Short Essays on European Topics

Previous Essays are still being filled into this feed.

To what degree is the EU an economic or a social organisation?
23.03.2021

Depending on the context, this question may have plenty answers. Looking back at the founding years, the European movement was characterized by the common goal of securing peace – by introducing economic constructions for that purpose. It is hard to draw a line between the two agendas in this perspective, it’s a chicken-and-egg question.

However, putting the question in the context of corona vaccine procurement a rather social picture emerges. While, doubtlessly, the EU’s faith in neoliberal market principles may have proven a naïve mistake, as Oliver Picek (Moment, 2021) writes, the general effort to jointly obtain vaccines and supply MS fairly regardless of individual MS wealth supports the social side of the European Union. Especially in this matter, I would wish for an even stronger european authority against entrepreneurial players, after all scandals with FFP2 masks and the breaking news of AstraZeneca's concealed vaccine doses, that have been uncovered by EU-inspectors. I still understand the critical voices on the limping process of vaccination (in Austria), yet the EU should not take the blame. National governments are responsible for engaging in the provided possibilites of procurement and as it seems enterprises have to be regulated by even stricter regulations to avoid opportunistic behaviour.

- ORF. (2021). 29 Millionen Impfdosen in Italien entdeckt. https://orf.at/stories/3206518/
- Picek, Oliver. (2021). Zu sehr der neoliberalen Propaganda geglaubt: Was lief falsch bei der EU-Impfstoffbeschaffung? In: Moment Magazin. https://www.moment.at/story/zu-sehr-der-neoliberalen-propaganda-geglaubt-was-lief-falsch-bei-der-eu-impfstoffbeschaffung

Cohesion Policy
23.03.2021

Cohesion Policy is constructed with the main goal of reducing economic and social inequalities between the European Union’s Member States. Generally, all parties are supposed to benefit from the policies: wealthier countries benefit from opportunities of an expanding single market, while countries with lower GDP are supported in order of catching up with economic and social developments. Cohesion policy works with the relocation of resources, which naturally entails a difficult discussion of the appropriate distribution and contribution to cohesion funds, like the Structural and Investment Fund, the European Social Fund and the Common Agricultural Policy.

One of the core questions in this discussion concerns the balance between the level of authority given to the EU and sovereignty held by MS in terms of allocating respective resources. Although an emotionally loaded question, the best answers can only be given based on empirical evidence on the efficiency of one or the either. As Crescenzi and Giua (2020) point out, previous literature has mostly explained the positive impact on a EU-wide level or only on MS-internal level. The authors tackle this research gap, coming to the conclusion, that while some MS show positive effects on parameters of employment and economic growth after receiving cohesion funding, other MS fail to prevail a positive of effect on one or even both parameters. This heterogeneity, examined at NUTS2-level (looking into smaller regions), suggests that MS an essential argument in the given discussion is about the internal ability to convert fundings into effects, hence the authors suggest in 2020 to shift authority again toward MS-decision making.

- Crescenzi, Riccardo, & Giua, Mara. (2020). One or many Cohesion Policies of the European Union? On the differential economic impacts of Cohesion Policy across member states. Regional Studies, 54(1), 10-20.
- McCormick, J. (2020) ‘CohesionPolicyʼ, in McCormick, J. ‘European UnionPoliticsʼ, 3rd edition, London: Macmillan,362-377.

An adequate policy cycle
16.03.2021

Discussing “the policy cycle in the EU that suggests that all interests are adequately represented”

The general priority of equal representation of MS interests is one of the aims of the respective policy cycle, integrating most institutions in decision making processes. (EC for agenda setting & law drafting, EP for approval, CJEU for legitimation, EP & MS for implementation, All for evaluation of the policies). I agree with Pazashvili Ester’s comment that it is of highest importance to grant equal reflection to all MS.

Yet, the issue of adequacy has been challenged by actions of member states, that bend or even break general values to which the EU has committed through different charter (Copenhagen Criteria, UDHR, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union). Hence, I do understand some MS asking for changes (of prerequisites) in the policy cycle to limit other MS, that break with keay values of the EU, free ride on the economical benefits of the Union itself. To give an example, I consider Polands recent changes to abortion law as an infringement of equality before the law, of equality between women and men and and a negligence of respect for human dignity.

See :
- https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55838210
- “Equal Opportunities” - https://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-parliament/en/democracy-and-human-rights/fundamental-rights-in-the-eu/promoting-equal-opportunities

The Equilibrium between efficiency and transparency
15.03.2021

The benefit desired from these trialogues is a shortened adoption & approval procedure and avoidance of rejections of legislative texts. This has been successful, as the chronologic statistics show, however at questionable expenses. Firstly, as the informal meetings are not required to publish any supporting documents, details become unknown and input by citizens is not enabled, hence undermining the democratic legitimisation of these trialogues.

The short-term rotation of the presidency of the Council of the EU leads as well to very varying pressure to conclude discussions, as can be said f.e. about the Digital Services Act, where the discussion is led under the Portuguese presidency. As some MS lack the (sitting) institutions in some matters, they may suffer from limited resources to contribute and follow the discussions of certain trialogues, thus creating a critical vacuum of influence in some matters.

Lastly, the displaced possibility of influence through political party lines can be regarded critical for transparency.

Finally, the cost-saving efficiency of this system has to be acknowledged as well.

You may also like