2024-03-28T16:30:08Zhttp://aei.pitt.edu/cgi/oai2
oai:aei.pitt.edu:832
2011-02-15T22:16:27Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D61727469636C65
The Netherlands and Luxembourg: Smaller Countries in an Ever-Larger Europe
van den Berg, Dirk Jan
Luxembourg
Netherlands
No abstract.
1994
Article
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/832/1/4.htm
van den Berg, Dirk Jan (1994) The Netherlands and Luxembourg: Smaller Countries in an Ever-Larger Europe. EIPASCOPE, 1994 (3). pp. 1-4.
http://aei.pitt.edu/832/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:1476
2011-02-15T22:18:46Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666676F7665726E616E6365
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303133
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303131
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303038
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303130
7375626A656374733D41:41303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303135
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D626F6F6B
National Parliaments on their Ways to Europe. Losers or Latecomers?
Ireland
Belgium
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
Italy
Denmark
Finland
Amsterdam Treaty
Luxembourg
France
Spain
Netherlands
Germany
European Convention
Sweden
Greece
Nice Treaty
IGC 1996
Portugal
U.K.
IGC 2000
Maastricht Treaty
European Commission
Council of Ministers
European Council
governance: EU & national level
European Parliament
integration theory (see also researching and writing the EU in this section)
Austria
[Table of Contents]. Preface, etc., 15-26; National Parliaments in the European Architecture: From Latecomers' Adaptation Towards Permanent Institutional Change?, by Andreas Maure, 27-76; The Federal Parliament of Belgium: Between Wishes, Rules and Practice, by Claire Vandevivere, 77-98; The Danish Folketing and Its European Affairs Committee: Strong Players in the National Policy Cycle, by Finn Laursen, 99-116; The German Bundestag: From Benevolent 'Weakness' towards Supportive Scrutiny, by Sven Holscheidt, 117-146; The Parliament of Greece: Slow but Constant Moves Toward European Integration?, by Peter Zervakis and Nikos Yannis, 147-172; The Parliament of Finland: A Model Case for Effective Scrutiny?, by Tapio Raunio, 173-198; The Parliament of Spain: Slowly Moving onto the European Direction?, by Felipe Basabe Llorens and Maria Teresa Gonzalez Escudero, 199-222; The French Parliament and the EU: Progressive Assertion and Strategic Investment, by Andrea Szukala and Olivier Rozenberg, 223-250; The Parliament of Ireland: A Passive Adapter Coming in from the Cold, by Brigid Laffan, 251-268; The Parliament of Italy: From Benevolent Observer to Active Player, by Federiga Bindi Calussi and Steffano B. Grassi, 269-300; The Luxemburg Chamber of Deputies: From a Toothless Tiger to a Critical Watchdog?, by Danielle Bossaert, 301-312; The Parliament of Austria: A Large Potential with Little Implications, by Barbara Blumel and Christine Neuhold, 313-336; The Parliament of the Netherlands and the European Union: Early Starter, Slow Mover, by Ben J.S. Hoetjes, 337-358; The Parliament of Portugal: Loyal Scrutiny and Informal Influence, by Ana Fraga, 359-376; The Parliament of Sweden: A Successful Adapter in the European Arena, by Hans Hegeland, 377-394; The Parliament of the United Kingdom: From Supportive Scrutiny to Unleased Control?, by Caitriona A. Carter, 395-424; National Parliaments after Amsterdam: From Slow Adapters to National Players, 425-476; The Reticent Acknowledgement of National Parliaments in the European Treaties: A Documentation, by Astrid Krekelberg, 477-490.
Nomos Verlag
Maurer, Andreas
Wessels, Wolfgang
2001
Book
PeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/1476/1/National_Parliaments_Losers_or_Latecomers.pdf
Maurer, Andreas and Wessels, Wolfgang, eds. (2001) National Parliaments on their Ways to Europe. Losers or Latecomers? Nomos Verlag, p. 521.
http://aei.pitt.edu/1476/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2024
2011-02-15T22:20:55Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
Netzwerkbildung in der EU als regionale Standortpolitik? Nordrhein-Westfalen und die transnationalen Beziehungen zu Regionen im Benelux-Raumsowie in Mittel- und Osteuropa = Network Building in the EU as Regional Location Policy? North Rhein-Westphalia amd the Transnational Relations to Regions in the Benelux as Well as in Central and Eastern Europe. ZEI Discussion Paper: C 134, 2004
Gross, Nicole Christina.
Belgium
EU-Central and Eastern Europe
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Germany
Nordrhein-Westfalen ist größte politische Region in der EU und aufgrund seiner geographischen Lage im Nordwesten europäische Kernregion. 18 Mio. Menschen leben hier, die ein Bruttoinlandsprodukt von 466,9 Mrd. EUR erwirtschaften, mit dem sie vor Bayern (371,3 Mrd. EUR) und Baden-Württemberg (314,3 Mrd. EUR) liegen. Im Zuge der Globalisierung und Europäisierung muss Nordrhein-Westfalen immer mehr seinen Standort behaupten. Dies erscheint um so schwieriger, je länger sich Strukturkrise und -wandel in dem Bundesland, hier insbesondere im Ruhrgebiet, hinziehen. In die durch die Montanindustrie monostrukturell geprägten und von hoher Arbeitslosigkeit betroffenen Region fließen im Zeitraum 2000 bis 2006 970 Mio. EUR aus Ziel-2-Mitteln der EU. Und dies wird nicht so bleiben, denn nach 2006 wird die EU stärker die schwachen Regionen in den mittel- und osteuropäischen Ländern för-dern. Nordrhein-Westfalen muss mit einer Reduzierung der Strukturförderung und langfristig mit einer Einstellung entsprechender Zahlungen – nach einem "Phasing out" – rechnen.
2004
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2024/1/dp_c134_gross.pdf
Gross, Nicole Christina. (2004) Netzwerkbildung in der EU als regionale Standortpolitik? Nordrhein-Westfalen und die transnationalen Beziehungen zu Regionen im Benelux-Raumsowie in Mittel- und Osteuropa = Network Building in the EU as Regional Location Policy? North Rhein-Westphalia amd the Transnational Relations to Regions in the Benelux as Well as in Central and Eastern Europe. ZEI Discussion Paper: C 134, 2004. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/2024/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6487
2011-02-15T22:42:47Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666676F7665726E616E6365
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F7067646D706D
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"A Europeanization of governance patterns in smaller European democracies?"
Falkner, Gerda
Lieber, Simone.
governance: EU & national level
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
Denmark
Luxembourg
Sweden
decision making/policy-making
Austria
In this paper, we shall first explain why expecting a certain degree of Europeanization of national governance patterns is not implausible. We will then outline a typology of public-private interaction patterns in public policy¬making suitable for detecting major changes, and a framework of factors that mediate domestic adaptation to Europeanization pressures. The latter can be of help in studying effects below the threshold of inter-ideal type changes. This leads us to summarizing four country studies on Europeanization of governance patterns in smaller European democracies, i.e., Austria, Denmark, Luxembourg and Sweden. The conclusions discuss if there is a convergence of public-private interaction patterns as a result of Europeanization.
2003
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6487/1/000460_1.PDF
Falkner, Gerda and Lieber, Simone. (2003) "A Europeanization of governance patterns in smaller European democracies?". In: UNSPECIFIED, Nashville, TN. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/6487/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6735
2020-01-09T21:30:52Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:656661454D55454D536575726F
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303330
7375626A656374733D46:46303133
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D46:46303034
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726C61626F72
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D46:46303238
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F706768646F63
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303232
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Integration and Conditional Convergence in the Enlarged EU Area. CEPS ENEPRI Working Papers No. 31, 1 February 2005
Kaitila, Ville.
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
U.K.
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Cyprus
EMU/EMS/euro
labour/labor
historical development of EC (pre-1986)
This working paper analyses conditional convergence in Europe and also tries to assess the impact that arises from integration. Using a pooled mean-group estimation method, we first analyse the conditional convergence of GDP per labour force in the area covering the 15 member states of the European Union (EU-15) in 1960-2002. Conditional convergence is well-documented for the EU-15. Higher investment, lower public consumption and lower inflation have contributed positively to GDP growth. Deeper European integration is shown to have accelerated growth when inflation is not included in the specification, but not otherwise. The evidence on the effect of integration on growth is therefore mixed. We then apply the same method to estimate the growth of GDP per labour force in the new EU member states – the eight Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs) – for the period 1993-2002. These countries are shown to have converged conditionally towards the average level of GDP per labour force in the EU-15. Higher investment and lower public consumption have also supported growth in the CEECs.
2005-02
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6735/1/1196_31.pdf
Kaitila, Ville. (2005) Integration and Conditional Convergence in the Enlarged EU Area. CEPS ENEPRI Working Papers No. 31, 1 February 2005. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/6735/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6828
2011-02-15T22:44:46Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:436F6E7374346575726F7065
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303330
7375626A656374733D46:46303133
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D46:46303034
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D46:46303331
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303232
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
The European Constitution and its Ratification Crisis. Constitutional Debates in the EU Member States. ZEI Discussion Papers C. 156, 2006
Authors, Numerous.
Ireland
Belgium
Italy
Denmark
Latvia
Estonia
Slovak Republic
Lithuania
Finland
Slovenia
Luxembourg
France
Cyprus
Spain
Netherlands
Malta
Germany
Sweden
Greece
Poland
Hungary
U.K.
Portugal
Czech Republic
Constitution for Europe
Austria
The following collection of papers examines the ratification process in each individual Member State, taking into consideration the most recent developments at the time of writing (January 2006). Furthermore, these papers discuss the position of party groups represented in the European Parliament on the Constitutional Treaty. The concise overview of the political and public debates on the Treaty, as well as the data collected on public opinion, shed light on the current state of the ratification process. The publication offers an analytical look into the constitutional moods of the 25 EU Member States and attempts to outline options for the future of the Constitutional Treaty. Table of Contents: Introduction; Constitutional Debates in Member States with a Referendum (individual chapters on Spain, France, The Netherlands, Luxembourg, Ireland, Denmark, Portugal, Poland, Czech Republic, Great Britain); Constitutional Debates in “old“ Member States without Referendum (individual chapters on Austria, Italy, Belgium, Greece, Germany, Sweden, Finland); Constitutional debates in “new“ Member States without Referendum (individual chapters on Lithuania, Hungary, Slovenia, Slovakia, Latvia, Estonia, Malta, Cyprus); Constitutional Debates among the Factions in the European Parliament (individual chapters on Party Groups in the European Parliament, European People’s Party, Party of European Socialists, Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, The Greens/European Free Alliance, The European United Left – Nordic Green Left, Independence/Democracy Group, Union for Europe of the Nations); Conclusion.
Eschke, Nina
Malick, Thomas.
2006
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6828/1/dp_c156_eschke_malick.pdf
Authors, Numerous. (2006) The European Constitution and its Ratification Crisis. Constitutional Debates in the EU Member States. ZEI Discussion Papers C. 156, 2006. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/6828/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7941
2011-02-15T22:51:07Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:7061666664656D6F637261637964656D6F63726174696364656669636974
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Discontinuity: Another Source for the EU’s Democratic Deficit?"
Konig, Thomas.
Ireland
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
Denmark
Luxembourg
France
Sweden
Greece
democracy/democratic deficit
Austria
This study evaluates discontinuity that is induced by the two-stage lawmaking process of EU directives and discussed in the jurisprudential literature as another source for the EU’s democratic deficit. While directives must be transposed into national law, their lengthy transposition period has raised the normative question about the extent to which governments of today can politically and reliably commit domestic majorities of tomorrow. From a political science perspective, this jack-in-the-box-effect is particularly critical in systems with restrictive voting procedures and high agency loss because the parliamentary principal is unable to learn about the behaviour of the governmental agent and can hardly change or amend the decision of the former government. Hence, the empirical task is to identify the potential for discontinuity in EU lawmaking which requires measuring the governmental activities in the implementation process and to compare the preferences of the former and current majorities. This is the first study which empirically analyzes the potential of discontinuity by combining statistics on the implementation process in the 15 member states with preference indicators for their governments over a period of almost 20 years. The findings reveal that parliaments are almost excluded from this process. On closer inspection, the results show that the preferences of the former and the newly elected representatives differ drastically in about one third of all cases, in particular in Austria, Denmark, France, Sweden – and to a lesser extent – in Ireland, Greece and Luxembourg where public support for European integration has also notably decreased in recent years.
2007
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7941/1/konig%2Dt%2D06a.pdf
Konig, Thomas. (2007) "Discontinuity: Another Source for the EU’s Democratic Deficit?". In: UNSPECIFIED, Montreal, Canada. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/7941/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7994
2011-02-15T22:51:27Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737077656C666172657374617465
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F706768646F63
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
The politics of reforms in Bismarckian welfare systems
Palier, Bruno.
Belgium
Italy
Luxembourg
France
Spain
Netherlands
welfare state
Germany
Hungary
historical development of EC (pre-1986)
Czech Republic
Austria
Countries that share a particular social protection system, of Bismarckian inspiration and based on social insurance, seem to encounter similar and particularly awkward difficulties. They also seem to be following parallel trends in reforms, with respect to both their timing and their content and process. This paper is an attempt to compare the development of Bismarckian welfare systems during the last 25 years, showing the common pattern of reform.
2007
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7994/1/palier%2Db%2D05i.pdf
Palier, Bruno. (2007) The politics of reforms in Bismarckian welfare systems. In: UNSPECIFIED, Montreal, Canada. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/7994/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:11486
2011-02-15T23:14:57Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737077656C666172657374617465
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D6F74686572
A Semi-Aggregate Model for Social Expenditure Projections. ENEPRI Research Reports No. 62, January 2009
Marco Ferraresi, Pier
Monticone, Chiara.
Italy
Denmark
Latvia
Luxembourg
France
welfare state
Spain
Netherlands
Germany
Poland
U.K.
This report describes the semi-aggregate model (SAM) developed to deliver aggregate projections of social protection expenditures as well as semi-aggregate projections of income sources by age class and gender for a number of European countries (Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Spain and United Kingdom) over the horizon 2005 - 2050. The partial equilibrium stance adopted allows both a greater flexibility in the choice of countries and in the building of scenarios, while at the same time offering an easier understanding of the model’s inner mechanisms with respect to general equilibrium modelling. Results for aggregate projections are presented, including various sensitivity scenarios devoted at analysing the role of theoretical replacement rates and employment rates – such as the one necessary to fulfil the Lisbon targets – on public pensions expenditures.
2009-01
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/11486/1/1777.pdf
Marco Ferraresi, Pier and Monticone, Chiara. (2009) A Semi-Aggregate Model for Social Expenditure Projections. ENEPRI Research Reports No. 62, January 2009. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/11486/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:14574
2011-02-15T23:34:37Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303439
74797065733D6F74686572
The Educational System in Luxembourg. CEPS Special Report, 21 September 2009
Geyer, Florian.
Luxembourg
education policy/vocational training
This paper was prepared as part of the INCLUD-ED Project, an Integrated Project of the 6th Framework Programme of the European Commission. Integrated Projects bring together the critical mass of activities and resources needed to achieve ambitious clearly defined scientific objectives and are expected to have a structuring effect on the fabric of European research. INCLUD-ED was the only project focused on compulsory education which was selected in the last Calls for Proposals of the 6th Framework Programme.
2009-09
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/14574/1/Includ%2Ded_FG_on_Ed_System_in_Luxembourg.pdf
Geyer, Florian. (2009) The Educational System in Luxembourg. CEPS Special Report, 21 September 2009. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/14574/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:33136
2012-08-19T21:05:05Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166664575726F7065616E656C656374696F6E73
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
Information and voting behaviour in European referendums: A missing link?
Siapkidou, Elli
France
Ireland
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Spain
European elections/voting behavior
In recent years an increasing number of European governments have decided to hold referendums on European issues. Whether it is the Treaty of Nice, participation in EMU, the European Constitution or the Treaty of Lisbon, whether the referendum is legally required (e.g. Ireland) or government induced (e.g. France), the number of European
referendums has increased. This increase has been accompanied, more often than not, by negative outcomes. Starting with the Danish rejection of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU) in 1992, there has been an increase in negative outcomes in European referendums. These negative outcomes, along with fall in public support (see Eurobarometers) and the rise of Eurosceptic parties across Europe have brought public opinion to the centre of the political and academic debate, casting doubts about the
resilience of the citizens’ “permissive consensus”. Whether it has become a “constraining dissensus” or not, the fact remains that there is a gap between Europe and its citizens and it seems to be widening.
Several rationales have been put forward to explain the European referendums’ outcomes, mainly focusing on each country at a time. Within this debate, this paper aims
to provide a holistic approach to voting in European referendums by exploring voting behaviour in five countries (Spain, France, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Ireland).
First, this paper will explore the motivations behind citizens’ negative or positive voting. Secondly, it will look into the relation between citizens’ levels of information and voting behaviour in European referendums. For this purpose, there will be a qualitative analysis
of the post-referendum Eurobarometers surveys, of the referendums in Spain, France, the Netherlands and Luxembourg on the European Constitution and Ireland on the Treaty of Lisbon. The argument put forward will be that information levels play a crucial role in influencing the voting behaviour of European citizens, in that it is associated both with abstention and negative voting.
2009
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/33136/1/siapkidou._elli.pdf
http://www.euce.org/eusa2009/papers.php
Siapkidou, Elli (2009) Information and voting behaviour in European referendums: A missing link? In: UNSPECIFIED. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/33136/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:70871
2016-01-15T18:50:35Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303136
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Balancing Priorities and Emergency Measures: Luxembourg’s Council Presidency. EPIN Commentary No. 30/15 January 2016
Renma, Vilde
Russack, Sophia
European Council-Presidency
Luxembourg
The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg held the reins of the EU Council presidency between 1 July
and 31 December 2015. This was the 12th time that the second-smallest and the richest EU
member state1
held the rotating Council presidency. As one of the founding members of the
EU, Luxembourg has sound experience to bring to this role. It was, however, their first presidency
since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and its introduction of the trio presidency format, this
time including Italy and Latvia. Under the slogan ‘A Union for the Citizens’, Luxembourg had the
task of concluding certain major dossiers before the end of the trio’s term and was able to contribute to
its overarching agenda, especially regarding the priorities of financial stability, growth stimulation and
the digital agenda.
2016-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/70871/1/EPIN_Commentary_No_30_Luxembourg_Presidency_0.pdf
https://www.ceps.eu/publications/balancing-priorities-and-emergency-measures-luxembourg%E2%80%99s-council-presidency
Renma, Vilde and Russack, Sophia (2016) Balancing Priorities and Emergency Measures: Luxembourg’s Council Presidency. EPIN Commentary No. 30/15 January 2016. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/70871/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:74994
2017-03-31T16:46:16Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
74797065733D6F74686572
Information Guide: Luxembourg. May 2015
Cardiff EDC, .
Luxembourg
A guide to information sources on the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, with hyperlinks to information within European Sources Online and on external websites.
2015-05
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/74994/1/Luxembourg.pdf
https://www.europeansources.info/showDoc?ID=1041933
Cardiff EDC, . (2015) Information Guide: Luxembourg. May 2015. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/74994/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:87734
2019-12-29T21:17:44Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65666153696E676C654D61726B6574:65666153696E676C654D61726B65746361706974616C676F6F64737365727669636573
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Managing Capital Flows: Experiences from Central and Eastern Europe. WP234. March 2008
von Hagen, Jürgen
Siedschlag, Iulia
EU-Central and Eastern Europe
Ireland
Luxembourg
Netherlands
capital, goods, services, workers
The countries of Central and Eastern Europe went from being largely closed to being largely open to international capital flows. This paper discusses their experience with capital account liberalization and coping with large capital inflows. We start with a discussion of basic economic characteristics and the real convergence achieved so far, and then discuss the pace and sequencing of capital account liberalization and the degree of international financial integration over the past decade. We then analyze trends and patterns of capital inflows in these countries in recent years. These stylized facts are useful for understanding the macroeconomic implications and policy challenges of coping with large capital inflows, which we discuss next. Finally we conclude with policy implications for emerging Asian economies.
2008
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/87734/1/WP234.pdf
von Hagen, Jürgen and Siedschlag, Iulia (2008) Managing Capital Flows: Experiences from Central and Eastern Europe. WP234. March 2008. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/87734/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:87957
2018-12-13T19:38:29Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303338
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Optimal interconnection and renewable targets in North-West Europe. ESRI WP416, December 2011
Lynch, Muireann A.
O'Malley, Mark J.
Tol, Richard S.J.
telecommunication policy
Belgium
Denmark
France
Germany
Ireland
Luxembourg
Netherlands
U.K.
We present a mixed-integer, linear programming model for determining optimal interconnection locations using a cost minimisation approach. Optimal interconnection and capacity investment decisions are determined under various targets for renewable penetration. The model is applied to a test system for eight countries in Northern Europe. It is found that considerations on the supply side dominate demand side considerations when determining optimal interconnection investment. Interconnection is found to be most valuable when targets for renewable electricity are set for the whole system, rather than for different regions within the system.
2011
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/87957/1/WP416.pdf
http://www.esri.ie/publications/the-time-evolution-of-the-social-cost-of-carbon-an-application-of-fund/
Lynch, Muireann A. and O'Malley, Mark J. and Tol, Richard S.J. (2011) Optimal interconnection and renewable targets in North-West Europe. ESRI WP416, December 2011. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/87957/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:101222
2019-12-26T17:40:58Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:696E7465726E6174696F6E616C7472616465
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
74797065733D61727469636C65
Trade Relations Between the United States and the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union. Belgian American Trade Review Vol. 35, No. 6, June 1980
Urbain, Robert
EU-US
Belgium
Luxembourg
international trade
The following speech was delivered at a membership luncheon of the Chamber at the Hotel Pierre, New
York City, on June 19, 1980. Minister Urbain was frank in his appraisal of declining Belgian exports to the
United States and the difficulties in encouraging Belgian businessmen to properly research and develop
new markets in this country. He also discussed the necessity of correcting the situation and some of the
steps he proposes to take.
After the luncheon, a meeting was held in another room. This was open to those interested in discussing
Belgo-American trade relations with the Minister. Robert J. Savoye, Past President and Chairman of the
Chamber's Trade Policy Committee, led a survey of the facts that have contributed to the present unsatisfactory
trade relations and suggested some steps Belgian industry and business need to take to obtain
a larger share of the potential American market.
1980
Article
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/101222/1/244.pdf
Urbain, Robert (1980) Trade Relations Between the United States and the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union. Belgian American Trade Review Vol. 35, No. 6, June 1980.
http://aei.pitt.edu/101222/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102400
2020-02-06T20:44:11Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303330
7375626A656374733D46:46303133
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D46:46303034
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:627564676574706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D46:46303235
7375626A656374733D46:46303331
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D46:464963656C616E64
7375626A656374733D46:46303136
7375626A656374733D46:4649737261656C
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303232
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
With a Little Help from My Friends: Ministerial Alignment and Public Spending Composition in Parliamentary Democracies. LEQS Paper No. 133/2018
April 2018
Bojar, Abel
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
U.K.
Czech Republic
Cyprus
Malta
Iceland
Israel
budgets & financing
The determinants of public spending composition have been studied from three broad
perspectives in the scholarly literature: functional economic pressures, institutional constraints
and party-political determinants. This paper engages with the third perspective by placing
intra-governmental dynamics in the center of the analysis. Building on the portfolio allocation
approach in the coalition formation literature and the common pool perspective in public
budgeting, I argue that spending ministers with party-political backing from the Finance
Minister or the Prime Minister are in a privileged positon to obtain extra funding for their
policy jurisdictions compared to their colleagues without such support or without any partisan
affiliation (non-partisan ministers). I test these propositions via a system of equations on six
spending categories using seemingly unrelated regressions on a panel of 32 parliamentary
democracies over two decades and offer largely supportive empirical evidence. With the
exception of education, I provide evidence that budget shares accruing to key spending
departments reflect this party-political logic of spending outcomes. In addition to the
econometric results, I also illustrate the impact of ministerial alignment by short qualitative
accounts from selected country cases.
2018
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102400/1/LEQSPaper133.pdf
Bojar, Abel (2018) With a Little Help from My Friends: Ministerial Alignment and Public Spending Composition in Parliamentary Democracies. LEQS Paper No. 133/2018 April 2018. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/102400/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102447
2020-02-11T14:21:32Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033394575726F7065616E636974697A656E73686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:7061666664656D6F637261637964656D6F63726174696364656669636974
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
More Initiative for Europe’s Citizens. Bertelsmann Policy Brief 02.2018
Hierlemann, Dominik
Huesmann, Christian
European citizenship
Austria
Germany
Luxembourg
democracy/democratic deficit
The European citizens’ initiative is being reformed – and that’s a good thing.
To date, the media have hardly reported on this young participation instrument.
But if the citizens’ initiative is to have any impact in Brussels,
it needs more public awareness.
2018
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102447/1/2.1.pdf
Hierlemann, Dominik and Huesmann, Christian (2018) More Initiative for Europe’s Citizens. Bertelsmann Policy Brief 02.2018. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/102447/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102509
2020-02-27T14:32:56Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303330
7375626A656374733D46:46303133
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D46:46303034
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737067656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303336
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D46:46303331
7375626A656374733D46:46303238
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303232
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D6F74686572
Social Justice in the EU – Index Report 2017 Social Inclusion Monitor Europe. Bertelsmann Stiftung Social Inclusion Monitor Europe 2017
Daniel Schraad-Tischler, Daniel Schraad-Tischler
Christof Schiller, Christof Schiller
Sascha Matthias Heller, Sascha Matthias Heller
Nina Siemer, Nina Siemer
Austria
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
U.K.
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Cyprus
Malta
Croatia
general
1. Europe is recovering not only economically,
but also in the domain of social justice
After years of downward movement, an upward trend in the domain of social
justice is evident in the broad majority of EU member states. Although far from
all member states have regained their pre-crisis levels, the most recent EU Social
Justice Index data give cause for hope that the worst is over not just in economic
terms, but also from a social perspective. At the top of this year’s Social Justice
Index are the northern European states of Denmark, Sweden and Finland. Rounding
out the top group are the Czech Republic, Slovenia, the Netherlands, Austria
and Germany, while Greece, despite again posting slight gains this year, remains
clearly in last place.
2017
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102509/1/NW_EU_Social_Justice_Index_2017.pdf
Daniel Schraad-Tischler, Daniel Schraad-Tischler and Christof Schiller, Christof Schiller and Sascha Matthias Heller, Sascha Matthias Heller and Nina Siemer, Nina Siemer (2017) Social Justice in the EU – Index Report 2017 Social Inclusion Monitor Europe. Bertelsmann Stiftung Social Inclusion Monitor Europe 2017. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102509/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102510
2020-02-28T14:32:27Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303232
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D46:4E6F7264696361726561
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D46:46303336
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303136:4430303230313645617374536F7574686561737441736961
7375626A656374733D46:4643616E616461
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303133
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303133
7375626A656374733D46:46303330
7375626A656374733D46:466A6170616E
7375626A656374733D46:46303034
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D45:45303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D46:46303235
7375626A656374733D46:46303331
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303238
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303232
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D6F74686572
Social Justice in the EU and OECD. Bertelsmann Stiftung Index Report 2019
Thorsten Hellmann, Thorsten Hellmann
Pia Schmidt, Pia Schmidt
Heller, Sascha Matthias
EU-US
EU-Middle East
East and Southeast Asia
EU-Latin America
OECD
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
U.K.
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Cyprus
Malta
Turkey
Croatia
Canada
Japan
Nordic area
With the onset of the economic and financial crisis, social justice has deteriorated
– on average – in the OECD and EU countries surveyed by the SJI.1 While the Social
Justice Index shows a slight but ongoing upward trend since economic recovery
began in 2014, the overall score remains below the pre-crisis level. In addition,
there are still striking discrepancies with regard to available opportunities to participate
in society in the 41 countries surveyed.
2019
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102510/1/SJI_2019.pdf
Thorsten Hellmann, Thorsten Hellmann and Pia Schmidt, Pia Schmidt and Heller, Sascha Matthias (2019) Social Justice in the EU and OECD. Bertelsmann Stiftung Index Report 2019. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102510/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102566
2020-03-05T14:06:17Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737067656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D46:46303336
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303330
7375626A656374733D46:46303133
7375626A656374733D46:46303034
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D46:46303331
7375626A656374733D46:46303238
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303232
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D6F74686572
Social Justice in the EU – Index Report 2016 Social Inclusion Monitor Europe
Schraad-Tischler, Daniel
Schiller, Christof
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
U.K.
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Cyprus
Malta
Croatia
general
1. Social justice in the EU – participation opportunities have improved in the majority of EU member states, but are still a long way behind precrisis levels
Social justice has improved slightly in the majority of EU member states compared
with last year’s Social Justice Index (SJI 2015). It appears that, after years of decline,
the majority of countries reached their lowest point between 2012 and 2014.
Whether the improvement is a genuine, stable turnaround or just a slight temporary
easing will only become apparent in future reports. At least the downward
trend observed since 2008 in terms of equal participation opportunities has halted
in the majority of member states. However, even seven years after the global economic
crisis first hit, participation opportunities in the vast majority of EU states
– with a few exceptions – are still noticeably worse than before the crisis. Only
five of the 28 EU countries – the Czech Republic, Germany, Luxembourg, the UK,
and Poland – are showing moderate improvements in terms of participation opportunities,
compared with the situation before the economic and financial crisis.
2016-11
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102566/1/Studie_NW_Social%2DJustice%2DIndex_2016.pdf
Schraad-Tischler, Daniel and Schiller, Christof (2016) Social Justice in the EU – Index Report 2016 Social Inclusion Monitor Europe. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102566/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102568
2020-03-05T14:22:57Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737067656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D46:46303336
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D46:46303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303330
7375626A656374733D46:46303133
7375626A656374733D46:46303034
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D46:46303331
7375626A656374733D46:46303238
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303232
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D6F74686572
Social Justice in the EU – Index Report 2015
Social Inclusion Monitor Europe
Schraad-Tischler, Daniel
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
U.K.
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Cyprus
Malta
Croatia
general
1. Social (in)justice in the EU – The low point seems to have been reached,
but no comprehensive turnaround is evident
In the majority of EU countries, the extent of social justice relative to last year’s edition of the
Social Justice Index (SJI 2014) has at least avoided further deterioration. It appears that for the
majority of countries, after several years of decline, the lowest point was reached between 2012 and 2014. This is in large part due to slight labor market improvements visible in the majority of
countries after 2013. Nevertheless, a genuine and comprehensive turnaround in terms of social
justice is not underway. To be sure, a certain stabilization with regard to economic affairs is evident
in many countries, at least on the basis of some indicators. This is true even of crisis-battered
European countries like Spain, Portugal and Ireland. However, only future SJI editions will show
whether social justice in Europe can sustainably stabilize and improve again. Social conditions
and participation opportunities for people in most EU countries remain considerably worse than
in the pre-crisis period. In no less than 11 countries, among them Spain and Portugal, things have
deteriorated once again compared to last year’s survey.
2016
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102568/1/Studie_NW_Social%2DJustice%2Din%2Dthe%2DEU%2DIndex%2DReport%2D2015_2015.pdf
Schraad-Tischler, Daniel (2016) Social Justice in the EU – Index Report 2015 Social Inclusion Monitor Europe. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102568/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102571
2020-03-05T15:02:40Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737067656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D46:46303136
7375626A656374733D46:4643616E616461
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:466A6170616E
7375626A656374733D46:46303134
7375626A656374733D45:45303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
7375626A656374733D46:46303235
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D46:464963656C616E64
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D6F74686572
Social Justice in the OECD – How Do the Member States
Compare? Bertelsmann Stiftung Sustainable Governance Indicators 2011
Schraad-Tischler, Daniel
EU-US
OECD
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Republic
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
U.K.
Czech Republic
Turkey
Canada
Iceland
Japan
general
A cross-national comparison of social justice in the OECD shows considerable variation in the
extent to which this principle is developed in these market-based democracies. According to the
methodology applied in this study, Iceland and Norway are the most socially just countries.1 Turkey,
which ranks among the bottom five in each of the six targeted dimensions, is the OECD’s least
socially just country. The findings of the cross-national study can be summarized as follows:
The north European states comprise a league of their own. Leading by far on the Justice Index,
Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland achieve particularly good results in the dimensions
of “access to education,” “social cohesion” and “intergenerational justice.” Yet even in
Scandinavia, there are some areas in want of action. Despite its overall strong showing, Sweden,
for example, struggles with a rate of youth unemployment three times as high as the general
unemployment rate.
Most central and northwestern European states rank in the upper midrange, although the Netherlands
(6), Switzerland (7) and France (10) rank higher than Germany (14).
The east-central European OECD members Hungary (17), Poland (20) and Slovakia (24) rank in
the lower midrange together with their southern European neighbors. The high-ranking outlier
here is the Czech Republic (11) due to its very low poverty levels in cross-national comparison.
All southern European countries lie considerably below the OECD average, with Turkey and
Greece in the bottom group of the ranking. In both these countries, fair access to education and
intergenerational justice (i.e., equity in burden-sharing across generations) are particularly underdeveloped.
Canada (9) is the top performer among the non-European OECD states. Its high ranking can be
attributed to strong results in the areas of education, labor market justice and social cohesion.
Australia (21), despite its relatively inclusive labor market, is struggling with larger problems
in poverty prevention and educational justice, and is therefore lagging behind in terms of creating
a sound framework for social justice.
Japan (22) and South Korea (25), where income poverty is relatively spread, fail to rank above
the bottom third of the Justice Index. Japan also receives particularly low marks for intergenerational
justice.
2011
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102571/1/GP_Social_Justice_in_the_OECD.pdf
Schraad-Tischler, Daniel (2011) Social Justice in the OECD – How Do the Member States Compare? Bertelsmann Stiftung Sustainable Governance Indicators 2011. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102571/