Analyser l’influence du syndicalisme agricole majoritaire: quelle utilité pour le modèle néo-corporatiste? Etude de cas à partir du «mini-paquet lait» = Analyze the influence of the majority agricultural trade unionism: what use to the neo-corporatist model? Case study from the "mini-milk package". Bruges Political Research Paper No. 35, August 2014

Cette recherche se propose de réfléchir sur la place des groupes d’intérêts dans le système politique de l’UE en partant de l’exemple de la filière lait. Dans un système généralement pluraliste, la PAC fait en effet figure de cas particulier puisqu’elle a fonctionné à partir des années 1960 sur une logique de co-gestion de la politique des marchés entre la Commission et la principale fédération agricole européenne, le Comité des Organisations Professionnelles agricoles (COPA) associé depuis 1962 au Comité Général de la Coopération agricole de l'Union européenne (COGECA). Néanmoins, du fait du processus de réforme de la PAC engagé depuis 1992, il paraît nécessaire d’analyser si la logique de co-gestion est remise en cause. Cette recherche conclue qu’il existe bien un rapport néo-corporatiste dans le secteur laitier, dans le sens où un acteur en particulier, le syndicat COPA-COGECA est parvenu à influencer de manière déterminante la procédure en obtenant de renforcer le pouvoir de négociation des producteurs sans revenir sur les réformes récentes de la PAC.

REACHING FOR BLUE GOLD - How the EU can rise to the water challenge while reaping the rewards. EPC Issue Paper No. 80, November 2015

Foreword. Climate change is bad news for water resources – and thus for human development, societies, economies, the environment, and local and global security. The increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events such as droughts and floods serves as a reminder of the effects climate change can have on the quantity and quality of global water reserves, and thus on various other aspects of life. Even though the effects differ from region to region, this is a global challenge with far-reaching consequences to which Europe is not immune. As the world leaders gather in Paris in December 2015 to discuss a new international climate deal, it is worth to remind politicians, businesses and citizens of the water challenge and its wider implications, which already affect us today – and which will only get worse with climate change. However, water-related risks resulting from climate change are not a fatality and damage control doesn’t have to be the only mantra. Placing the water challenge at the centre of political and security dialogues, development strategies and climate mitigation and adaptation measures, and implementing smarter water management, could also bring great economic, environmental and social benefits, in and outside the European Union. It would also contribute to global security. Water matters – now more than ever. This is also what this publication demonstrates. Building on the European Policy Centre’s, two-year “Blue Gold” project, this publication shows the rationale for action, how the EU could use its existing internal and external policy instruments to tackle the water challenge with its various dimensions and the benefits of action.

EU Budgetary Responses to the ‘Refugee Crisis’: Reconfiguring the Funding Landscape. CEPS Paper Liberty and Security in Europe No. 93/May 2016

This paper analyses the EU budgetary responses to the ‘refugee crisis’ in Europe. The European Commission has proposed several changes to the EU budget as well as the establishment of new funding instruments. The paper explores what the announced funding consists of, what role it plays in policy-making and what issues it generates. Throughout these budgetary responses the search for flexibility has been dominant, motivated by the need to respond more swiftly to humanitarian and operational needs. In addition, the paper argues that beyond implementation or management, the role of funding is also symbolic and communicative. In light of limited competences that are difficult to exercise, funding represents a powerful tool enabling the Commission to shape policy-making in times of crisis. At the same time, the dominant search for flexibility also challenges established funding rules and procedures. It has furthermore led to reduced space for democratic scrutiny by the European Parliament. More profoundly, EU funding for cooperation with third countries to prevent the inflow of refugees and asylum seekers has monetised questions over the responsibility for these individuals. As the EU–Turkey agreement shows, this has created a self-imposed dependence on third countries, with the risk of potentially insatiable demands for EU funding. This paper questions the proportionality and rule of law compliance of allocating funding for the implementation of this agreement. Moreover, it proposes that the Commission take steps to practically safeguard the humanitarian aid principles in the management structures of the new funding instruments, and it stresses the need for more scrutiny of the reconfigured funding landscape by the European Parliament and the European Court of Auditors.