How the European Union does not work: national bargaining success in the Council of Ministers

We know surprisingly little about whether the content of European Union legislation reflects the preferences of some Member States more than others. The few studies that have examined national bargaining success rates for EU legislation have conceptual and methodological weaknesses. To redress these problems I use a salience-weighted measure to gauge the relative success of Member States in translating their national preferences into legislation, and test two plausible, competing hypotheses about how the EU works: that no state consistently achieves more of what it really wants than any other, and that large Member States tend to beat small ones. Neither hypothesis receives empirical support. Not only do states differ far more significantly in their respective levels of bargaining success than previously recognised, but some of the smaller states are the ones that do especially well. The paper‟s main contribution -- demonstrating that the EU does not work as most people think it does -- sets the stage for new research questions, both positive and normative. In the last section I make a tentative start answering two of the most important: which factors explain the surprising empirical results, and whether differential national bargaining success might undermine the legitimacy of the integration process.

In search of the aim of the free movement of persons provisions: has the Court of Justice missed the point?

The Court of Justice has, over the years, often been vilified for exceeding the limits of its jurisdiction by interpreting the provisions of Community legislation in a way not seem originally envisaged by its drafters. A recent example of this approach was a cluster of cases in the context of the free movement of workers and the freedom of establishment (Ritter-Coulais and its progeny), where the Court included within the scope of those provisions situations which, arguably, did not present a sufficient link with their (economic) aim. In particular, in that case law the Court accepted that the mere exercise of free movement for the purpose of taking up residence in the territory of another Member State whilst continuing to exercise an economic activity in the State of origin, suffices for bringing a Member State national within the scope of Articles 39 and 43 EC. It is argued that the most plausible explanation for this approach is that the Court now wishes to re-read the economic fundamental freedoms in such a way as to include within their scope all economically active Union citizens, irrespective of whether their situation presents a sufficient link with the exercise of an economic activity in a cross-border context. It is suggested that this approach is problematic for a number of reasons. It is, therefore, concluded that the Court should revert to its orthodox approach, according to which only situations that involve Union citizens who have moved between Member States for the purpose of taking up an economic activity should be included within the scope of the market freedoms.

Bioscience Horizons: the national journal of undergraduate research

Bioscience Horizons (BH)commenced publication in 2008 and features research papers and reviews written by graduating UK bioscience students. The journal is run by a consortium of UK universities (the Universities of Nottingham, Reading, Leeds and Chester) in association with Oxford University Press. Its submissions encompass the full range of subjects taught by UK bioscience departments, ranging from agronomy to zoology and including animal behaviour, cancer research, environmental biology, microbial sciences, molecular biology, pharmacolgy, primatology, taxonomy and other areas. BH receives manuscripts from recent graduates (with a bachelor of science or equivalent first degree) describing research carried out during their undergraduate studies, usually as a final-year research project. All submissions undergo expert review and have to meet strict criteria for scientific excellence and originality. Articles are written by a single author and published with the agreement of the graduate's home university department. The journal has an ISSN number and is open-access; articles are freely 'cite-able' contributions to the bioscience research literature.

National and sub-national assessments of soil organic carbon stocks and changes: The GEFSOC modelling system

Soil organic carbon (SOC) plays a vital role in ecosystem function, determining soil fertility, water holding capacity and susceptibility to land degradation. In addition, SOC is related to atmospheric CO, levels with soils having the potential for C release or sequestration, depending on land use, land management and climate. The United Nations Convention on Climate Change and its Kyoto Protocol, and other United Nations Conventions to Combat Desertification and on Biodiversity all recognize the importance of SOC and point to the need for quantification of SOC stocks and changes. An understanding of SOC stocks and changes at the national and regional scale is necessary to further our understanding of the global C cycle, to assess the responses of terrestrial ecosystems to climate change and to aid policy makers in making land use/management decisions. Several studies have considered SOC stocks at the plot scale, but these are site specific and of limited value in making inferences about larger areas. Some studies have used empirical methods to estimate SOC stocks and changes at the regional scale, but such studies are limited in their ability to project future changes, and most have been carried out using temperate data sets. The computational method outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been used to estimate SOC stock changes at the regional scale in several studies, including a recent study considering five contrasting eco regions. This 'one step' approach fails to account for the dynamic manner in which SOC changes are likely to occur following changes in land use and land management. A dynamic modelling approach allows estimates to be made in a manner that accounts for the underlying processes leading to SOC change. Ecosystem models, designed for site scale applications can be linked to spatial databases, giving spatially explicit results that allow geographic areas of change in SOC stocks to be identified. Some studies have used variations on this approach to estimate SOC stock changes at the sub-national and national scale for areas of the USA and Europe and at the watershed scale for areas of Mexico and Cuba. However, a need remained for a national and regional scale, spatially explicit system that is generically applicable and can be applied to as wide a range of soil types, climates and land uses as possible. The Global Environment Facility Soil Organic Carbon (GEFSOC) Modelling System was developed in response to this need. The GEFSOC system allows estimates of SOC stocks and changes to be made for diverse conditions, providing essential information for countries wishing to take part in an emerging C market, and bringing us closer to an understanding of the future role of soils in the global C cycle. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.