oalib

Publish in OALib Journal

ISSN: 2333-9721

APC: Only $99

Submit

Any time

2019 ( 23 )

2018 ( 332 )

2017 ( 328 )

2016 ( 388 )

Custom range...

Search Results: 1 - 10 of 15644 matches for " co-decision "
All listed articles are free for downloading (OA Articles)
Page 1 /15644
Display every page Item
Women's Empowerment And Panchayat Raj
Mahadevi. M. Tugave
Golden Research Thoughts , 2013, DOI: 10.9780/22315063
Abstract: Empowerment in its simplest form means the manifestation of redistribution of power that challenges patriarchal ideology and the male dominance. It is both a process and the result of the process. The concept of women's empowerment, throughout the world, has its roots in women's movement. It is since the mid 1980s that this term became popular in the field of development, especially in reference to women. In India, it is the Sixth Five Year Plan (1980- 1985) which can be taken as a landmark for the cause of women. Ills here that the concept of women and empowerment was introduced for the first time.
The "Legislative Backbone" keeping the Institution upright? The Role of European Parliament Committees in the EU Policy-Making Process
Christine Neuhold
European Integration Online Papers , 2001,
Abstract: Over the past five decades the European Parliament (EP) has moved from being a largely consultative assembly to being a genuine co-legislature. The growth in the EPs powers was accompanied by a revaluation of its Standing Committees. It is in these committees, the legislative backbone of the EP, that scrutiny of European Union (EU) legislation takes place. As in the US Congress the real work of the Parliament is done in its committees. They have become a key element in the EU policy-making process and make vital contributions to the shaping of legislation. Although these committees play such a major role in the EP, they have rarely been the subject of empirical inquiries. This paper, which is part of a wider project studying the role of committees, intends to fill this gap. In an examination of how legislative acts have been processed by such committees on the basis of interviews and documentary analysis, this paper focuses on the following main questions: 1. How do EP committees operate? 2. How do they interact with other institutions within the EU system of governance? 3. How do they affect the "link" to the EU citizen? From an analytical perspective answers to these questions are important as they help us to understand some characteristics of the EU decision-making process. From a normative perspective our research also tries to answer the question of whether EP committees help increase the EPs accountability to EU citizens.
The "Legislative Backbone" keeping the Institution upright? The Role of European Parliament Committees in the EU Policy-Making Process
Christine Neuhold
European Integration Online Papers , 2001,
Abstract: Over the past five decades the European Parliament (EP) has moved from being a largely consultative assembly to being a genuine co-legislature. The growth in the EP s powers was accompanied by a revaluation of its Standing Committees. It is in these committees, the legislative backbone of the EP, that scrutiny of European Union (EU) legislation takes place. As in the US Congress the real work of the Parliament is done in its committees. They have become a key element in the EU policy-making process and make vital contributions to the shaping of legislation. Although these committees play such a major role in the EP, they have rarely been the subject of empirical inquiries. This paper, which is part of a wider project studying the role of committees, intends to fill this gap. In an examination of how legislative acts have been processed by such committees on the basis of interviews and documentary analysis, this paper focuses on the following main questions: 1. How do EP committees operate? 2. How do they interact with other institutions within the EU system of governance? 3. How do they affect the "link" to the EU citizen? From an analytical perspective answers to these questions are important as they help us to understand some characteristics of the EU decision-making process. From a normative perspective our research also tries to answer the question of whether EP committees help increase the EP s accountability to EU citizens.
New forms of decision making for sustainability
Mojca Golobi?,Wolfgang Pfefferkorn,Sergeja Praper
Urbani Izziv , 2007,
Abstract: Paper discusses the way and the level to which the decision making form is relevant for the outcome of the decision process as measured against the sustainability targets. A brief overview of scientific and political discourse on this matter shows, that participative decision making forms are supposed to lead towards sustainable development. While their qualities in ensuring transparency, inclusiveness, fairness and deliberation opportunities for concerned citizens need not be questioned, their contribution towards other sustainability goals require some empirical support. An attempt to collect some empirical evidence on this relation is presented in the second part of the paper. The study is based on the analysis of extensive data base of “best practice examples” in several topics related to sustainable development, which were compiled in “Future in the Alps” project. A brief overview confirms the inadequacy of traditional market, technocratic and consultative decision making forms to effectively support sustainability objectives. The detailed study of a set of cases, assessed as “best practices” of decision making has shown that they perform rather effective in terms of meeting sustainability goals. As expected, their effects in social sphere were highest and most positive, the contribution towards environmental goals generally high, but sometimes ambiguous, while the economic effects could sometimes be assessed as rather long-term and redistributive.
Role of Political Affiliation across the European Institutions in the Dynamics of the EU Legislative Process
Radko Hokovsky,Viera Knutelska
AUCO Czech Economic Review , 2012,
Abstract: This paper addresses the question of the impact of party political affiliation on the pace of the EU legislative process. It hypothesizes that the codecision process should be faster if the key actors from the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council are closer on the left-right policy scale or share affiliation to the same political family. The hypotheses are tested on the data covering the period of five years, from May 2004 to June 2009. While closeness on the left-right policy scale did not prove to have any effect, the findings show that if all three main actors, or at least the EP rapporteur and responsible Commissioner, come from the same political family, the codecision-process is indeed faster. The paper thus aims to contribute to the study of importance of party political ties and left-right cleavages in the EU decision-making.
Time to Decide: The effect of early agreements on legislative duration in the EU
Dimiter and Anne Rasmussen Toshkov
European Integration Online Papers , 2012,
Abstract: The increased use of early agreements in the EU co-decision procedure raises the concern that intra and inter-institutional political debate is sacrificed for the sake of efficiency. We investigate the effect of early agreements (trilogues) on the time it takes for legislation to be negotiated during the first reading of co-decision. We find that the first reading negotiations of trilogues on salient legislation take longer than first readings of similar files reconciled at second and third reading. First readings of early agreements also appear to last longer when considering all co-decision files submitted to the 5th and 6th European Parliaments, but the effect is masked by a general increase in first reading duration after 2004. We conclude that even if early agreements restrict access of certain actors to decision making, they allow for more time for substantive debate at the first reading stage than similar files reconciled later in the legislative process.
PROBLèMES SPéCIFIQUES CONCERNANT LES RELATIONS ENTRE LES INSTITUTIONS COMMUNAUTAIRES
Mirela COSTACHE
Acta Universitatis Danubius : Juridica , 2007,
Abstract: The theme discussed in the article in question debates the institutional European edifice. Seen more than a confederation of states, but less than a federal state, the European Union represents a new edifice, which is always evolving. The relationship between the five fundamental institutions and governments Member States are in a continuous change, as the balance of forces shall be adjusted and modified. In conclusion, none of the European Community institutions can be completely autonomous. They are all interdependent, connected, both at the national and super national level.
Comitology and delegated acts after Lisbon: How the European Parliament lost the implementation game
Mathias Dobbels
European Integration Online Papers , 2012,
Abstract: The European Parliament is frequently seen as the ‘big winner’ of the Lisbon Treaty, given the fact that several changes have significantly extended its powers, such as the extension of co-decision as the ordinary legislative procedure, and the introduction of the assent procedure to international agreements. The reform of comitology (Article 291) and the introduction of the new instrument of delegated acts (Article 290) are generally seen in the same light, marking the culmination of a long-standing quest of the EP to gain equal rights to the Council in this area. This article questions the view that the Parliament has had unconditional ‘success’ by examining in detail the way the new provisions have been implemented. It argues that Member States in the Council managed to claw back influence on delegated powers through the manner that the new treaty articles have been put into practice. We identify the EP’s timing and selective attention with regard to this domain as the main explanations for this outcome. Our analysis demonstrates the need to study the actual implementation of treaty provisions before coming to a conclusion about the identity of ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ of treaty reform.
National, Political and Institutional Influence in European Union Decision Making
Franti?ek Turnovec
AUCO Czech Economic Review , 2008,
Abstract: The distribution of decisional power among member states of the EU has remained a hot issue in recent discussions about the future design of European Union decision making and the Lisbon revision of the unsuccessful proposal of the Constitutional Treaty. Usually only the distribution of voting weights in the Council of Ministers under the qualified majority voting rule is taken into account. In contrast, in this paper we formulate simplified models of the consultation and co-decision procedures in the decision making of European Union institutions, reflecting the fact that together with the Council of Ministers the Commission and European Parliament are also important actors in EU decision making. The main conclusion of this paper is that the distribution of voting power in the Council of Ministers voting record provides incomplete evidence about national influences in European Union decision making. With rare exceptions decision making is based on the consultation and co-decision procedures involving the Commission and/or European Parliament. Legislative procedures change the inter-institutional distribution of power (among the Council, Commission and European Parliament) reducing the power of the Council and at the same time they change intra-institutional power in the Council (the relative power of the Member States compared to the Council voting without taking into account the Commission and Parliament).
A New Kind of Legitimacy for a New Kind of Parliament The Evolution of the European Parliament
Udo Diedrichs
European Integration Online Papers , 1997,
Abstract: The Treaty on European Union (EU) has on the one hand increased democratic legitimacy of the integration process by confering new powers to the European Parliament (EP) - legitimacy viewed as an attribute-, while on the other hand acceptance by the citizens - legitimacy conceived as orientation - dropped considerably after Maastricht. This situation hints at a paradox and highlights the need for a more complex approach to the issue of legitimacy of the EU and the role played by the EP. As a first step, we identify different views on the role of the European Parliament: a federalist and a realist one. Further, they are contrasted with empirical findings about the role and function of the EP after Maastricht, using three main dimensions: policy-making, system-development and interaction with the citizens. Taking into account the results of this inquiry, we present a new perspective on the EP based upon a view of the EU as a new kind of political system characterised by fusion. It is a major feature of this new kind of political system that national, subnational and supranational actors merge their instruments to 'produce' political decisions. The result is a mixed polity whose legitimacy is neither based on a collective personality called 'the people' nor on the single peoples of the member states only, but on a 'pluralistic citizenship' as a 'unity-in diversity'. Legitimacy as an attribute must be defined in new terms deviant from national experiences, entailing - at least partly - a lack of transparency, increasing complexity and growing differentiation. Is Legitimacy possible despite these apparant drawbacks? This question hints at an ambiguous, but also 'productive' tension within the EU system as a whole and with regard to the role and position of the EP in particular.
Page 1 /15644
Display every page Item


Home
Copyright © 2008-2017 Open Access Library. All rights reserved.