freely and take up employment in any member state. Therefore these immigrants, though legally resident in the EU, cannot participate in the common market. The third and fourth sections will detail the political struggle over whether or not to give free movement rights to TCNs, looking at the key roles played by the European Court of Justice (analyzed in Section Three) and the European Commission (analyzed in Section Four) in the face of strong opposition by powerful member states. This political struggle will be analyzed in the context of the debate between supranationalism and intergovernmentalism (Stone Sweet and Sandholtz 1998, Moravcsik 1998), and will be analyzed on the basis of secondary sources, and interviews I conducted with political actors in Brussels during 2003 and 2004. The fifth section concludes the chapter, analyzing the extent of TCN free movement rights as they currently stand, as well as their prospects of future expansion, in the broader perspective of the increasing degree of EU control over immigration policy in the 21st Century.
2005
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/4555/1/05_Luedtke.pdf
Luedtke, Adam. (2005) One Market, 25 States, 20 Million Outsiders?: European Union Immigration Policy. UNSPECIFIED. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/4555/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:5283
2011-02-15T22:35:58Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Migration policies for a Romania within the European Union: Navigating between Scylla and Charybdis
Baldwin-Edwards, Martin.
immigration policy
free movement/border control
Romania
In this paper, first I outline Romania’s recent emigration history, followed by a more detailed analysis of its contemporary characteristics. Next, I focus on what may prove to be a problem in the future – brain-drain and skill losses, along with their ameliorative counterpart of migrants’ remittances. The issue of immigration into Romania is then addressed, which closely fits the Scylla and Charybdis analysis as border controls are largely EU-directed, whereas future labour market needs for immigration may seem too far in the future to worry about. Finally, I conclude with a section on policy issues: here, I try to identify what seem likely to arise as the most demanding structural issues in the management of immigration, emigration and economic development of Romania.
2005
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/5283/1/MMO_WP7.pdf
Baldwin-Edwards, Martin. (2005) Migration policies for a Romania within the European Union: Navigating between Scylla and Charybdis. [Working Paper] (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/5283/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:5955
2011-02-15T22:39:38Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303132
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65666153696E676C654D61726B6574:65666153696E676C654D61726B65746361706974616C676F6F64737365727669636573
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303230
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273636F6D706E6174696D70
74797065733D61727469636C65
The Power of the European Community to Impose Criminal Penalties
Castillo García, José F.
free movement/border control
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
compliance/national implementation
capital, goods, services, workers
environmental policy (including international arena)
European Court of Justice/Court of First Instance
This article analyses the judgement delivered by the European Court of Justice on 13 September 2005 establishing that the European Community has the power to require the Member States to impose criminal penalties for the purpose of protecting the environment, and discusses its benefits in the light of the need to ensure the effective and efficient implementation of other Community policies and the freedom of movement of persons, goods, services and capital. In particular, the consequences of the judgement for acts adopted and proposals pending will be considered. Attention is also paid to the costs for national sovereignty and to relevant changes introduced in the Constitutional Treaty.
2005
Article
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/5955/1/Scope2005_3_4(2).pdf
Castillo García, José F. (2005) The Power of the European Community to Impose Criminal Penalties. EIPAScope, 2005 (3). pp. 27-34.
http://aei.pitt.edu/5955/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6547
2011-02-15T22:43:07Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033394575726F7065616E636974697A656E73686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"The future of European migration rights"
Maas, Willem
free movement/border control
European citizenship
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
This is part of my PhD. dissertation, entitled "Creating European Citizens," which explains the development and implications of European Union citizenship. EU citizenship grants nationals of EU member states a set of rights (including mobility and voting rights) throughout the territory of the Union; these are rights enforceable by individuals against states of which they are not necessarily citizens. In this paper, I consider some scenarios for the future o£ EU migration rights. I advance two main arguments: first, the current Treaty rights enjoy widespread support and are unlikely to be reversed, although contestation continues to occur over their interpretation and implementation. Second, although a number of phenomena-here I consider enlargement and the push for greater harmonization between different national legal systems, touching also on potential socio-economic shocks and political opposition-pose risks for their future development. EU migration rights will likely be consolidated and even expanded over the coming decades. The dynamics by which this probable consolidation and expansion of rights occurs deserve close attention.
2003
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6547/1/000435_1.PDF
Maas, Willem (2003) "The future of European migration rights". In: UNSPECIFIED, Nashville, TN. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/6547/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6630
2011-02-15T22:43:35Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
An Interim Plan for South-East Europe: Customs Union with the EU and a Regional Schengen for the Free Movement of People. CEPS Policy Briefs No. 85, 1 November 2005
Emerson, Michael.
free movement/border control
EU-South-Eastern Europe (Balkans)
enlargement
Turkey
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
Pending clarification of further enlargement prospects for the whole of the Western Balkans, Michael Emerson argues in this paper that there is every reason to consolidate the positive recent developments with further initiatives of strategic importance to the region. He explores two outstanding candidates for this purpose: 1) enlargement of the existing Customs Union of the EU and Turkey to include the whole of the Western Balkans, and 2) a South-East European Schengen Agreement for the free movement of people.
2005-11
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6630/1/1277_85.pdf
Emerson, Michael. (2005) An Interim Plan for South-East Europe: Customs Union with the EU and a Regional Schengen for the Free Movement of People. CEPS Policy Briefs No. 85, 1 November 2005. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/6630/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6641
2011-02-15T22:43:39Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
What about the Neighbours? The Impact of Schengen along the EU’s External Borders. CEPS Working Documents No. 210, 1 October 2004
Apap, Joanna
Tchorbadjiyska, Angelina.
free movement/border control
European Neighbourhood Policy
Moldova
Ukraine
Belarus
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
Over the last few years, the EU’s discourse concerning border controls has presented a paradox – on the one hand, the EU promotes good neighbourly relations, while on the other hand it emphasises the need to strictly implement the Schengen acquis on border controls and visa regimes. The main underlying obstacle to a good and open partnership between the EU and the candidate states, and in turn between the enlarged EU and its neighbours, is a lack of trust towards the EU’s neighbours. One major challenge now for neighbours such as Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus is how to convince the EU that they can be good partners in fulfilling the objectives of Schengen and protecting the EU’s interest with respect to who comes in and out of its external borders. The two main questions on which this working paper is centred are: · To what extent can there be flexibility in implementing Schengen rules to prevent marginalising the new EU neighbours as a result of fears about ‘threats’ moving westwards across borders? · What can the EU neighbours do in the short, medium and long term to promote trust and to one day hope to come off the Schengen ‘negative list’ with respect to freedom of movement?
2004-10
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6641/1/1171_210.pdf
Apap, Joanna and Tchorbadjiyska, Angelina. (2004) What about the Neighbours? The Impact of Schengen along the EU’s External Borders. CEPS Working Documents No. 210, 1 October 2004. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/6641/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6643
2011-02-15T22:43:39Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303132
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
What Does Freedom of Movement Mean in an Enlarged EU? CEPS Working Documents No. 208, 1 October 2004
Carrera, Sergio
free movement/border control
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
European Court of Justice/Court of First Instance
The purpose of this report is to assess the main challenges to the principle of free movement of persons in theory and practice in an enlarged European Union. The right to move freely represents one of the fundamental freedoms of the internal market as well as an essential political element of the package of rights linked to the very status of EU citizenship. The scope ratione personae and the current state of the principle of free movement of persons is assessed by looking at the most recent case law of the European Court of Justice and the recently adopted Directive on the rights of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the member states. But what are the hidden and visible obstacles to free movement of persons in Europe? How can these barriers be overcome to make free movement and residence rights more inclusive? This working document addresses these questions along with: 1. Who are the beneficiaries of the free movement of persons in an enlarged Europe? 2. What is the impact of the recent legal developments in the freedom of movement dimension, such as the European Court of Justice case law and the new Directive? 3. To what extent are pro-security policies such as the Schengen Information System II and an enhanced interoperability between European databases fully compatible with the freedom of movement paradigm?
2004-10
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6643/1/1162_208.pdf
Carrera, Sergio (2004) What Does Freedom of Movement Mean in an Enlarged EU? CEPS Working Documents No. 208, 1 October 2004. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/6643/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6672
2011-02-15T22:43:50Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Integrated Border Management at the EU Level. CEPS Working Documents No. 227, 1 August 2005
Hobbing, Peter.
immigration policy
free movement/border control
In times marked by trends as diverse as economic globalisation, international migration as well as fear of terrorism and organised crime, the efficient handling of borders has become an issue of political priority, in the EU and across the world. Modern, economy-oriented states have to rely on a flourishing trade and offer a comfortable degree of security to their citizens. The formula commonly chosen in combining these two objectives is that of ‘integrated border management’, which represents the delicate attempt to marry security concerns with trade facilitation. If the implementation of this innovative approach is already proving to be a challenge to well-established nation states, it becomes a genuine balancing act for an incomplete federation such as the EU, with its sensitive mix of a single external border and 25 separate legal/administrative systems. This working paper seeks to illustrate the difficulties encountered by the EU and develop solutions that should firmly go into the direction of a coherent, communitarian approach in border management, such as that sketched out by the recent Council Regulation No. 2007/2004 establishing the European Border Agency known as FRONTEX.
2005-08
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6672/1/1254_227.pdf
Hobbing, Peter. (2005) Integrated Border Management at the EU Level. CEPS Working Documents No. 227, 1 August 2005. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/6672/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6894
2011-02-15T22:45:07Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033394575726F7065616E636974697A656E73686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Freedom of Movement within 'Fortress Europe'"
Maas, Willem.
free movement/border control
European citizenship
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
Introduction. Much attention has been focused on those seeking to enter ‘fortress Europe’ whether the concept is understood to refer only to the EU Schengen countries or to include non-EU Schengen countries, the United Kingdom and Ireland, or the countries which joined the Union in May 2004. Yet internal mobility within ‘fortress Europe’ is at least as worthy of consideration. The rise of freedom of movement rights in Europe now codified with the legal category of European Union citizenship represents a startling reversal of the historical tradition of state sovereignty. States have historically been defined in terms of insiders (citizens) and outsiders (foreigners). The new supranational rights supersede this traditional distinction by reducing or even removing the ability of European states to discriminate between their own citizens and those of other EU member states. Borders within the European Union still matter, but the remaining barriers to freedom of movement within ‘fortress Europe’ are practical rather than legal, and even they are rapidly disappearing. Exceptions to the European free movement regime still exist such as the case of individuals deemed to pose a significant threat to public health or public security. But the rights of free movement have now been extended to virtually all European citizens, even though there will be a phase-in period for workers from most of the new accession states. By contrast, third-country nationals citizens neither of the host state (first country) nor of another EU member state (second country) but of a non-EU state continue to be denied freedom of movement rights within the Union, despite the efforts of the Commission and some national governments to extend them the same rights as those enjoyed by EU citizens. Exceptions to Schengen also continue to exist, as with special events such as the European soccer cup, for which Portugal in 2004 (just as Belgium and the Netherlands in 2000) was granted a temporary exemption on the requirement to abstain from checking the identification of individuals crossing Portuguese borders. On the whole, however, the picture that emerges for freedom of movement within Europe is one of a continent in which Europeans can move about freely, and in which state borders (though clearly not the borders between ‘fortress Europe’ and the rest of the world!) have lost most of the significance they once possessed. This paper lays out the development of the Schengen system and places it within the context of European Union citizenship.
2005
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6894/1/Maas%2DSchengen.pdf
Maas, Willem. (2005) "Freedom of Movement within 'Fortress Europe'". In: UNSPECIFIED, Austin, Texas. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/6894/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7066
2011-02-15T22:46:08Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Free movement of persons: granting individual rights or regulating business?"
White, Robin A. C.
free movement/border control
[From the Introduction]. It is now accepted that there has been convergence in the interpretation by the Court of Justice of the rules applicable to the free movement of goods, to the free movement of persons, and to the free movement of services.(1) The same trend can be seen in the less voluminous case law on the free movement of capital. The convergence of principles is generally, though not universally, seen as a good thing, despite earlier views that the law on the four freedoms might follow different routes. If the perspective from which the area is viewed is the dismantling of protectionist barriers, or the prohibition of discrimination in all its forms, or securing the completion of an internal market, then the logic of convergence is compelling. Jukka Snell has commented: "The building of a coherent and transparent European legal system demands a common approach that is based on generally accepted principles, not on dubious distinction".(2) However, there are practical and legal distinctions between the Treaty rules on the four freedoms which demand more than a monochrome view of the landscape. Let us look at a number of those distinctions.
2003
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7066/1/001515_1.PDF
White, Robin A. C. (2003) "Free movement of persons: granting individual rights or regulating business?". In: UNSPECIFIED, Nashville, Tennessee. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/7066/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7082
2011-02-15T22:46:14Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Eurostars and Eurocities: Towards a Sociology of Free Moving Professionals in Western Europe"
Favell, Adrien.
Belgium
free movement/border control
Netherlands
Despite an economic union premised on free movement across Europe, population statistics consistently show that a very low percentage of Western Europeans migrate and settle permanently in other European countries. Middle class Europeans show a remarkable propensity to stay put in their native countries. One can only conclude that the European economic and social system functions in ways that scarcely resemble its founding principle of the free movement of peoples. This presentation reports on qualitative research in Brussels and Amsterdam which has sought to understand the choices, career trajectories, and personal problems faced by professionals who have chosen the path of free movement within Europe. The study reveals the deep-seated national organization of life in even the most internationalized-or Europeanized-of cities, particularly concerning housing, child education, and political participation. Favell focuses on the difficult struggle for "quality life" that is and always has given the advantage to a rooted "bourgeois" conception of accumulation and social power. In a Europe where the declining welfare state and the all-powerful international economic system would seem to be overwhelming the nation-state, Favell suggests that these hidden barriers to free movement in Europe lie at the heart of the resilience of the national as the dominant form of social organization on the continent.
2003
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7082/1/wrkg71.pdf
Favell, Adrien. (2003) "Eurostars and Eurocities: Towards a Sociology of Free Moving Professionals in Western Europe". In: UNSPECIFIED, Nashville, Tennessee.
http://aei.pitt.edu/7082/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7245
2011-02-15T22:47:08Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666676F7665726E616E6365
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666707569657075
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033394575726F7065616E636974697A656E73686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Political Implications of European Citizenship for a Federal European Union"
Koslowski, Rey.
free movement/border control
European citizenship
governance: EU & national level
political union & integration/European Political Union
[From the Introduction]. The argument proceeds as follows. In the first section, I outline the conflict between democracy and federalism in the abstract and identify problems that will be elucidated using historical and contemporary examples in the subsequent sections. In the second section, I demonstrate the problem resident aliens pose for democracy, examine the distinction between jus soli and jus sanguinis and review the political problems of inclusion that arise from that distinction. In the third section, I describe the development of European citizenship leading up to the Maastricht Agreement. In the fourth section, I argue that dual state\supra-state citizenship is hallmark of federalism but, due to the nature of European citizenship, the political union emerging from the Maastricht agreement differs from traditional federal models such as the United States and Germany. (3) In fifth section, I assess the recent controversy over European citizenship and argue that the differing structure of political union resulting from European citizenship could make the European Union susceptible to unconventional sources of jurisdictional and political conflicts, change the political dynamics of the accession of new members, and severely-complicate any future act of secession. In sixth section, I assess trends in intra-EC migration and evaluate their political significance for the future. In the conclusion, I summarize the core argument and offer a research agenda in the form of an exploration of possible theoretical solutions to the dilemma initially posed.
1993
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7245/1/002496.PDF
Koslowski, Rey. (1993) "Political Implications of European Citizenship for a Federal European Union". In: UNSPECIFIED, Washington, DC. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/7245/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7406
2012-04-06T16:28:59Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D6F74686572
Construction of a European Institutional Model for Managing Operational Cooperation at the EU's External Borders: Is the FRONTEX Agency a decisive step forward? CEPS CHALLENGE Paper, No. 6, 22 March 2007
Jorry, Hélène.
free movement/border control
Within the context of the fifth enlargement of the EU, the increasing securitisation of JHA policies and the establishment of an area of freedom, security and justice, the issue of integrated border management (IBM) has become crucial since 2001. Building upon the existing fragmented framework, the creation of the FRONTEX Agency brings an innovative and tailor-made institutional response designed by the Council Regulation No. 2007/2004/EC in order to promote burden sharing, solidarity and mutual trust between the Member States in the operational management of the EU's external borders. Despite no direct operational powers, the FRONTEX Agency has been assigned a large array of competences in various sectors, including a pioneering mission of coordination of operational cooperation and the controversial task of assisting joint return operations. This paper addresses fundamental questions related to the issue of integrated border management. It seeks to assess the role and limits of the FRONTEX Agency in the operational management of the EU's external borders in order to examine in what way the creation of this 19th European agency embodies a decisive step forward towards the construction of an EU common policy on external borders.
2007-03
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7406/2/7406.pdf
Jorry, Hélène. (2007) Construction of a European Institutional Model for Managing Operational Cooperation at the EU's External Borders: Is the FRONTEX Agency a decisive step forward? CEPS CHALLENGE Paper, No. 6, 22 March 2007. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/7406/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7623
2011-02-15T22:49:14Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Bridging the Divide? Europeanization, Transnational Consumption, and Ethnic Identity in a European City. University of Illinois EUC Working Paper, Volume 5, No. 1, 2005
Asher, Andrew D.
free movement/border control
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
Germany
Poland
In an effort to promote the free movement of people and capital, and to establish a supranational conception of identity that deemphasizes nationality and ethnicity as markers of difference, the European Union (EU) has pursued a specific policy agenda of "deterritorializing" its internal borders. Utilizing the urban area of Frankfurt an-der-Oder, Germany, and Slubice, Poland--two border cities divided only by the Oder River--as an ethnographic site, this paper examines the construction and performance of national and ethnic identities in the transnational context of the Polish-German border regions through the commonplace cultural interactions engendered by the deregulation of cross-border movements and consumption practices. By examining the everyday articulation and negotiation between different ethnicities and nationalities, this paper explores how residents of the Polish/German border regions employ different forms of ethnic, national and transnational identities, and how systems of ethnicity and nationality are reconfigured in response to the EU's expanding transnational institutions. In this way, Frankfurt(Oder)/Slubice acts as a microcosm for demonstrating transformations that are occurring throughout Europe, by virtue of its location as a place where what it means to be "European" is negotiated and contested through everyday cross-border practices and interactions.
2005-05
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7623/1/Asher_Divide.pdf
Asher, Andrew D. (2005) Bridging the Divide? Europeanization, Transnational Consumption, and Ethnic Identity in a European City. University of Illinois EUC Working Paper, Volume 5, No. 1, 2005. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/7623/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7989
2011-02-15T22:51:25Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033394575726F7065616E636974697A656E73686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166664575726F7065616E656C656374696F6E73
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
The Representation of Intra-EU Migrants at the Member-State Level: Do Voting Rights Matter?
Olsson, Anna.
free movement/border control
European citizenship
European elections/voting behavior
Since the introduction of the EU citizenship in 1992 the freedom of movement and residence within the Union has lead to an ever increasing number of individuals residing in another EU member-state than their own. These intra-EU migrants have increasingly been granted the same rights as the citizens of their country of residence, with one conspicuous exception: voting rights in national elections. It seems paradox, however, that those EU-citizens who embody the idea of European citizenship the most – those who migrate to reside in another EU member-state – are granted democratic representation through the right to vote at the municipal and European levels, but not at the national level in their country of residence. This paper investigates how the absence of voting rights for intra-EU migrants affects their sense of democratic representation. More specifically, this paper seeks to determine whether intra-EU migrants differ from citizens in their satisfaction with democracy in their country of residence and in the EU, estimating two ordinal logit models using data collected through 11 Eurobarometer surveys ranging from 1997 to 2004. The results indicate that intra-EU migrants are more likely to be satisfied with democracy than citizens, both in their country of residence and in the EU, thus suggesting that direct representation through the participation in national elections may not be as important as suggested in previous research. However, the finding that a greater ideological distance to the median citizen in the country of residence is associated with a lesser satisfaction with democracy suggests that virtual representation, in the more general sense, takes the place of the narrower notion of institutionalized representation, at least in the mind of the masses. These findings help shed some light on the puzzle of representation within the context of European integration, and the fact that contrary to public opinion, European elites argue for institutionalized representation, shows that the duality of and tension between virtual and actual representation, as suggested by Hanna Pitkin, very much exists in the EU today.
2007
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7989/1/olsson%2Da%2D01h.pdf
Olsson, Anna. (2007) The Representation of Intra-EU Migrants at the Member-State Level: Do Voting Rights Matter? In: UNSPECIFIED, Montreal, Canada. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/7989/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:8130
2011-02-15T22:52:18Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D67656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303035
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Security, Borders, and the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series, Vol. 4 No. 15, May 2004
Ibryamova, Nuray V.
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
free movement/border control
general
EU-Central and Eastern Europe
enlargement
In 2003 the European Union adopted its first security strategy, which identified the key threats and challenges to European security, its strategic objectives, as well as the possible means for addressing these objectives. The document, presented by CFSP1 High Representative Javier Solana, was an important milestone in the development of the EU as a regional security actor with potential to play a global security role. The strategy, entitled “A Safer Europe in a Better World,” also signified that the security of Europe was indivisible from that of the rest of the world, and especially its immediate neighborhood. As European integration deepens, there is a growing perception that the member states cannot adequately protect their societies as a result of their borderless frontiers, resulting in an increasing internal insecurity. The current round of enlargement is also implicated in this process, as it poses a number of challenges in this area. This enlargement brings the European Union’s eastern border deep into the territory of the former Soviet Union in the Baltic region, and reaches states that are still in the process of institution-building The management of these new borders will have a significant impact on the stability of the rest of Europe, which finds itself outside the EU, as well as on the internal security of those who are inside. This essay aims to look at some of the discursive links between security and the eastern enlargement of the European Union and the role of security in creating the two “Europes,” as witnessed by the renewed emphasis on the new eastern external border of the EU. It argues that it is primarily societal security threats that have been important in the context of enlargement, contributing to the implementation of internal security policies, whose effects are sometimes conflicting with the overall objective of peaceful, stable and prosperous Europe. The article begins by looking at the linkage between the lifting of internal borders and non-traditional military threats, such as immigration and organized crime. It then examines how the eastern enlargement has been implicated in the securitization of these cross-border activities and the policy responses to the perceived security deficit. It concludes by discussing some of the consequences of the strengthening of the external borders of the EU on its new members as well as on its new neighbors to the east.
2004-05
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/8130/1/ibryamovasecurityfinal.pdf
Ibryamova, Nuray V. (2004) Security, Borders, and the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series, Vol. 4 No. 15, May 2004. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/8130/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:8163
2020-01-09T21:39:32Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303330
7375626A656374733D46:46303133
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033394575726F7065616E636974697A656E73686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303034
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303238
7375626A656374733D46:46303331
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F706768646F63
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303232
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Citizenship, Free Movement, and EU Enlargement. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series Vol. 5 No. 34, October 2005
Maas, Willem.
European citizenship
Estonia
Hungary
Latvia
Lithuania
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Cyprus
Malta
historical development of EC (pre-1986)
free movement/border control
[Introduction]. The European Union’s most significant enlargement admitted ten states in 2004: Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Freedom of movement among all but Malta and Cyprus had for many years been restricted. Laws and policies similar to the Soviet propiska (residence permits) system—which placed severe limits on the right to move even between different cities within the Soviet Union, let alone between different Republics—restricted mobility under Communism. For individual citizens in the postcommunist states that joined the Union in 2004, freedom of movement symbolized the “return to Europe” of EU accession. By contrast to the restricted movement that citizens of many of these states had experienced under Communism, EU citizenship promised a right to reside and work anywhere within the territory of the Union. The perceived injustice of the delay in granting free movement rights to Spanish and Portuguese citizens helps explain the support of Spanish and Portuguese political leaders for European citizenship. The transition period for free movement of workers upon the accession of Spain and Portugal was seven years, which was reduced to six years as fears of massive immigration from those countries proved unfounded. Once the language of European citizenship was being widely invoked, it became politically more difficult to distinguish free movement of persons from free movement of goods, services, and capital. Experience with the Spanish and Portuguese accessions in 1986—and German reunification—quashed the objection in the discussions leading to Maastricht that extending mobility rights to all categories of member state nationals would lead to chaos. Yet the enlargement negotiations with the central and eastern European states witnessed a renewal of similar objections. There was a significant disjuncture between the existence of EU citizenship and the reality of the accession negotiations, in particular the transition arrangements passed to render enlargement more politically palatable in the existing member states. The negotiations disappointed those who hoped that European integration heralded a gradual move away from a focus on economic integration towards an increasing emphasis on individual rights. Because of largely unfounded fears of mass migration from accession countries to existing member states, full freedom of movement will be introduced only gradually. The addition of new member states with traditions of citizenship that differ from those of the existing member states alters the political dynamics affecting the future development of EU citizenship.
2005-10
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/8163/1/Maasfinal.pdf
Maas, Willem. (2005) Citizenship, Free Movement, and EU Enlargement. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series Vol. 5 No. 34, October 2005. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/8163/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:8203
2011-02-15T22:52:47Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D46:46303238
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
EU Enlargement 2007: A Full Stop? EUMA Papers, Vol.4 No.1 January 2007
Gudjonsdottir, Vilborg Asa.
free movement/border control
enlargement
Romania
Bulgaria
[Introduction]. On the 1st of January 2007 Romania and Bulgaria became members of the European Union. The 2004 enlargement of the EU has had its difficulties and many wonder if these two Eastern European countries are in fact ready to join the EU. Although their economies are growing fast, both countries are poor in income as well as in public spirit. Bribes are routine and officials tend to be badly trained, ill-paid and often corrupt, with the worst corruption in both countries occurring in the customs service. Similar problems exist in the countries´ judiciaries.1 Improvement efforts have not proved efficient enough, especially in Bulgaria where many suspect that changes will not be effective since political will is lacking at the top. Romania is at least willing to prosecute corrupt politicians while in Bulgaria the process has hardly begun. The existing EU members are most worried about the free movement of workers, and it is foreseen that more member states will impose restrictions on the free movement of workers from these countries than did so for the 2004 enlargement.2 How bad is the situation in the public sector of these two soon to become EU countries and what other things need to be considered?
2007-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/8203/1/Gudjonsdottir_EUMA_EUEnlargement2007_EUMA_final.pdf
Gudjonsdottir, Vilborg Asa. (2007) EU Enlargement 2007: A Full Stop? EUMA Papers, Vol.4 No.1 January 2007. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/8203/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9296
2011-02-15T23:00:11Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Germany, Multilateralism, and the Eastern Enlargement of the EU. CES Germany & Europe Working Paper no. 01.4, 2001
Hofhansel, Claus.
free movement/border control
enlargement
Germany
Since World War II, the most distinctive characteristic of German foreign policy has been its commitment to multilateralism. This commitment has served German material interests, but it has a normative basis as well. This paper analyzes German domestic support for multilateralist policies, defined in terms of the principles of indivisibility, generalized principles of conduct, and diffuse reciprocity, in the context of negotiations on the EU’s eastern enlargement. Empirically, the paper focuses on the policy areas of freedom of movement for workers and agriculture. The main theoretical argument is that domestic support for multilateralist policies depends on the distributional consequences of such policies and the ability of political institutions to manage distributional conflicts. Distributional conflict undermines support for multilateralist policies. In the case of Germany, distributional conflicts among different sectors and regions of the German economy have become more severe partly, but not exclusively, due to German unification. Furthermore, German political institutions are less able to resolve such conflicts than in the past. The evidence presented here shows more intense domestic distributional conflicts on the free movement of labor issue than over agriculture, and, as expected, we see more explicitly bilateral and less multilateralist demands by unions and employers.
2001
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9296/1/Hofhansel.pdf
Hofhansel, Claus. (2001) Germany, Multilateralism, and the Eastern Enlargement of the EU. CES Germany & Europe Working Paper no. 01.4, 2001. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/9296/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9374
2012-04-06T16:19:35Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
EC Visa Facilitation and Readmission Agreements: Implementing a New EU Security Approach in the Neighbourhood. CEPS Working Document No. 290/April 2008.
Trauner, Florian.
Kruse, Imke.
free movement/border control
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
immigration policy
With the Eastern Enlargement successfully completed, the EU is searching for a proper balance between internal security and external stabilisation that is acceptable to all sides. This paper focuses on an EU foreign policy instrument that is a case in point for this struggle: EC visa facilitation and readmission agreements. By looking at the EU's strategy on visa facilitation and readmission, this paper aims to offer a first systematic analysis of the objectives, substance and political implications of these agreements. The analysis considers the instrument of EC visa facilitation and readmission agreements as a means to implement a new EU security approach in the neighbourhood. In offering more relaxed travel conditions in exchange for the signing of an EC readmission agreement and reforming domestic justice and home affairs, the EU has found a new way to press for reforms in neighbouring countries while addressing a major source of discontent in these countries. The analysis concludes with the broader implications of these agreements and argues that even if the facilitated travel opportunities are beneficial for the citizens of the target countries, the positive achievements are undermined by the Schengen enlargement, which makes the new member states tie up their borders to those of their neighbours.
2008-04
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9374/2/9374.pdf
Trauner, Florian. and Kruse, Imke. (2008) EC Visa Facilitation and Readmission Agreements: Implementing a New EU Security Approach in the Neighbourhood. CEPS Working Document No. 290/April 2008. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/9374/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9399
2012-04-03T16:11:24Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The Commission’s New Border Package: Does it take us one step closer to a 'cyber-fortress Europe'? CEPS Policy Briefs No. 154, 5 March 2008.
Guild, Elspeth.
Carrera, Sergio.
Geyer, Florian.
free movement/border control
On 13 February 2008, the European Commission presented a new 'Border Package', setting out its vision of how to foster the further management of the EU's external border. In assessing the desirability and feasibility of the new system, CEPS JHA specialists find the Commission's proposal ill-considered and likely to have substantial counterproductive effects on the ground. They expect it to create the same sort of public relations problems as do similar US measures among a travelling public that finds itself increasingly the object of state suspicion, with no concrete reason or grounds.
2008-03
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9399/2/9399.pdf
Guild, Elspeth. and Carrera, Sergio. and Geyer, Florian. (2008) The Commission’s New Border Package: Does it take us one step closer to a 'cyber-fortress Europe'? CEPS Policy Briefs No. 154, 5 March 2008. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/9399/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9484
2011-02-15T23:01:19Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726C61626F72
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D7072657072696E74
The Bitter Taste of Strawberry Jam: Distortions on Romanian Labour Market beyond 2007
Silasi, Grigore
Simina, Ovidiu Laurian
labour/labor
free movement/border control
Romania
The paper is a contribution at the scientific debate of migration and mobility issues in the context of an enlarged European Union (EU-27). We consider that Romania, a country with a labour market that faces distortions, will benefit from migration on short term, but will need to import labour force in order to maintain the development trend. Remittances, as result of Romanians emigration after 2002, helped the economic development of the country in the last years (remittances’ inflow doubled the FDI). As a response to the media debate regarding Romania’s emigration, we consider that the fear of mass migration from Romania following the year 2007 is not justified. While the European (and mostly British) media cries on the threat of Bulgarians and Romanians’ emigration, as following to the 2007 accession, the scientific reports say that the A8 countries’ migration benefits to economy of the EU15 countries. In the same time, the Romanian media and the Romanian entrepreneurs announce the ‘Chinese invasion’ and the lack of labour in construction, industry and even agriculture. We see labour as goods: the economic theory say that goods are moving with the prices, the highest price attracts (more) goods. Romania is not only a gateway for the East-West international migration (like Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece for the South-North direction), but a labour market in need of workers. While a big part of the labour force is already migrated, mostly to the SE Europe (some 2.5m workers are cited to be abroad, with both legal and illegal/irregular status), the Romanian companies could not find local workers to use them in order to benefit from the money inflow targeting Romania in the light of its new membership to the European Union (foreign investments and European post accession funds). Instead of increasing the salaries, the local employers rather prefer to ‘import’ workers from poorer countries (Chinese, Moldavians, Ukrainians, who still accept a lower wage as compared to the medium wage in Romania, but bigger enough as compared to those from their country of origin). The paper concludes with the case of the Banat region, considered the ‘Western Europe’ from Romania, as a small scale model for the labour market relations within the whole EU.
2007
Preprint
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9484/1/Silasi%2C_Simina_2007_%2D_Bitter_Taste_of_Strawberry_Jam.pdf
Silasi, Grigore and Simina, Ovidiu Laurian (2007) The Bitter Taste of Strawberry Jam: Distortions on Romanian Labour Market beyond 2007. [Preprint] (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/9484/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9542
2012-04-06T15:48:28Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726C61626F72
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D6F74686572
A New European Agenda for Labour Mobility. CEPS Task Force Reports No. 50, 1 April 2004
Turnmann, Anna.
labour/labor
free movement/border control
Among the big issues facing the EU is the declining working-age population and the effect this decline will have on our economies, businesses and social welfare systems. One way to address this issue is to promote labour mobility throughout the EU. The CEPS-ECHR (European Club for Human Resources) Task Force – chaired by Allan Larsson, former Director-General of DG Employment and Social Affairs – presents its recommendations for a more flexible and secure labour market in this report. As a result of its research, the Task Force calls for 1) focusing the Lisbon review on the resourcing of labour markets, 2) appointing a commissioner for mobility, 3) setting up an annual monitoring process in which leading countries in mobility policies are ‘named and famed’ and 4) strengthening corporate policies for mobility through a business network. Reactions and comments are invited from all interested parties, which will be made available on both the CEPS and ECHR websites.
2004-04
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9542/2/9542.pdf
Turnmann, Anna. (2004) A New European Agenda for Labour Mobility. CEPS Task Force Reports No. 50, 1 April 2004. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/9542/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9748
2011-02-15T23:03:39Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D67656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D6173796C756D706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D45:45303039
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303230
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D656D706C6F796D656E74756E656D706C6F796D656E74
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D626F6F6B
Migration, Mobility and Human Rights at the Eastern Border of the European Union - Space of Freedom and Security
Ruspini, Paolo
Hiriş, Liliana
Geiger, Martin
Wersching, Simona
Simina, Ovidiu Laurian
Levine, Samuel Jay
Schulz, Wolfgang P.
Heikkilä, Elli
Pikkarainen, Maria
Feridun, Mete
Ivlevs, Artjoms
Bicanová, Radka
Figlová, Zuzana
Kačerová, Eva
Lötzer, Rüdiger
Parasca, Teofil
Groutsis, Dimitria
Unal, Bayram
Baldwin-Edwards, Martin
Mircea, Alexandru
Pristavu, Anca Cristina
Silaşi, Grigore
Constantin, Daniela Luminiţa
Vădăsan, Ioana
Cismaş, Laura
Oprea, Florin
Popescu, Ada Iuliana
Cǎmǎrǎşan, Adriana Vasile
Petrescu, Gabriela Elena.
free movement/border control
Italy
Denmark
Latvia
OSCE/Helsinki Process/CSCE
regionalism, international
Finland
EU-Central and Eastern Europe
enlargement
Spain
Germany
Greece
Hungary
immigration policy
Romania
Czech Republic
asylum policy
employment/unemployment
general
This edited collection of migration papers would like to emphasise the acute need for migration related study and research in Romania. At this time, migration and mobility are studied as minor subjects in Economics, Sociology, Political Sciences and European Studies only (mostly at post-graduate level). We consider that Romanian universities need more ‘migration studies’, while research should cover migration as a whole, migration and mobility being analysed from different points of view – social, economical, legal etc. Romania is part of the European Migration Space not only as a source of labourers for the European labour market, but also as source of quality research for the European scientific arena. Even a country located at the eastern border of the European Union, we consider Romania as part of the European area of freedom, security and justice, and therefore interested in solving correctly all challenges incurred by the complex phenomena of migration and workers’ mobility at the European level. The waves of illegal immigrants arriving continuously on the Spanish, Italian and Maltese shores, and the workers’ flows from the new Member States from Central and Eastern Europe following the 2004 accession, forced the EU officials and the whole Europe to open the debate on the economical and mostly social consequences of labour mobility. This study volume is our contribution to this important scientific debate. Starting with the spring of 2005, the Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence and the School of High Comparative European Studies (SISEC), both within the West University of Timisoara, have proposed a series of events in order to raise the awareness of the Romanian scientific environment on this very sensitive issues: migration and mobility in the widen European Space. An annual international event to celebrate 9 May - The Europe Day was already a tradition for SISEC (an academic formula launched back in 1995 in order to prepare national experts in European affairs, offering academic post-graduate degrees in High European Studies). With the financial support from the Jean Monnet Programme (DG Education and Culture, European Commission), a first migration panel was organised in the framework of the international colloquium ‘Romania and the European Union in 2007’ held in Timisoara between 6 and 7 of May 2005 (panel Migration, Asylum and Human Rights at the Eastern Border of the European Union). Having in mind the positive welcoming of the migration related subjects during the 2005 colloquium, a second event was organised on 5 May 2006 in the framework of the European Year of Workers’ Mobility: the international colloquium Migration and Mobility: Assets and Challenges for the Enlargement of the European Union. In the same period, the Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence, SISEC and The British Council in Bucharest have jointly edited two special issues of The Romanian Journal of European Studies, no.4/2005 and 5-6/2006, both dedicated to migration and mobility. Preliminary versions of many of the chapters of this volume were presented at the above mentioned international events. The papers were chosen according to their scientific quality, after an anonymously peer-review selection. The authors debate both theoretical issues and practical results of their research. They are renowned experts at international level, members of the academia, PhD students or experienced practitioners involved in the management of the migration flows at the governmental level. This volume was financed by the Jean Monnet Programme of the Directorate General Education and Culture, European Commission, throughout the Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence (C03/0110) within the West University of Timisoara, Romania, and is dedicated to the European Year of Workers’ Mobility 2006. Timisoara, December 2006
Editura Universitatii de Vest
Silasi, Grigore
Simina, Ovidiu Laurian.
2008-12
Book
PeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9748/1/SILASI_SIMINA_migration%2C_mobility_and_human_rights_2008.pdf
Ruspini, Paolo and Hiriş, Liliana and Geiger, Martin and Wersching, Simona and Simina, Ovidiu Laurian and Levine, Samuel Jay and Schulz, Wolfgang P. and Heikkilä, Elli and Pikkarainen, Maria and Feridun, Mete and Ivlevs, Artjoms and Bicanová, Radka and Figlová, Zuzana and Kačerová, Eva and Lötzer, Rüdiger and Parasca, Teofil and Groutsis, Dimitria and Unal, Bayram and Baldwin-Edwards, Martin and Mircea, Alexandru and Pristavu, Anca Cristina and Silaşi, Grigore and Constantin, Daniela Luminiţa and Vădăsan, Ioana and Cismaş, Laura and Oprea, Florin and Popescu, Ada Iuliana and Cǎmǎrǎşan, Adriana Vasile and Petrescu, Gabriela Elena. (2008) Migration, Mobility and Human Rights at the Eastern Border of the European Union - Space of Freedom and Security. Editura Universitatii de Vest, p. 413.
http://aei.pitt.edu/9748/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:10758
2011-02-15T23:10:24Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033394575726F7065616E636974697A656E73686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:73706469736372696D696E6174696F6E6D696E6F726974696573
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D6F74686572
Implementation of Directive 2004/38 in the context of EU Enlargement: A proliferation of different forms of citizenship? CEPS Special Report, 9 April 2009
Carrera, Sergio
Faure Atger, Anaïs.
immigration policy
European citizenship
free movement/border control
discrimination/minorities
enlargement
This paper assesses the impact and potential effects of inadequate domestic transposition of Directive 2004/38 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States and the effects of the transitional arrangements secured in the latest rounds of enlargement on the status and practice of European citizenship in an enlarged EU. The authors argue that one of the major consequences of these processes has been the proliferation of different forms of European citizenship whose normative framing and implementation by the nation-states foster differential treatment that sometimes conflicts with fundamental rights. They also highlight that the narrow national interpretations of the scope of rights conferred by European citizenship are subject to supranational guarantees provided by the EU legal system.
2009-04
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/10758/1/1827.pdf
Carrera, Sergio and Faure Atger, Anaïs. (2009) Implementation of Directive 2004/38 in the context of EU Enlargement: A proliferation of different forms of citizenship? CEPS Special Report, 9 April 2009. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/10758/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:10781
2011-02-23T15:12:51Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:4430303130333968756D616E726967687473
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726C61626F72
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737077656C666172657374617465
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032696E7465726E6174696F6E616C65636F6E6F6D79
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D656D706C6F796D656E74756E656D706C6F796D656E74
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:4430303268726469
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:643030314C6973626F6E6167656E6461
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D61727469636C65
Romania, A Country in Need of Workers? The Bitter Taste of “Strawberry Jam”
Silasi, Grigore
Simina, Ovidiu Laurian.
free movement/border control
international economy
human rights & democracy initiatives
welfare state
employment/unemployment
European Neighbourhood Policy
Lisbon StrategyAgenda/Partnership for Growth and Employment
immigration policy
labour/labor
Romania
human rights
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
The paper is a contribution at the scientific debate of migration and mobility issues in the context of an enlarged European Union (EU-27). We consider that Romania, a country with a labour market that faces distortions, will benefit from migration on short term, but will need to import labour force in order to maintain the development trend. Remittances, as result of Romanians emigration after 2002, helped the economic development of the country in the last years (remittances’ inflow doubled the FDI). As a response to the media debate regarding Romania’s emigration, we consider that the fear of mass migration from Romania following the year 2007 is not justified. While the European (and mostly British) media cries on the threat of Bulgarians and Romanians’ emigration, as following to the 2007 accession, the scientific reports say that the A8 countries’ migration benefits to economy of the EU15 countries. In the same time, the Romanian media and the Romanian entrepreneurs announce the ‘Chinese invasion’ and the lack of labour in construction, industry and even agriculture. We see labour as goods: the economic theory say that goods are moving with the prices, the highest price attracts (more) goods. Romania is not only a gateway for the East-West international migration (like Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece for the South-North direction), but a labour market in need of workers. While a big part of the labour force is already migrated, mostly to the SE Europe (some 2.5m workers are cited to be abroad, with both legal and illegal/irregular status), the Romanian companies could not find local workers to use them in order to benefit from the money inflow targeting Romania in the light of its new membership to the European Union (foreign investments and European post accession funds). Instead of increasing the salaries, the local employers rather prefer to ‘import’ workers from poorer countries (Moldavians, Chinese, Ukrainians, who still accept a lower wage as compared to the medium wage in Romania, but bigger enough as compared to those from their countries of origin).
Editura Universitatii de Vest, Timisoara
SIMINA, Ovidiu Laurian
2007
Article
PeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/10781/1/RJES_5%2D6.2007_Silasi%2DSimina.pdf
Silasi, Grigore and Simina, Ovidiu Laurian. (2007) Romania, A Country in Need of Workers? The Bitter Taste of “Strawberry Jam”. The Romanian Journal of European Studies, 5/6. pp. 179-205. ISSN 1583-199X
http://aei.pitt.edu/10781/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:10782
2012-01-26T02:17:56Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65666167656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:4430303130333968756D616E726967687473
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F7067646D706D
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D67656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303130
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726C61626F72
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D6173796C756D706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303132
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032696E7465726E6174696F6E616C65636F6E6F6D79
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303230
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D656D706C6F796D656E74756E656D706C6F796D656E74
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:636F6E726573
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:4430303268726469
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:643030314C6973626F6E6167656E6461
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65666165636F6E6F6D6963706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D626F6F6B
"Special Issue on Migration". The Romanian Journal of European Studies, 5-6, 2007
free movement/border control
EU-South-Eastern Europe (Balkans)
regionalism, international
development
human rights & democracy initiatives
European Neighbourhood Policy
Lisbon StrategyAgenda/Partnership for Growth and Employment
immigration policy
Romania
asylum policy
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
international economy
economic policy
employment/unemployment
labour/labor
general
human rights
conflict resolution/crisis management
general
decision making/policy-making
Economics, demography, war, persecution/repression and ecology are generally accepted as being the main source for international migration. If we put the mentality/culture among all this factors, as a major topic in understanding the phenomena which drive migration, the picture seems to widen. As mentioned in an earlier article quoted in my contribution for this special double-issue of The Romanian Journal of European Studies (authored in co-operation with Prof. Silaşi from the West University of Timişoara), before deciding to migrate, one must cross one ore more border(s): real but mostly ‘imagined’ or ‘imaginary’ borders. It is very important for each person to surpass his/her own mentality before to chose to put behind house, family, children, community and social life, and to move to other region, country or even continent for a better life. The mentality regarding the (decision to) migration is close related to the amount of information available and mainly of education. In the same time, migratory movements could become elements for an increasingly conflicting situation when there is a lack of integration of immigrants and migration policies, related to the lack of education regarding acceptance of immigrants (the mentality) and understanding of the migration phenomenon. In order to understand migration, one should know about it, firstly. When learned about migration, one may study it deeply, to see and understand the causes, consequences and implications, to learn how to take the risks and how to manage migration. Studying migration in Romania… It is not very simple. Because nowadays is more common to find migration related headlines in the media, than migration subjects in the university curricula. Starting with January 2002, Romanians travelled freely within the EU15 territory, without holding a visa for the Schengen Area. But migration became ‘a topic’ in Romania after the accession of the A8 countries (May 1st, 2004) only, and mainly around the moment of the country’s accession to the European Union. A decade ago and up to 2004, it was difficult to find academic information about Romania on migration, to compare the findings with those presented in the scientific literature abroad, to reveal similarities or differences from other countries in the region or within the European Union. Only a few reports, mostly commissioned by some international organisations, focused on migration from Romania to the European Union. During a conference in Helsinki in September 2002, I was very (positively) surprised by the welcoming of my empirical research about Romania as source and transit country for international migration: some participants asked me where/how to find such data about Romania, as provided in my paper. Indeed, at that time, it was quite a challenge to find reliable figures or good reports in order to prepare a scientific paper. Things changed since 2002, both at the national and the European level (nowadays, we may say that everybody is working on migration, reports on migration are released several times per year at the European level). But even now, when some Romanian universities and NGOs are interested in doing such research, I consider we still don’t have enough research on migration. More of that, the majority of studies are sociological, only a few uses economics for analyse, and don’t focus on all aspects. The most important socio-economic study on Romanian migration after 1990, and widely quoted after its release, could be Constantin et al. (2004), a research commissioned by the European Institute of Romania (a governmental funded body), but this uses data available before the biggest wave of EU enlargement, and some hypotheses may be already changed since then. We don’t have enough research on migration as a whole, migration and mobility being analysed from different points of view – social, economical, legal etc. On the other hand, I was not able to find Romanian studies on the legal aspects of migration. It seems to me that Romania still doesn’t have experts on legal issues as related to migration, asylum, mobility and freedom of establishment (and I do hope I am wrong!). By editing a second issue dedicated to migration and mobility, the Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence within the West University of Timişoara, editor of The Romanian Journal of European Studies, emphasises the need for migration and mobility research in Romania. At this time, Romanian doesn’t have ‘migration studies’ in the university curricula, migration and mobility are studies as subjects in Economics, Sociology and European Studies, among the most important area of academic research. The team of the Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence consider that Romanian university need ‘migration studies’ too. Romania should be understood as part of the European Migration Space not only as a source of labourers for the European labour market, but also as source for quality research in this matter for the European scientific arena. European Union member since 2007, Romania is part of the European area of freedom, security and justice and therefore it is interested in solving correctly all challenges incurred by the complex phenomena of migration and workers’ mobility at the European and international level. The Europe of the last few years was confronted with some major challenges: the accession of twelve new Member States, ratification of the Treaty on European Constitution, the debate on the common budged for 2007-2013, some social movement/riots with ethnic roots, the establishing of the new agenda regarding the area of security and justice, or the mobility for labour of the new Member States. Maybe one of the hottest topics was the liberalising of the accession to the European labour market for the new EU citizens from the A8 states. Together with the waves of illegal immigrants arriving continuously on the Spanish, Italian and Maltese shores, the labour mobility/migration for work of the citizens from the 8 states from the Central and Eastern Europe forced both the EU officials and the citizens from the EU15 states (the so-called ‘Old Europe’) to open the debate on the economical and mostly social consequences of labour mobility. The European Year of Workers’ Mobility 2006 has raised peoples' awareness of their rights to work in another EU country and how to exercise them, reinforced tools to help them find a job abroad, and highlighted the remaining obstacles to a genuine European job market. The collection of valuable papers on migration and mobility from issues of The Romanian Journal of European Studies No.4/2005 and No.5-6/2007, along with the colloquiums organized in Timişoara in May 2005 and May 2006, should be seen as our contribution to this important debate. The papers from this special double-issue were put together according to their scientific quality, after an anonymously peer-review selection. There are twelve papers covering migration from different points of view (unfortunately, we still do not have juridical papers). The twenty authors (and co-authors) belong to economic and social sciences, coming from sixteen universities from the Europe and the Americas. They put under debate both theoretical issues and practical results of their research. After I had the opportunity to co-organise two international colloquiums on mobility and migration (Timişoara, May 2005 and May 2006) in the framework of the Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence of the West University of Timişoara, I was honoured to accept the important challenge of editing this special double-issue of The Romanian Journal of European Studies as Guest-editor. I thank Professor Silaşi and the editorial team for their full support. I hope I managed to do a good job here, because working at this issue emphasised the sentiment that I must do all my best to continue the idea which was at the origin of the Migratie.ro project of the School of High Comparative European Studies (SISEC) of the West University of Timişoara: promoting the idea of introducing the mobility and migration studies in the academic curricula of the Romanian universities.
Editura Universitatii de Vest, Timisoara
Simina, Ovidiu Laurian
2007
Book
PeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/10782/1/Romanian_Journal_of_European_Studies_5%2D6.2007_FULL.pdf
Simina, Ovidiu Laurian, ed. (2007) "Special Issue on Migration". The Romanian Journal of European Studies, 5-6, 2007. Journals > West University of Timisoara, Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence > The Romanian Journal of European Studies <http://aei.pitt.edu/view/series/wuotjmecoetrjoes.html>, 5/6 . Editura Universitatii de Vest, Timisoara.
http://aei.pitt.edu/10782/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:10962
2011-02-15T23:11:43Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D6F74686572
Informing the Borders Debate. CEPS Special Reports, 18 May 2009
Guild, Elspeth
Carrera, Sergio
Eggenschwiler, Alejandro
free movement/border control
This Background Briefing is one in a set of four dealing, respectively, with immigration, asylum, borders and data protection. They are produced as part of a CEPS project on “Informing the Immigration Debate: Preparing for the European Parliament Elections 4-7 June” supported by the Barrow Cadbury Trust, an independent charitable foundation that funds and promotes social justice initiatives (for more information, see http://www.bctrust.org.uk). The Background Briefings aim to inform the debate about these controversial and often technical issues for the political parties as they prepare for the EP elections and address the voting public.
2009-05
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/10962/1/1843[1].pdf
Guild, Elspeth and Carrera, Sergio and Eggenschwiler, Alejandro (2009) Informing the Borders Debate. CEPS Special Reports, 18 May 2009. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/10962/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:11033
2011-02-15T23:12:13Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D61727469636C65
La politique de voisinage face au délicat dilemme de la mobilité. = The European Neighborhood Policy facing the difficult dilemma of mobility
Boniface, Jérôme
Wesseling, Mara.
immigration policy
free movement/border control
European Neighbourhood Policy
No abstract.
2008-03
Article
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/11033/1/20090130170745_SCOPE2008%2D3_4_Boniface_Wesseling.pdf
Boniface, Jérôme and Wesseling, Mara. (2008) La politique de voisinage face au délicat dilemme de la mobilité. = The European Neighborhood Policy facing the difficult dilemma of mobility. EIPAScope, 2008 (3). pp. 1-6.
http://aei.pitt.edu/11033/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:13697
2011-02-15T23:28:39Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303132
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737077656C666172657374617465
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Un certo grado di solidarieta. Libera circolazione delle persone e accesso al welfare nella giurisprudenza della corte di giustizia delle comunita europee. = A certain degree of solidarity. Free movement of persons and access to welfare in the European Court of Justice. WP C.S.D.L.E. "Massimo D'Antona" .INT - 62/2008
Giubboni, Stefano.
free movement/border control
welfare state
European Court of Justice/Court of First Instance
No abstract.
2008
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/13697/1/giubboni_n62%2D2008int.pdf
Giubboni, Stefano. (2008) Un certo grado di solidarieta. Libera circolazione delle persone e accesso al welfare nella giurisprudenza della corte di giustizia delle comunita europee. = A certain degree of solidarity. Free movement of persons and access to welfare in the European Court of Justice. WP C.S.D.L.E. "Massimo D'Antona" .INT - 62/2008. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/13697/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:14049
2011-02-15T23:30:55Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D67656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303035
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726C61626F72
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D656D706C6F796D656E74756E656D706C6F796D656E74
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
Romania and the New Economy of Migration: Costs, Decision, Networks, Development. SISEC Discussion Paper Vol. 7, No. 2, November 2008
Silasi, Grigore
Simina, Ovidiu Laurian.
immigration policy
labour/labor
free movement/border control
Romania
general
EU-Central and Eastern Europe
employment/unemployment
In some earlier studies, as a response to the media debate during the hot summer of 2006, regarding Romania’s emigration as following the accession to the EU, we were saying that the fear of mass migration from Romania was not justified. Romania is not only a gateway for the East-West international migration (like Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece for the South-North direction), but a labour market in need of workers. Nowadays, almost two years after January 1st, 2007, the facts prove our prediction as being true. While a big part of the labour force is already migrated, mostly to the SE Europe (some 2.5m workers are cited to be abroad, with both legal and illegal/irregular status, even before the EU enlargement), the Romanian companies could not find local workers to use them in order to benefit from the money inflow targeting Romania in the light of its new membership to the European Union (foreign investments and European post accession funds). Instead of increasing the salaries, the local employers rather prefer to ‘import’ workers from poorer countries (Moldavians, Chinese, Ukrainians and others who still accept a lower wage as compared to the medium wage in Romania, but bigger enough as compared to those from their countries of origin).
2008-11
Discussion Paper
PeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/14049/1/SDP_7%2D2%2D2008_Silasi_Simina.pdf
Silasi, Grigore and Simina, Ovidiu Laurian. (2008) Romania and the New Economy of Migration: Costs, Decision, Networks, Development. SISEC Discussion Paper Vol. 7, No. 2, November 2008. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/14049/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:14411
2011-02-15T23:33:29Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:4430303130333968756D616E726967687473
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F706767656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303132
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:4C6973626F6E547265617479
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:4430303170707061
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166666C65676974696D616379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D626F6F6B
Normativity, Fundamental Rights and Legal Order in the EU
Timsit, Gerard
Gnes, Matteo
Mathieu, Bertrand
Nihoul, Pierre
Opperman, Thomas
Raulus, Helen
Jacque, Jean Paul.
free movement/border control
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
general
public policy/public administration
human rights
legitimacy
Lisbon Treaty
European Court of Justice/Court of First Instance
Two years ago, specifically on 23 May 2008, the European Public Law Organization (EPLO) Branch in Bucharest was established in the presence of Prof.Dr. Spyridon Flogaitis, Director, President of the Board of Directors and important Romanian and Hellenic officials. Hosted by the National School of Political Studies and Public Administration (NSPSPA) through the Faculty of Public Administration, the EPLO Branch in Bucharest has marked an important moment in view of extending and developing EPLO specific activities and has encompassed an activity of collaboration of over a decade between the two institutions. The forms of collaboration, already traditional: joint European programmes, participation in the European Public Law Academy, mobility of students, doctoral students and teaching staff will be diversified. The start of a cycle of conferences on actual topics of the European Union construction, legal, administrative and managerial substantiation of the important processes represents such a form. Conducted under the aegis "The Dialogues of EPLO at NSPSPA", the conferences have enjoyed the participation of recognized academic personalities from prestigious European universities. The conferences have carried forth scientific events for the Romanian academia, in view to increase EPLO prestige, to acquire knowledge and disseminate its activities. The current volume gathers the content of the first conferences, circumscribing to important concepts of the theory and practice of the EU construction: normativity, fundamental rights or legal order. Of course the reader's thorough analysis when studying the current volume will get us close or far away from the three concepts, already stated. Thus, the first topic "La Regulation, une forme moderne de la normativite?" of Professor Gérard Timsit debates, from doctrine view, the specific difference between "regulation" and "reglementation", taking into consideration "the crisis of traditional normativity" developing towards "a new social normativity". Considering the societies' complexity, the author identifies another crisis of "the deficit of legitimacy", leading to "the deficit of societies' complexity and their governance systems". Professor Timsit, whose work substantiates the programmes on theory and science of administration within the framework of NSPSPA, reveals the necessity of new changes in view of better understanding the complexity: transforming the bureaucratic state into a strategic state, thus triggering a reshaped administration, able to deal the society's empirical realities in times of crisis or disaster. The issues specific for the transformations of the European institutions after the Lisbon Treaty are approached by Professor Jean Paul Jacque, who insists on "strengthening the effectiveness of the EU institutional system" through the democratisation of law-making within the Council, enlargement of the scope of the co-decision procedure etc. The comparative analysis between the provisions of the former EU Constitution and those of Lisbon Treaty emphasises the necessity of national parliaments' participation and promotion of participative democracy in view of democratization of law-making within the Council. In the conclusions of the conference, the author presents "the open democratic space that has to be occupied by political actors and citizens", which should abandon the traditional behaviour in the European elections, insisting on relevant matters concerning the competences and contents of the EU policies. The perspective opened by Lisbon Treaty on fundamental rights protection in the European Union provides for the first time a mandatory set of fundamental rights. Corroborating this fact with the provisions of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, common questions emerge, finding an answer in Professor Helena Raulus's conference. The questions refer to the meaning of that new fundamental rights system for the Union or Member States as well as to the EU role in strengthening the fundamental human rights and creating a new mechanism for monitoring the human rights infringement by the Member States. A final conclusion, quite interesting for the debated topic refers to the fact that in the emphasised context, the Union does not gain any new competences or tasks on human rights protection and the provisions of the Charter are mainly directed to the Union institutions and to the Member States only when they are acting within the scope of the Union law. Matteo Gnes's conference tries to address other question: "European legal integration: new possibilities for EU and non-EU citizens?" Based on a broad range of relevant cases, Centros, Akrich or Polish plumber, the conclusion of the conference refers to the phenomena due to the convergence of market forces and legal principles embodied in the principles of free movement. Even if some of those phenomena may foster Euro sceptic attitudes, the final conclusion is: "European integration is an extremely positive central aspect of everyday life of every European citizen". In addition to the topics on fundamental rights and freedoms, it emerges the issue of the public contracts in the European law. The debate with legal and economic features, presented by Professor Pierre Nihoul is structured on the principles of competition, transparency and neutrality and it highlights the necessity to take into consideration the social, environmental, ethic and fair concerns on the public markets. In this context, however, it is worth to mention a conclusion. It refers, on one hand, to the fact that the opportunities provided by the legal texts remain limited and, on the other hand, the exercise of public powers does not sufficiently reflect the development of the legal debate. The contents of the other two conferences are complementary, being focused on the EU democratic legal order, respectively the European judiciary. The most important issues addressed by Professor Bertrand Mathiew in his conference refer to the legitimacy of the European legal order and to the interrogation on: "European Parliament, a representation of the European citizens?" We also find the response to those topics or questions in the second part of the presentation concerning the European Parliament which is considered an institution participating in the democratic functioning of the European Union; thus it becomes "an instrument of embryo for separation of powers", and its representative function is challenged by other forms of democratic expression. Professor Thomas Oppermann presents his arguments and the structures triggering the European judiciary. As a cross-national democracy observing the rule of law, the EU needs an independent judiciary system – the third power, the constitutive Treaties legitimate the fact that the EU is a "Union of law", interpreting and enforcing the European law. The European legislation is mandatory in all Member States.
The Economica Publishing House,Bucharest,Romania
Matei, Lucica.
2010-07
Book
PeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/14411/1/Normativity[1]_Lucica_Matei.pdf
Timsit, Gerard and Gnes, Matteo and Mathieu, Bertrand and Nihoul, Pierre and Opperman, Thomas and Raulus, Helen and Jacque, Jean Paul. (2010) Normativity, Fundamental Rights and Legal Order in the EU. The Economica Publishing House,Bucharest,Romania, p. 171.
http://aei.pitt.edu/14411/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:14579
2011-02-15T23:34:39Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Towards a Common European Border Service? CEPS Working Document No. 331, June 2010
Carrera, Sergio.
free movement/border control
What should be the future institutional configurations of the second generation of the EU’s Integrated Border Management strategy for the common external borders? The Stockholm Programme endorsed by the European Council on December 2009 and the European Commission’s action plan implementing it published in April 2010 have brought back to the EU policy agenda the feasibility of setting up a European system of border guards as a long-term policy vision. This Working Document examines the origins of this proposal and aims at thinking ahead by asserting that any future discussion and study in this context should be refocused by initially addressing two central questions: First, what kind of 'border guard' and what kinds of 'border controls' does the EU need in light of the current EU acquis on external border crossings and the Schengen Borders Code? Second, what would be the 'added value' of any new institutional arrangement at the current stage of European integration? Author Sergio Carrera, CEPS Research Fellow, argues that these questions could presage the establishment of a common European border service aimed at i) guaranteeing a uniform implementation and high-standard application of EU border law and the materialisation of a European approach to external border controls; ii) ensuring the respect of fundamental rights and guarantees in all external border control-related activities; iii) facilitating the (de)politicisation and accountability of external border controls; and iv) addressing issues of solidarity and mutual trust building across the external borders in an enlarged EU.
2010-06
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/14579/1/Towards_a_Common_European_Border_Service_by_Carrera_edited_final.pdf
Carrera, Sergio. (2010) Towards a Common European Border Service? CEPS Working Document No. 331, June 2010. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/14579/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:14583
2011-02-15T23:34:40Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Remaking Europe's Borders through the European Neighbourhood Policy. CEPS Working Document No. 327, March 2010
Dimitrovova, Bohdana.
free movement/border control
European Neighbourhood Policy
This Working Document explores the implications of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) as an ambitious EU foreign policy for the development of a European political community. It suggests that the ENP can be viewed as an attempt to reconcile two potentially contradictory processes. The first – ‘border confirming’ – is about confirming border areas of demarcation and division, in which borders are conceived as boundary lines, frontier zones or barriers that protect the European Union and its citizens. The second – ‘border transcending’ – consists of a challenge to open EU borders and involves the transformation of the EU’s external boundaries into zones of interactions, opportunities and exchanges, with the emphasis on the transcendence of boundaries. To unpick some of the contradictions surrounding the highly contested phenomena of mobility in the neighbourhood, this paper analyses three bordering strategies: state borders, the imperial analogy and borders as networks. Each corresponds to different forms of territoriality and implies a different mode of control over the population.
2010-03
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/14583/1/WD_No._327_by_Dimitrovova_on_Remaking_Europe's_Borders.pdf
Dimitrovova, Bohdana. (2010) Remaking Europe's Borders through the European Neighbourhood Policy. CEPS Working Document No. 327, March 2010. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/14583/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:14993
2011-02-15T23:37:37Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D67656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Border Security, Technology and the Stockholm Programme. INEX Policy Brief No. 3, November 2009
Bigo, Didier
Jeandesboz, Julien.
free movement/border control
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
general
The draft document of the Stockholm programme places considerable emphasis on technology in the context of the EU’s security policies. Among its most notable elements is the proposal to establish "an EU Information Management Strategy". Despite an emphasis on citizens' freedoms and rights, and on the protection of their personal data and privacy, the programme remains overtly oriented towards the reinforcement of the reliance on technology within the context of EU security policies, particularly computerised systems of information exchange and data processing. These, in turn, are largely defined in terms of the priorities and viewpoints of security professionals. This paper focuses more specifically on issues related to technology and border security. In this area, the draft programme reflects an endorsement of previous tendencies, particularly of the Commission’s 2008 "border package", tabled shortly before the departure of JHA Commissioner Franco Frattini, and of the 2008 "Future Group" final report. The tendency, in this regard, is towards the proliferation of computerised systems of information exchange and processing, with little regard to the question of proportionality.
2009-11
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/14993/1/border%2Dsecurity%2Dtechnology%2Dstockholm%2Dprogramme.pdf
Bigo, Didier and Jeandesboz, Julien. (2009) Border Security, Technology and the Stockholm Programme. INEX Policy Brief No. 3, November 2009. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/14993/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:15491
2013-09-22T19:58:21Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303134
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303133
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Reinforcing Interregional Cooperation between the EU and the GCC: Scenarios for a modification of visa policies. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe, January 2011
Faure Atger, Anais
Guild, Elspeth.
free movement/border control
EU-Middle East
EU-Islam
Both the EU and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) are major political and economic actors, and the development of strategic partnerships in selected areas between the regions is among the priorities on their respective agendas. The existence of complex visa policies and practices between the two regions, however, constitutes a fundamental barrier preventing the promotion of exchanges between these regions when encouraging people-to-people contacts, developing commercial relations or exchanging knowledge. This paper aims at evaluating the possibilities for the visa rules of both regions being modified in order to reflect the privileged partnership that the EU and the GCC are willing to further develop. It concludes by putting forward policy recommendations and three scenarios on the possible ways to overcome current issues and implement new strategies for visa policy in the context of public diplomacy and outreach in EU–GCC relations.
2011-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/15491/1/No_36_Visa_Policies_by_Faure%2DAtger_%26_Guild%2D1.pdf
Faure Atger, Anais and Guild, Elspeth. (2011) Reinforcing Interregional Cooperation between the EU and the GCC: Scenarios for a modification of visa policies. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe, January 2011. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/15491/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:31639
2014-07-18T01:25:47Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
A race against solidarity: the Schengen regime and the Franco-Italian affair. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe, April 2011
Carrera, Sergio
Guild, Elspeth
Merlino, Massimo.
Parkin, Joanna.
France
Italy
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
free movement/border control
In April 2011, France reintroduced internal border checks with Italy to prevent mobility by North African immigrants who hold temporary residence permits issued by Italy and who had entered the EU from Tunisia as a result of revolutions and war in the southern Mediterranean region. This has caused a diplomatic row between the two countries and provoked strong reactions other EU member states and at EU level. This paper examines the compatibility of the Italian and French measures with EU border legislation and legal principles as well as the foundations of the Schengen regime. It argues that the Franco-Italian affair illustrates a ‘race to the bottom’ on European principles of solidarity, loyal cooperation and fundamental rights. The affair ultimately reveals the very limits and unfinished elements of the EU’s immigration and border policies. Finally, the paper puts forward policy recommendations to the parties involved.
2011-04
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/31639/1/The_Franco%2DItalian_Affair.pdf
http://shop.ceps.eu/book/race-against-solidarity-schengen-regime-and-franco-italian-affair
Carrera, Sergio and Guild, Elspeth and Merlino, Massimo. and Parkin, Joanna. (2011) A race against solidarity: the Schengen regime and the Franco-Italian affair. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe, April 2011. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/31639/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:32325
2011-09-13T14:55:42Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D45:45303130
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303136:4430303230313643656E7472616C41736961
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6566617472616465706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:64303032627372
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303137
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303139
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Europe deploys towards a civil-military strategy for CSDP. Egmont Paper No. 49, June 2011
Biscop, Sven.
Coelmont, Jo.
energy policy (Including international arena)
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
Central Asia
EU-ACP
EU-Eastern Partnership
UN
EU-Black Sea region
trade policy
free movement/border control
Executive summary. CSDP: Strategy Needed.
Why does Europe develop the military and civilian capabilities that it does? Why does it undertake the military and civilian operations that it does? And why in other cases does it refrain from action?
The answers to these questions would amount to a civilian-military strategy for the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). Starting from the EU’s vital interests, an analysis of the threats and challenges to these interests, and the EU’s foreign policy priorities, a CSDP strategy would outline the priority regions and issues for CSDP and, in function of the long-term political objectives and the appropriate political roadmap for those regions and issues, scenarios in which launching an operation could be appropriate.
Without strategy, we can never be sure that the operations that we do are actually the most relevant and important that we could undertake. We cannot direct the operations that we do undertake to achieve the desired strategic effect. And we cannot focus capability development if we do not know our strategic priorities.
Many of the building-blocks of a CSDP strategy already exist. What remains to be done is to connect the dots and render explicit: (1) for which priority regions and issues we must plan and prepare, (2) for which possible scenarios that may require a CSDP operation, and (3) identify the implications for our capabilities
and a roadmap to meet those requirements.
Priority Regions and Issues.
The regions and issues on which CSDP ought to focus are those where our vital interests are most directly at stake:
• Defence against any military threat to the territory of the Union.
• Open lines of communication and trade (in physical as well as in cyber
space).
• A secure supply of energy and other vital natural resources.
• A sustainable environment.
• Manageable migration flows.
• The maintenance of international law (including the UN Charter and the treaties and regulations of the key international organizations) and of universally agreed rights.
• Preserving the autonomy of the decision-making of the EU and its Member States.
That does not mean that the EU will disregard other regions and issues, but it does provide the focus for early warning and prevention, and for permanent contingency planning for:
• The Eastern Neighbourhood (the Baltic to the Black Sea).
• The Southern Neighbourhood (the Dardanelles to Gibraltar).
• The Gulf.
• Central Asia.
• Sub-Sahara Africa.
• Maritime security.
• Collective security under the UN, notably the Responsibility to Protect.
If the main focus of CSDP is on the external security of the Union, it does have a complementary role to play in our internal security as well, notably in the implementation of the Solidarity Clause, and including perhaps, in the future, in our collective defence.
Scenarios for Operations.
For the purpose of military planning, as well as to guide military capability
development, the EU military bodies have elaborated five illustrative scenarios.
These no longer cover all operations that the EU already is undertaking. Five
new scenarios ought to be added:
• A Maritime Security Scenario.
• A Cyber Security Scenario.
• A Support Operations Scenario.
• A Counter-Terrorism Scenario.
• An Internal Security Scenario.
Capability Implications.
In order to stay in tune with today’s higher level of crisis management activity, the existing military Headline Goal has to be interpreted broadly. The aim to be able to sustain a corps level deployment (50 to 60,000 troops) for at least one year should be understood as a deployment which EU Member States must be able to undertake at any one time over and above ongoing operations. Then the EU would be able to deal with every eventuality.
Generating the necessary capabilities requires an ambitious approach to pooling & sharing, but also to go beyond it and create a Permanent Capability Conference as a durable strategic-level platform for harmonization of national defence planning as such, rather than project-by-project coordination only.
With regard to civilian capabilities, achieving the original civilian Headline Goal would already constitute a significant improvement, but there is a lack of implementation and follow-through by the Member States. If decentralised civilian capacity-building does not work, the EU should have recourse to sizeable standby
pools of civilian personnel which are pre-identified, trained, and ready for deployment.
There is scope for combining military and civilian capability development in at least five areas: communications, information, transport, protection and logistics.
The EU could be the first to create a permanent civilian-military Operational Headquarters (OHQ), in Brussels, which could plan for and conduct both civilian and military operations and, allowing for close interaction with all relevant EU actors, could implement a truly comprehensive approach to crisis management.
Information gathering, analysis and dissemination are strategic enablers for any military or civilian operation or mission. A real Intelligence Fusion and Analysis Centre should replace the scattered poles of intelligence within the EU institutions.
From Strategy to Action.
Adopting a strategy for CSDP will not in itself guarantee resolute action in each and every crisis. But forging a consensus on priority regions and issues and drawing the conclusions from that for our capabilities, including planning and conduct, will focus our preventive, long-term efforts, and will certainly make us better prepared for action in any contingency.
Being more prepared and knowing in advance what our priority regions and issues are, and why, will then hopefully also strengthen the political will to generate action under the EU flag by the able and willing Member States, and will thus make for an EU that carries its weight on the global stage.
Biscop, Sven.
Coelmont, Jo.
2011-06
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/32325/1/ep49.pdf
http://www.egmontinstitute.be/paperegm/ep49.pdf
Biscop, Sven. and Coelmont, Jo. (2011) Europe deploys towards a civil-military strategy for CSDP. Egmont Paper No. 49, June 2011. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/32325/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:32452
2011-09-21T16:56:09Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D46:46303133
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303034
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303230
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737067656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303037
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:73706469736372696D696E6174696F6E6D696E6F726974696573
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303135
74797065733D626F6F6B
Towards the completion of Europe. Analysis and perspectives of the new European Union enlargement.
Abraham, David
Akbar , Yusaf H.
Böhm, Monika
Crawford, Beverly
Domínguez , Roberto
Eralp , Atila
Granell, Francesc
Gungor, Gaye
Ibryamova, Nuray
Ilcheva, Maria
Krok-Paszkowska, Ania.
Laursen, Finn
Lemke, Christiane
Maas, Willem
Nugent, Neill
Roy, Joaquín
Royo, Sebastián
Schimmelfennig, Frank
Thiel, Markus
Vilpisauskas, Ramunas
environmental policy (including international arena)
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
EU-Mediterranean/Union for the Mediterranean
development
enlargement
European Parliament
Estonia
Germany
Hungary
Latvia
Lithuania
Portugal
Romania
Slovak Republic
Spain
Turkey
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
discrimination/minorities
general
free movement/border control
This volume aims to contribute to the analysis of the EU in general
and the background and consequences of its 2004 enlargement
in particular. This enlargement is by far one of the greatest tests
for the European Union and its institutions because the process
of Europeanization is taking place in a variety of countries with
diverse political cultures and dissimilar perceptions about the
meaning and commitment to European integration. Given their
differences in political and economic power, incumbent and new
members are inevitably altering the functioning and character of
the EU, a unique polity in the international system. Derived from
this theoretical challenge, the chapters of this book suggest some
explanations on six areas related to the 2004 enlargement: analytical
approaches, citizens and identities, debates and regional transformations,
external impacts, and the potential Turkey’s membership.
The articles included in this publication are the result of the
academic initiative of the Miami European Union Center, partnership
formed by the University of Miami and Florida International
University since 2000, which was also selected by the European
Commission as one of the ten European Union Centers of Excellence
in the United States for the period 2005|2008.
Jean Monnet Chair/University of Miami
Roy, Joaquín
Dominguez, Roberto
2006
Book
PeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/32452/1/EU_enlarg%2Dbook%2Dtext%2Bcover.pdf
http://www6.miami.edu/eucenter/
Abraham, David and Akbar , Yusaf H. and Böhm, Monika and Crawford, Beverly and Domínguez , Roberto and Eralp , Atila and Granell, Francesc and Gungor, Gaye and Ibryamova, Nuray and Ilcheva, Maria and Krok-Paszkowska, Ania. and Laursen, Finn and Lemke, Christiane and Maas, Willem and Nugent, Neill and Roy, Joaquín and Royo, Sebastián and Schimmelfennig, Frank and Thiel, Markus and Vilpisauskas, Ramunas (2006) Towards the completion of Europe. Analysis and perspectives of the new European Union enlargement. Jean Monnet Chair/University of Miami. ISBN 0963867873
http://aei.pitt.edu/32452/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:32571
2011-12-30T20:35:01Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D67656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D6173796C756D706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:747068616A63636D636D
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D626F6F6B
Striking a Balance between Freedom, Security and Justice. CEPS Paperback. October 2002
Anderson, Malcom
Apap, Joanna
criminal matters (organized crime, drug & sex trade)
asylum policy
free movement/border control
general
immigration policy
This monograph surveys the achievements of the European Union in the field of Justice and Home Affairs and analyses the pro’s and con’s of setting up an area of freedom, security and justice. The inter-connections between internal and external security issues are carefully examined - both from a practical and institutional point of view-and consideration is given to how to avoid excessive “securitisation” of society. It argues for the need to take an integrated approach towards these issues in order to ensure that the right balance is actually being struck between these three dimensions.
2002-10
Book
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/32571/1/10._Striking_a_Balance_between_Freedom%2C_Security_and_Justice.pdf
http://www.ceps.be/book/striking-balance-between-freedom-security-and-justice
Anderson, Malcom and Apap, Joanna (2002) Striking a Balance between Freedom, Security and Justice. CEPS Paperback. October 2002. Series > Centre for European Policy Studies (Brussels) > CEPS Paperbacks <http://aei.pitt.edu/view/series/SMCEPSPaperbacks.html> . UNSPECIFIED. ISBN 9290794044
http://aei.pitt.edu/32571/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:33108
2012-10-26T17:22:03Z
7374617475733D7375626D6974746564
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
Germany's preferences on the freedom of movement provisions of the Ankara Agreement: the Wirtschaftswunder and opportunity and effort of Turkish diplomacy
Mayer, Matthias M.
Germany
Turkey
free movement/border control
immigration policy
Why did Germany support provisions on freedom of movement for Turkish workers in the Association
Agreement between the European Economic Community (EEC) and Turkey, which was concluded in
1963? This is puzzling given that Germany was fervently opposed to other common EU measures on
legal economic migration since immigration policy was communitarized by the Amsterdam Treaty in
1999. The papers test two hypotheses. First, that the a positive economic situation induces the
German government to support common EU measures as in periods of strong growth Germany has
more open immigration policies and there is a positive relationship between open national immigration
policies and support for common EU measures. Second, a sending country (or a group of sending
countries) needs to exert diplomatic pressure on the German government in order for it to support
common EU measures on legal economic migration. For this to be successful there need to be two
conditions in place, the sending country must have the opportunity to exert influence, due to strong
historical ties with Germany or being important for geo-political reasons, and frame the need for
common EU measures on legal migration in an effective manner. The hypotheses are confirmed for
the case of Turkey and the Ankara Agreement and are used to assemble a theoretically eclectic and
generally applicable framework able to explain Germany’s support for common EU measures on legal
economic migration.
2009
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/33108/1/mayer._matthias_m..pdf
http://www.euce.org/eusa2009/papers.php
Mayer, Matthias M. (2009) Germany's preferences on the freedom of movement provisions of the Ankara Agreement: the Wirtschaftswunder and opportunity and effort of Turkish diplomacy. In: UNSPECIFIED. (Submitted)
http://aei.pitt.edu/33108/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:43307
2013-08-28T14:46:30Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
Free movement of workers in the EU. Legal aspects of the transitional arrangements. ZEI Discussion Paper No. 217, 2013
Kraleva, Desislava
free movement/border control
From the Introduction. There are four fundamental freedoms which lay the foundation of the European Union. Those are the free movement of goods, free movement of capital, free movement of services and free movement of persons. They
guarantee the existence and effective functioning of an area without internal borders within which goods, capital, services and people move freely. Despite the pivotal importance of these freedoms, there are cases where some
freedoms can be partially or fully restricted within the territory of some member states or the Union as a whole. This thesis is going to analyze the restrictions of one of these freedoms: the free movement of persons, resulting
from the arrangements applying to new member states. The focus will be the free movement of workers from new to old member states for a transitional period following the date of accession.
2013
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/43307/1/dp_c217_kraleva.pdf
http://www.zei.uni-bonn.de/dateien/discussion-paper/dp_c217_kraleva.pdf
Kraleva, Desislava (2013) Free movement of workers in the EU. Legal aspects of the transitional arrangements. ZEI Discussion Paper No. 217, 2013. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/43307/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:44315
2013-10-01T13:37:54Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65666153696E676C654D61726B6574:65666153696E676C654D61726B65746361706974616C676F6F64737365727669636573
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D6F74686572
Liberalising trade in services: creating new migration opportunities? Research Paper in Law, 1/2010
Hatzopoulos, Vassilis
capital, goods, services, workers
free movement/border control
Introduction. It is quite uncommon to associate migration with the rules on services trade. Indeed, all economic definitions of services insist on their immaterial nature and on the increased possibility of trading them ‘virtually’ over networks or else, without any physical movement of the parties involved. Somehow this ‘immaterial’ nature of services reflects on their providers/recipients which seem to be ‘invisible’. Even though most services still require the physical contact of the provider with the recipient1
and, when provided over national borders, do entail migration, service providers and/or recipients are rarely thought of as ‘immigrants’. This may be due to the fact that they enter the foreign territory with a specific aim and, once this aim accomplished, move back to their state of origin; technically they only qualify as short term non-cyclical migrants and are of little interest to policy-makers. A second reason may be that both service providers and recipients are economically desirable: the former are typically highly skilled and trained professionals and the latter are well-off ‘visitors’, increasing consumption in the host state.
The legal definition of services in Article 57 TFEU (ex Art. 50 EC) further nourishes this idea about service providers/recipients not being migrants: the relevant Treaty rules only apply when the provisions on free movement of workers and freedom of establishment – themselves clearly linked to migration – do not apply. This distinction has been fleshed up by the ECJ which has consistently held that the distinction between the rules on establishment, on the one hand, and the rules on services, on the other, lies on duration.2 Indeed, all EC manuals state four types of service provision falling under the EC Treaty: a) where the service provider moves to the recipient’s state, for a short period of time (longer stay would amount to establishment), b) where the service recipients themselves move to the state where the service is offered (eg for medical care, education, tourism etc), c) where both service providers and recipients move together in another member state (eg a tourist guide accompanying a group travelling abroad) and d) where the service itself is provided across the borders (typically through the use of ICTs). None of these situations would typically qualify as migration.
The above ‘dissociation’ between services and migration has been gradually weakened in the recent years. Indeed, migration is increasingly connected to the transnational provision of services. This is the result of three kinds of factors: developments in the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) case law; legislative initiatives in the EU; and the GATS. Each one of these is considered in some detail below.
The aim of the analysis which follows is to show the extent to which (legislative and judicial) policies aimed at the free provision of services actively affect migration conditions within the EU. The EC rules on the provision of services primarily affect the movement of EU nationals. As it will be shown below, however, third country nationals (TCNs) may also claim the benefits of the rules on services, either as recipients thereof or as employees of some EC undertaking which is providing services in another member state (posted workers).
2010-02
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/44315/1/research_paper_1_2010_hatzopoulos.pdf
https://www.coleurope.eu/website/study/european-legal-studies/research-activities
Hatzopoulos, Vassilis (2010) Liberalising trade in services: creating new migration opportunities? Research Paper in Law, 1/2010. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/44315/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:45600
2013-11-09T20:57:27Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D67656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273636F6D706E6174696D70
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The Criminalisation of Migration in Europe: A State-of-the-Art of the Academic Literature and Research. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 61, October 2013
Parkin, Joanna
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
compliance/national implementation
free movement/border control
general
immigration policy
In the last 30 years, a clear trend has come to define modern immigration law and policy. A set of seemingly disparate developments concerning the constant reinforcement of border controls, tightening of conditions of entry, expanding capacities for detention and deportation and the proliferation of criminal sanctions for migration offences, accompanied by an anxiety on the part of the press, public and political establishment regarding migrant criminality can now be seen to form a definitive shift in the European Union towards the so-called ‘criminalisation of migration’.
This paper aims to provide an overview of the ‘state-of-the-art’ in the academic literature and EU research on criminalisation of migration in Europe. It analyses three key manifestations of the so-called ‘crimmigration’ trend: discursive criminalisation; the use of criminal law for migration management; and immigrant detention, focusing both on developments in domestic legislation of EU member states but also the increasing conflation of mobility, crime and security which has accompanied EU integration. By identifying the trends, synergies and gaps in the scholarly approaches dealing with the criminalisation of migration, the paper seeks to provide a framework for on-going research under Work Package 8 of the FIDUCIA project.
2013-10
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/45600/1/Criminalisation_of_Migration_in_Europe_J_Parkin_FIDUCIA_final.pdf
http://www.ceps.be/book/criminalisation-migration-europe-state-art-academic-literature-and-research
Parkin, Joanna (2013) The Criminalisation of Migration in Europe: A State-of-the-Art of the Academic Literature and Research. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 61, October 2013. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/45600/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:46156
2013-12-09T14:06:51Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726C61626F72
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
spotlight europe #2013/05 - December 2013: Unblocking the lifeline of talent
Morehouse, Christal.
Busse, Mathias
Germany
labour/labor
free movement/border control
Against the background of demographic decline and growing economic competitiveness from emerging economies, this Spotlight published in cooperation with the Centre for European Policy Studies looks into the potential of increased intra-EU labour mobility. It will examine the ‘German
case’ on EU labour mobility. It proposes ideas on how to better foster a European
fair deal on talent, one that would benefit the EU as a whole. It concludes with
a proposal on how to increase the benefits of the freedom of movement.
2013-12
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/46156/1/Spotlight0513_EN_Web.pdf
Morehouse, Christal. and Busse, Mathias (2013) spotlight europe #2013/05 - December 2013: Unblocking the lifeline of talent. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/46156/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:47679
2014-02-25T14:54:13Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737067656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D626F6F6B
Social Benefits and Migration: A Contested Relationship and Policy Challenge in the EU. CEPS Paperbacks. September 2013
Lambert, Jean
Guild, Elspeth
Carrera, Sergio
Groenendijk, Kees
Minderhoud, Paul
Wiesbrock, Anja
Garlick, Madeline
Cornelissen, Rob
Giulietti, Corrado
Kahanec, Martin
Eisele, Katharina
general
free movement/border control
Following the financial crisis that commenced in 2008, the relationship between migration and social benefits has become increasingly contested in a number of large EU member states. The Eastern expansion of the EU in 2004 and 2007 has added a new dimension to the relationship. Concerns have spread across a number of member states about the 'costs' and 'financial burdens' of migration and intra-EU mobility and there have been calls for restrictions of existing EU rights and freedoms in the areas of EU free movement, social security coordination, asylum and migration laws.
Guild, Elspeth
Carrera, Sergio
Eisele, Katharina
2013
Book
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/47679/1/Migration_and_Social_Benefits%2D1.pdf
http://www.ceps.be/book/social-benefits-and-migration-contested-relationship-and-policy-challenge-eu
Lambert, Jean and Guild, Elspeth and Carrera, Sergio and Groenendijk, Kees and Minderhoud, Paul and Wiesbrock, Anja and Garlick, Madeline and Cornelissen, Rob and Giulietti, Corrado and Kahanec, Martin and Eisele, Katharina (2013) Social Benefits and Migration: A Contested Relationship and Policy Challenge in the EU. CEPS Paperbacks. September 2013. Series > Centre for European Policy Studies (Brussels) > CEPS Paperbacks <http://aei.pitt.edu/view/series/SMCEPSPaperbacks.html> . UNSPECIFIED. ISBN 978-94-6138-349-5
http://aei.pitt.edu/47679/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:50116
2014-03-26T13:07:17Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The global race for talent: Europe's migration challenge. Bruegel Policy Brief 2014/02, March 2014
Münz, Rainer
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
free movement/border control
immigration policy
In an ageing world with demographic and economic imbalances, the number of international migrants is likely to rise during the twenty-first century. The geography of migration flows is changing, however. Mobile people will be increasingly attracted by faster-growing economies. Therefore, some traditional destinations in western Europe will face stronger competition for skilled labour-not least from countries like China where the working-age population will shrink after 2020. At the same time, the sentiment in many European receiving societies is turning against migration and intra-European Union mobility.
2014-03
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/50116/1/The_global_race_for_talent%2D_Europe's_migration_challenge_(English).pdf
http://www.bruegel.org/scholars/scholar-detail/scholar/210-rainer-munz/
Münz, Rainer (2014) The global race for talent: Europe's migration challenge. Bruegel Policy Brief 2014/02, March 2014. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/50116/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:50257
2014-07-10T15:07:46Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The Impact of Visa Liberalisation in Eastern Partnership Countries, Russia and Turkey on Trans-Border Mobility. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 63, March 2014
i Sagrera, Raül Hernández
EU-Eastern Partnership
Turkey
Russia
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
free movement/border control
Schengen Visa liberalisation in the Eastern Partnership countries, Russia and Turkey has proven to have a huge transformative potential across the justice, liberty and security policies of the countries where it has been deployed. Far-reaching technical reforms in the fields of document security, irregular migration and border management, public order security and fundamental rights have to be implemented so that visa-free travel can be allowed. Evidence provided by visa applications data reveals that visa liberalisation is a logical step, provided that the technical reforms are adopted and implemented. This study analyses the current state of play of the implementation of the EU visa policy instruments and assesses the positive impact of visa-free travel on trans-border mobility according to current visa application statistics.
2014-03
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/50257/1/No_63_EU_Visa_Liberalisation.pdf
http://www.ceps.be/book/impact-visa-liberalisation-eastern-partnership-countries-russia-and-turkey-trans-border-mobilit
i Sagrera, Raül Hernández (2014) The Impact of Visa Liberalisation in Eastern Partnership Countries, Russia and Turkey on Trans-Border Mobility. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 63, March 2014. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/50257/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:52645
2019-09-16T14:40:53Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033396D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
The Determinants of Migration Under the Freedom of Movement: Lessons from the European Union
Cormack Patton, Sarah J.
migration Policy
free movement/border control
This paper asks: what determines international migration and how has the EU’s free movement of people arrangement impacted this process? I argue that relative factor endowments (of capital and labor) and democracy serve as substitutes when a potential migrant is seeking a receiving
country. By contrast, I argue that under the EU’s free movement of people regime, intra-EU migration is driven by relative factor endowments. Empirical analysis supports these arguments, and finds that relative factor endowments can compensate for a dearth in democratic governance in the receiving country and that relative factor endowments drive migration within the EU’s free movement of people regime.
2011
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/52645/1/CORMACK_PATTON.pdf
Cormack Patton, Sarah J. (2011) The Determinants of Migration Under the Freedom of Movement: Lessons from the European Union. In: UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/52645/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:56408
2018-01-02T19:48:22Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706F70756C69736D
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:656661454D55454D536575726F
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303435
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303230
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F706767656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C6166666169727367726F777468
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033396D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65666153696E676C654D61726B6574
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Challenges and new beginnings: Priorities for the EU’s new leadership. EPC Challenge Europe Issue 22, September 2014
Andor, László
Balfour,, Rosa
Emmanouilidis,, Janis A.
Grabbe,, Heather
Harbour, Malcolm
Ivan, Paul
Leinen, Jo
Malmström, Cecilia
Pagoulatos, George
Rodrigues, Maria João
Schwarzer, Daniela
Sikorski, Radoslaw
Stubb, Alexander
Swieboda, Pawel
Van Rompuy, Herman
Zuleeg, Fabian
environmental policy (including international arena)
social policy
migration Policy
innovation policy
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
economic growth
EMU/EMS/euro
Single Market
general
populism
free movement/border control
Table of contents -
State of the Union and key challenges for Europe's future, Janis A. Emmanouilidis and Paul Ivan;
Europe’s economic challenges and the importance of ideas
and innovation, Herman Van Rompuy;
The growth challenge for Europe and the EMU, George Pagoulatos; Strengthening the euro area, Daniela Schwarzer; Social Europe. Can the EU again improve people's life prospects?, László Andor; Solidarity and cohesion, Pawel Swieboda; The single market and competitiveness – the challenges
for the Juncker team, Malcolm Harbour; A European response to the resource and climate challenge, Jo Leinen; Renewal through international action? Options for EU foreign policy, Rosa Balfour; EU migration policy – new realities, new opportunities, Cecilia Malmström;
Freedom of movement of persons – the building-block of
European growth, Radoslaw Sikorski; Building up European leadership – an assessment of the recent process, Maria João Rodrigues; Populism in the EU: new threats to the open society?, Heather Grabbe; Differentiated Europe needs strong institutions, Alexander Stubb; Improving decision-making in the EU, Fabian Zuleeg; The need for a New Pact, Janis A. Emmanouilidis.
2014-09
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/56408/1/pub_4855_challenge_europe_issue_22.pdf
http://www.epc.eu/pub_details.php?cat_id=7&pub_id=4855
Andor, László and Balfour,, Rosa and Emmanouilidis,, Janis A. and Grabbe,, Heather and Harbour, Malcolm and Ivan, Paul and Leinen, Jo and Malmström, Cecilia and Pagoulatos, George and Rodrigues, Maria João and Schwarzer, Daniela and Sikorski, Radoslaw and Stubb, Alexander and Swieboda, Pawel and Van Rompuy, Herman and Zuleeg, Fabian (2014) Challenges and new beginnings: Priorities for the EU’s new leadership. EPC Challenge Europe Issue 22, September 2014. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/56408/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:56440
2014-10-22T18:53:15Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Stigmatisation of EU mobile citizens: a ticking time bomb for the European project. EPC Commentary, 24 January 2014
Ghimis, Andreia
Lazarowicz, Alex
Pascouau, Yves
free movement/border control
The 2013 European Year of Citizens was profoundly marked by escalating attacks against one of the EU’s major achievement for EU citizens: freedom of movement. In April 2013, Home Affairs Ministers from Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK were party to a letter claiming that “a significant number of new immigrants draw social assistance in the host countries, frequently without genuine entitlement, burdening host societies’ social welfare systems”. This letter laid the groundwork for a “battle plan”, presented by David Cameron in November, which aimed to make the free movement of persons “less free” and put forward the idea of capping “EU migration”. Furthermore, in December, the German conservative Christian Social Union (CSU) took up a similar petty political discourse.
After the end of the transitional period for Romania and Bulgaria on 1 January 2014, the debate continues with Chuka Umunna (British Labour Party) proposing to restrict the freedom of movement to highly skilled EU citizens and to citizens in possession of a firm job offer. Alongside this, the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel announced the formation of a committee to investigate “poverty migration” in Germany. This wave of resentment has been more recently followed by the UK Prime Minister David Cameron, expressing his intention to re-negotiate EU law in order to be able to withdraw child benefits from EU citizens working in the UK, citing Polish citizens working in the UK as an example. Seeing this as a stigmatisation of the Polish population, the Polish foreign minister, Radosław Sikorski, qualified Cameron’s discourse as “unacceptable”. The debate over limiting freedom of movement has continuously escalated and reached a worrying level. With the EP elections approaching in May 2014, this debate is likely to become worse.
2014-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/56440/1/pub_4096_stigmatisation_of_eu_mobile_citizens.pdf
http://www.epc.eu/pub_details.php?cat_id=4&pub_id=4096&year=2014
Ghimis, Andreia and Lazarowicz, Alex and Pascouau, Yves (2014) Stigmatisation of EU mobile citizens: a ticking time bomb for the European project. EPC Commentary, 24 January 2014. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/56440/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:56473
2014-10-22T17:19:07Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:4430303130333968756D616E726967687473
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Frontex and the respect of fundamental rights: from better protection to full responsibility. EPC Policy Brief, 3 June 2014
Pascouau , Yves
Schumacher, Pascal
human rights
free movement/border control
The European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex) was created to improve border management cooperation between Member States. Seen from its inception as a security-oriented body, tools and rules have been gradually developed to enhance the human rights dimension and protection regarding Frontex activities. However, this step has not been accompanied with the explicit recognition of Frontex’s legal responsibility regarding violations of human rights occurring during joint operations it coordinates. Despite Frontex position rejecting such a responsibility, it is no longer clear whether this position can be maintained, as Yves Pascouau and Pascal Schumacher demonstrate in this Policy Brief.
2014-06
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/56473/1/pub_4512_frontext_and_the_respect_of_fundamental_rights.pdf
http://www.epc.eu/pub_details.php?cat_id=3&pub_id=4512&year=2014
Pascouau , Yves and Schumacher, Pascal (2014) Frontex and the respect of fundamental rights: from better protection to full responsibility. EPC Policy Brief, 3 June 2014. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/56473/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:56521
2014-12-07T00:35:32Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303438
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324555415345414E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303136
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303436
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D6F74686572
Migration and Integration. Common Challenges and Responses
from Europe and Asia
Yeoh, Brenda S.A.
Iguchi, Yasushi
Ee, Miriam
Chan-Hoong, Leong
Rueppel, Patrick
Hong, Danielle
Seol, Dong-Hoon
Pastore, Ferruccio.
Salis, Ester
Finotelli, Claudia
Quirico, Monica
Devitt, Camilla
Pascouau, Yves
Steller, Birte
Campani, Giovanna
Strik, Tineke
public health policy (including global activities)
information society
EU-Asia-general
EU-ASEAN
free movement/border control
immigration policy
With the signing of the ASEAN Framework Agreement for the Integration of Priority Sectors
(FA) in 2004, migration and integration issues gained significance on the agenda. Primarily
concerned with increasing economic growth, this framework excludes the integration of low
and unskilled migrant workers; instead, ASEAN efforts to address migration and integration
issues have been limited to Mutual Recognition Agreements for skilled labour and professionals.
After an analysis of migration policy in the region, we highlight specific barriers to the
integration of labour migrants in two priority sectors – nursing, which is highly regulated by
the state, and Information, Communications and Technology (ICT), which is typically selfregulated
and privately run. Despite a MRA for nursing allowing registered nurses to practice
in another ASEAN country under supervision of local nurses without registering with the
host country’s nursing regulatory authority, in practice, there are major barriers to the free
movement of nurses within ASEAN in terms of skills recognition, licensure requirements and
other protectionist measures. Although regulations governing the inflow of ICT professionals
are not as stringent as those for healthcare professionals, private costs associated with job
search and gaining foreign employment are higher in the ICT sector, largely due to limited
information on international mobility within the industry. Three sets of barriers to greater
integration are discussed. First, the economic and political diversity within ASEAN makes
integration more problematic than in the European Union. Second, the primary concern
with value-adding economic growth means that regional agreements are focused on skilled
and professional labour migration only. Third, the “ASEAN way” of doing things – via a
strong emphasis on consensus and non-interference with domestic policies – often means that
the FA provision for the free movement of labour is usually trumped by domestic policies that
do not reflect the same desire for labour integration.
Hofmeister, Willliam
Rueppel, Patrick
Pascouau, Yves
Frontini, Andrea
2014
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/56521/1/pub_4350_migration_and_integration.pdf
Yeoh, Brenda S.A. and Iguchi, Yasushi and Ee, Miriam and Chan-Hoong, Leong and Rueppel, Patrick and Hong, Danielle and Seol, Dong-Hoon and Pastore, Ferruccio. and Salis, Ester and Finotelli, Claudia and Quirico, Monica and Devitt, Camilla and Pascouau, Yves and Steller, Birte and Campani, Giovanna and Strik, Tineke (2014) Migration and Integration. Common Challenges and Responses from Europe and Asia. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/56521/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:57973
2014-12-06T22:29:29Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D6F74686572
Making the impossible possible: the prospects for visa-free movement between the EU and its eastern partners. OSW Point of View Number 27, May 2012
Jaroszewicz, Marta
EU-Eastern Partnership
free movement/border control
To make the abolition of visas in relations between the EU and the Eastern European countries possible, the ”spell cast” must be broken on this issue. With the present levels of mobility and people-to-people, business and political contacts the introduction of a visa-free regime will be a natural consequence of the liberalisation processes which have been at work for years.Moreover, the decision to lift the visa requirement is unlikely to significantly stimulate an increase in migration pressure from Eastern European countries but could reduce the operating costs of expanded Schengen consular network. Lifting the visa requirement for Eastern European citizens can be temporary and conditional and allow for actual implementation of an increased conditionality rule. In political terms, making visa liberalisation a key issue would fundamentally change the partners’ approach to the Eastern Partnership and would provide a link to the Partnership for Modernisation targeted at Russia.
Labuszewska, Anna
2012-05
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/57973/1/pw_27_en_0.pdf
http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/policy-briefs/2012-06-06/making-impossible-possible-prospects-visa-free-movement-between
Jaroszewicz, Marta (2012) Making the impossible possible: the prospects for visa-free movement between the EU and its eastern partners. OSW Point of View Number 27, May 2012. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/57973/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58263
2018-01-02T19:50:40Z
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58264
2018-01-02T19:49:52Z
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58302
2014-12-11T19:42:21Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The EU-Ukraine Action Plan on Visa Liberalisation: an assessment of Ukraine's readiness. OSW Commentary No. 45, 2011-01-17
Jaroszewicz, Marta
Ukraine
free movement/border control
The Action Plan on visas adopted during the recent EU-Ukraine summit
is a success for Ukraine. It is the first time that Kyiv has succeeded in
obtaining a definition of the conditions and criteria whose fulfilment will
enable Ukraine to apply for the lifting of EU visas for its citizens. Ukraine's
strong point has been its political will; the lifting of this visa regime has
been a priority for all Ukrainian governments since 2005. Since Viktor
Yanukovych became president, Ukraine has adopted or prepared key legal
acts that brought it nearer to European standards in the area of border and
migration management. One of Kyiv's strengths is also its relatively well
reformed and efficiently managed border service. Moreover, illegal transit
migration via Ukraine is decreasing, and fewer Ukrainians are trying to
enter or stay in the EU illegally. Also, Kyiv has efficiently implemented the
EU-Ukraine readmission agreement.
The hardest task for Ukraine will be to meet the EU’s expectations concerning
values, the condition of Ukrainian democracy, and the rule of
law. Corruption remains the main barrier to Ukraine's development and
modernisation; the courts are weak and the judicial system inefficient.
The main undertaking of the new migration service that is being formed
at the moment will be to create a civil system of registration, monitoring
and regulating the stays of foreign nationals. This may prove difficult,
as the supervisory authority (the Ministry of the Interior) remains an unreformed,
police-type bureaucratic institution. Ukraine is lagging behind
countries such as Russia, Belarus and Moldova when it comes to the introduction
of biometric documents. Another problem is the lack of an electronic
information system on foreign nationals, visas and border crossings
which would be accessible to all the relevant services and institutions.
For these reasons, the complete abolition of visas seems to be a longterm
perspective, especially considering that many EU countries, which
themselves are faced with the problem of migrants’ integration, are rather
sceptical about the further liberalisation of movement of people with their
eastern neighbours. In the immediate future, if Ukraine meets some of the
requirements set by the EU, it will be able to seek the extension of the visa
facilitations that have been in operation since 2008.
2011-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58302/1/commentary_45_0.pdf
http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-commentary/2011-01-17/eu-ukraine-action-plan-visa-liberalisation-assessment-ukraines
Jaroszewicz, Marta (2011) The EU-Ukraine Action Plan on Visa Liberalisation: an assessment of Ukraine's readiness. OSW Commentary No. 45, 2011-01-17. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/58302/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58420
2014-12-17T19:47:55Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D6F74686572
EU Borders and Their Controls: Preventing unwanted movement of people in Europe? CEPS Essay No. 6, 14 November 2013
Guild, Elspeth
Carrera, Sergio
free movement/border control
his Essay attempts to take a step back from the tragic event in the first week of October 2013, when a boat capsized off the Italian island of Lampedusa and some 300 persons drowned seeking safe harbour. It sets out to examine the issue of EU border controls from the perspectives of the technologies, new and old, building on a variety of scholarly disciplines to understand what is happening to border controls on the movement of persons in the EU and why the results are so deadly.
The Essay opens with an overview of what actually happens at the EU’s external borders. It then moves on to assess the old and new set of border control technologies that are deployed at the EU external borders, and how new technologies such as those based on automated controls and biometrics, are transforming the classical principles of European border controls. It then covers the reasons why people are refused admission at the EU’s external borders and the extent to which new border and surveillance technologies would assist in the effective controls in light of EU border law. Conclusions are finally offered on the articulation between the facts of EU border controls on persons and the claims and proposals for new technologies that are emerging from the EU institutions.
2013-11
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58420/1/Essay_No_6_EU_Borders_and_their_Controls_revised.pdf
http://www.ceps.eu/book/eu-borders-and-their-controls-preventing-unwanted-movement-people-europe
Guild, Elspeth and Carrera, Sergio (2013) EU Borders and Their Controls: Preventing unwanted movement of people in Europe? CEPS Essay No. 6, 14 November 2013. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/58420/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58534
2014-12-18T19:08:08Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726C61626F72
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65666153696E676C654D61726B6574:65666153696E676C654D61726B65746361706974616C676F6F64737365727669636573
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Education, migration, and job satisfaction: The regional returns of human capital in the EU. Bruges European Economic Research (BEER) Papers 1/November 2004
Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés
Vilalta-Bufi, Montserrat
capital, goods, services, workers
labour/labor
free movement/border control
The paper looks at the link between human capital and regional economic
performance in the EU. Using indicators of educational stock, the matching of
educational supply and labour demand, and migration extracted from the
European Community Household Panel (ECHP), it identifies that the economic
performance of European regions over the last few years is generally associated
with differences in human capital endowment. However, and in contrast to
previous studies, the results highlight that factors such as the matching of
educational supply and local labour needs, job satisfaction, and migration may
have a stronger connection to economic performance than the traditional
measures of educational stock.
2004-11
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58534/1/beer15_(2).pdf
Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés and Vilalta-Bufi, Montserrat (2004) Education, migration, and job satisfaction: The regional returns of human capital in the EU. Bruges European Economic Research (BEER) Papers 1/November 2004. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/58534/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:60167
2015-01-23T16:56:53Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D46:46303238
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Unconfirmed but still feared: the tidal wave of Bulgarians and Romanians one year later. EPC Commentary, 15 January 2015
Ghimis, Andreia
Romania
U.K.
Bulgaria
free movement/border control
This time last year politicians and media were stoking fears over the massive floods of Romanians and Bulgarians who were about to invade the UK (but not only) as the employment restrictions for these EU citizens were being lifted in nine remaining EU Member States. These fears have proven to be unfounded. Nevertheless, major national and EU developments will continue to feed this debate.
2015-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/60167/1/pub_5192_unconfirmed_but_still_feared.pdf
http://www.epc.eu/pub_details.php?cat_id=4&pub_id=5192&year=2015
Ghimis, Andreia (2015) Unconfirmed but still feared: the tidal wave of Bulgarians and Romanians one year later. EPC Commentary, 15 January 2015. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/60167/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:60717
2015-02-02T20:44:06Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Whose Mare? Rule of law challenges in the field of European border surveillance in the Mediterranean. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 79/January 2015
Carrera, Sergio
den Hertog, Leonhard
Italy
free movement/border control
This paper examines key developments in the field of European border surveillance in the Mediterranean. By asking, ‘Whose Mare?’, we focus on rule of law challenges stemming from these developments in a post-Lisbon EU. The developments examined are the Italian Navy-led Mare Nostrum operation, the debates over European ‘exit strategies’ for this operation and the ensuing launch of the Frontex Triton joint operation (JO). The recently adopted Regulation on Frontex sea border surveillance operations is also presented as a key development to understand the rule of law challenges. Moreover, the adoption of the European Union Maritime Security Strategy (MSS) and the development of several maritime surveillance systems in the EU highlight that a wide range of actors seeks authority over this field.
2015-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/60717/1/LSE_79.pdf
http://www.ceps.eu/book/whose-mare-rule-law-challenges-field-european-border-surveillance-mediterranean
Carrera, Sergio and den Hertog, Leonhard (2015) Whose Mare? Rule of law challenges in the field of European border surveillance in the Mediterranean. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 79/January 2015. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/60717/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:63555
2015-05-04T20:14:51Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
From Lampedusa to the Post-Stockholm Programme: Difficult European solidarity in the field of migration. European Policy Brief No. 24, March 2014
Balleix, Corinne
free movement/border control
Solidarity is a founding principle of the European migration policy. To hold true, Member States must be faithful to their common commitment to European migration rules and implement fair burden sharing of the costs attached to border controls. However, solidarity among Member States appears altogether fragile and under threat, a situation that could jeopardise the founding principle of the free movement of persons in the European Union’s space. The recent solidarity crisis among Member States was solved by an increased externalisation of the European migration policy. Consequently, for the EU to live up to its values, it will have to prove itself generous towards third countries.
2014-03
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/63555/1/EPB24.pdf
http://www.egmontinstitute.be/publication_article/from-lampedusa-to-the-post-stockholm-programme-difficult-european-solidarity-in-the-field-of-migrations/
Balleix, Corinne (2014) From Lampedusa to the Post-Stockholm Programme: Difficult European solidarity in the field of migration. European Policy Brief No. 24, March 2014. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/63555/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:63783
2015-12-08T19:24:23Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303235
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
No Move without Free Movement: The EU-Swiss controversy over quotas for free movement of persons. CEPS Policy Brief No. 331, 23 April 2015
Carrera, Sergio
Guild, Elspeth
Eisele, Katharina
Switzerland
free movement/border control
immigration policy
The focus of this Policy Brief is the Swiss referendum of 2014 against ‘mass immigration’ in Switzerland. It identifies the challenges that a quota on EU citizens’ free movement rights to Switzerland would pose to EU-Swiss relations, considering: i) the value of freedom of movement in the EU and its indivisibility from the internal market and other economic freedoms; ii) the specificity of the EU legal system following the Lisbon Treaty that established democratic and judicial accountability mechanisms; iii) the lack of supranational judicial oversight of the EU-Switzerland agreements framework; and iv) the existence of the so-called guillotine mechanism, according to which the termination of the Free Movement Agreement would entail the automatic termination of the other agreements with the EU. The authors set out a number of options and consider their implications for EU-Swiss relations.
2015-04
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/63783/2/PB331_EU%2DSwiss_Mobility_.pdf
http://www.ceps.eu/publications/no-move-without-free-movement-eu-swiss-controversy-over-quotas-free-movement-persons
Carrera, Sergio and Guild, Elspeth and Eisele, Katharina (2015) No Move without Free Movement: The EU-Swiss controversy over quotas for free movement of persons. CEPS Policy Brief No. 331, 23 April 2015. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/63783/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:79647
2018-05-23T16:11:21Z
7374617475733D7375626D6974746564
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D70726F63656564696E6773
Free Movement of Those Having
Sufficient Resources
not to become a Burden
on the “Social Assistance System of the
Host State”
Rossi, Lucia Serena
free movement/border control
Introductory Slide: The economic implications of
the free movement
• I- The Original Market Approach
• II From Market to Citizenship
• III Are Citzens’ Rights Fundamental
Rights?
• IV Non-EU citizens:What Resources are
“adequate”?
2015
Conference Proceedings
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/79647/1/Rossi.pdf
Rossi, Lucia Serena (2015) Free Movement of Those Having Sufficient Resources not to become a Burden on the “Social Assistance System of the Host State”. [Conference Proceedings] (Submitted)
http://aei.pitt.edu/79647/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:81699
2016-11-16T16:57:04Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D6173796C756D706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D6D6967726174696F6E6D6F76656D656E74
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Money Talks: Mapping the Funding for EU External Migration Policy. CEPS Paper in Liberty & Security in Europe 15 November 2016
den Hertog, Leonhard
asylum policy
free movement/border control
2015 Migration Movement
This paper examines the role of funding in the EU’s external policies on migration, borders and asylum. Academics have looked extensively into the political and legal resources of the EU in this area, but surprisingly little attention has been paid to the role of funding in the governance of this cooperation with third countries. The objective of this paper is to understand what EU funds are involved and which actors are setting priorities for funding in the field of migration, borders and asylum. This is a highly technical field of EU governance, characterised by complex political and legal dynamics. The funding landscape is fragmented and incoherent, with limited coordination, but this incoherence can be understood in light of the broader political, sociological and institutional struggles that come to the fore in the setting of priorities for funding. This paper argues that a certain degree of incoherence is an inevitable characteristic of EU governance in this field. The bigger issue is the challenge posed to accountability by this EU funding.
2016-11
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/81699/1/LSE_No_95_LdH_Mapping_Funding_final.pdf
https://www.ceps.eu/publications/money-talks-mapping-funding-eu-external-migration-policy
den Hertog, Leonhard (2016) Money Talks: Mapping the Funding for EU External Migration Policy. CEPS Paper in Liberty & Security in Europe 15 November 2016. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/81699/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:82508
2017-01-05T19:34:50Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:4430627265786974
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The Brexit and EU freedom of movement:
legal uncertainty on both sides of the ‘border’. IES Policy Brief Issue 2016/7• April 2016
Roos, Christof
Brexit
U.K.
free movement/border control
By bundling the manifold policy expertise of the
researchers of the Institute for European Studies
(IES), this paper forms part of a series of analyses
investigating the potential implications of a ‘Brexit’
scenario for different EU policies. All papers ask
the same three questions: 1) What is the state
of the EU policy in focus? 2) What is the UK’s
role/interest in this policy field? 3) What are the
potential implications of a ‘Brexit’ scenario at the
policy-level?
After Claire Dupont and Florian Trauner introduce
the project, Richard Lewis sets the historical and
cultural context and explains how the UK and the
EU have come to such a low-point in their relations.
Next, five policy fields are analysed: justice and
home affairs; free movement policies; EU external
representation; the (digital) single market; and
environmental policy.
2016-04
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/82508/1/Brexit4_0.pdf
http://www.ies.be/policy-brief/brexit-and-eu-freedom-movement-legal-uncertainty-both-sides-%E2%80%98border%E2%80%99
Roos, Christof (2016) The Brexit and EU freedom of movement: legal uncertainty on both sides of the ‘border’. IES Policy Brief Issue 2016/7• April 2016. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/82508/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102664
2020-03-26T14:18:10Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Ordinanze prefettizie, libertà di riunione e diritto al conflitto = Prefectural orders, freedom of assembly and right to conflict. WP C.S.D.L.E. “Massimo D’Antona”.INT – 150/2019
Bellavista, Alessandro
free movement/border control
The essay analyses an emergency ordinance issued by a prefect, who has prohibited for a certain period of time the possibility to meet in certain street locations. The ordinance has been deemed legitimate by the administrative judge after a complaint presented by some trade unions. However, both measures arouse suspicions, as they limit – without adequate balance – the exercise of some constitutional rights such as the rights of assembly and of trade union activity.
2019-09
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102664/1/20190924%2D121928_Bellavista_n_150%2D2019intpdf.pdf
Bellavista, Alessandro (2019) Ordinanze prefettizie, libertà di riunione e diritto al conflitto = Prefectural orders, freedom of assembly and right to conflict. WP C.S.D.L.E. “Massimo D’Antona”.INT – 150/2019. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/102664/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103615
2021-09-27T17:50:46Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:4641666768616E697374616E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303133
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Afghan refugees: Europe should develop an ambitious and collaborative structure. Egmont Commentary 25 August 2021.
Siman, Bernard
EU-Middle East
Afghanistan
free movement/border control
immigration policy
The TV news and press coverage of the mayhem in Kabul and around its airport mask the greater scrum by tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Afghanis heading towards the country’s borders with the neighbouring states and beyond.
Already tens of thousands have entered Pakistan and Iran recently as a result of the violence in their country. Pakistan says that officially documented afghani refugees on its territory total 1.4million; Iran says it houses 700,000. The number is very likely much higher, and large numbers have made or intend to make their way to Turkey, many en route to Europe. Both Iran and Turkey are not as hospitable to these Afghanis as they once were both because of fears related to the COVID pandemic, as well as because of the current strength of the xenophobic domestic political tendencies in both. Turkey already has 3.6 million Syrian refugees and, together with Iran, they have hundreds of thousands of Afghani refugees from previous conflicts.
2021-09
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103615/1/Afghan_refugees_Europe_should_develop_an_ambitious_and_collaborative_structure_%2D_Egmont_Institute.pdf
Siman, Bernard (2021) Afghan refugees: Europe should develop an ambitious and collaborative structure. Egmont Commentary 25 August 2021. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103615/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103849
2024-03-26T15:37:07Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303337
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:627564676574706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Broader border taxes: a new option for European Union budget resources. Bruegel Policy Brief Issue 06/24, March 2024.
Saint-Amans , Pascal
tax policy
budgets & financing
free movement/border control
There is widespread agreement on the need for new resources to fund the European Union's budget in order to meet increasing spending demands, not least repayment of debt incurred as part of the EU’s post-pandemic economic recovery. In particular it is seen as desirable that the EU should have ‘own’ resources, or reliable ongoing revenue streams. But there is little agreement on what new own resources could consist of.
Limited reform so far has led to the introduction of a levy paid by EU members depending on plastic packaging waste generated in their territory and not recycled. Meanwhile, the European Commission has proposed resources for the EU budget from emissions trading revenues, and from levies collected under the EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM). There proposals are pragmatic and move in the right direction, but do not go far enough.
The debate about own resources should focus on whether the EU will be able to build genuine own resources based on common tax policies. The EU suffers from ‘tax leakage’ in which profits are shifted from high-tax to low-tax EU countries, and from there onto no or low-tax non-EU jurisdictions, often without the application of withholding taxes. It may not be too much of a stretch to compare this situation of tax leakage with the situation addressed by CBAM – a quasi-tax at the border. So far, an opportunity for what could be seen as a tax at the border of the internal market, aiming to protect the market from harmful competition, may have been missed. Such a tax could reflect the undertaxed profit rule agreed as part of the international deal on the corporate minimum tax. Focusing on protecting the revenues of EU members by common tax borders could offer scope for new own resources.
2024-03
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103849/1/PB_06_2024_0.pdf
Saint-Amans , Pascal (2024) Broader border taxes: a new option for European Union budget resources. Bruegel Policy Brief Issue 06/24, March 2024. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103849/