994 resultados para Eurooppa 2020 -strategia
Resumo:
Strategia dunajska jest drugim po strategii bałtyckiej przykładem rosnącego znaczenia makroregionów w Unii Europejskiej. Na politykę regionalną patrzy się przy tym coraz częściej przez pryzmat realizacji nie tylko spójności wewnętrznej, ale także działań na rzecz lepszego powiązania państwa z otoczeniem zewnętrznym – zarówno unijnym, jak i pozaunijnym. Polska współtworzy strategię bałtycką, ale nie została włączona do ścisłego grona państw przygotowujących strategię dunajską. Wyzwaniem dla Grupy Wyszehradzkiej jest określenie stanowiska w sprawie roli strategii makroregionalnych w budowaniu spójności Europy Środkowej i harmonijnego rozwoju całej UE. Postulat lepszej koordynacji polityk i środków UE w celu wdrażania strategii makroregionalnych należy traktować także jako wezwanie do zacieśnienia współpracy między Polską a jej południowymi sąsiadami, bezpośrednio zaangażowanymi w realizację strategii dunajskiej.
Resumo:
No abstract.
Resumo:
In its Conclusions of 26-27 June 2014, the European Council has adopted the new “Strategic Guidelines for Legislative and Operational Planning for the coming years within the EU’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ)”. These Guidelines reveal a pre-Lisbon Treaty mindset among the EU member states and the Justice and Home Affairs Council. This essay argues that the Guidelines are mainly driven by the interests and agendas of national Ministries of Interior and Justice and are only “strategic” to the extent that they aim at first, re-injecting ‘intergovernmentalism’ or bringing back the old EU Third Pillar ways of working to the new EU institutional setting of the AFSJ and second, at sidelining the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and rule of law in the AFSJ. The paper argues that the European Council Guidelines seek to prevent the advances in Justice and Home Affairs cooperation as envisaged in the Treaty of Lisbon, particularly its emphasis on supranational democratic, legal and judicial accountability. As a consequence of this move to ‘de-Lisbonise’ JHA cooperation, fundamental rights and rule of law-related initiatives will be neglected and the interest of the individual will be displaced from the centre of gravity in the coming AFSJ 2020 policy agenda.
Resumo:
Summary. It is clear that any action to combat climate change must involve extensive efforts in reducing the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the energy sector. In the EU, nearly 80% of total GHG emissions come from the energy sector (European Commission, 2011, p. 21). Any credible action within the EU on combating climate change therefore requires deep shifts in the way we produce and use our energy. This paper highlights that renewable energy policies to 2020 are insufficient to meet the EU’s long-term climate policy objectives of reducing GHG emissions by between 80 and 95% by 2050, and thereby aiming to avoid an increase in global temperatures of more than 2°C. Such an ambition would likely require a very high share of renewable energy (in the range of 80 to 100%) in the overall energy mix of the EU, given current uncertainties about the feasibility of potential technological developments (e.g. carbon capture and storage technology).
Resumo:
The European Council meeting on 7 and 8 February 2013 attracted an unusual level of attention from media and citizens. For a couple of days, Europe played a more important role in national politics and news. Sensation-frenzied media and excited politicians spouted notions of ‘a battle’, ‘winners’, ‘losers’ or ‘striking deals’, as if Europe had gone back to the time when its military powers still conflicted. After more than 24 hours of intense negotiations, the respective Member States leaders left Brussels with ‘good news’ for their citizens. However, those with more Euro-federalist feelings were left with a sense of non-accomplishment and missed opportunities, not only because the EU budget for the first time in history was set for a net decrease, but also because the European Council’s conclusions did not contain any ground-breaking changes to this system. Nevertheless, the European Parliament (EP) immediately reminded Europe about its role and outlined its conditions for further negotiations. Thus, the supporters of a modern and stronger EU budget still see a chance in the consent procedure and hope to shift the focus of the debate from the juste retour spirit to the consideration of the European common good. Is there still a chance for such a shift? What issues are at stake?
Resumo:
No abstract.
Resumo:
Ensuring the sustainability, security and cost-competitiveness of energy supplies for the EU citizens are the main objectives of the EU climate and energy policy, which remains high on the EU agenda. The next European legislature will have the difficult task to reconcile these different objectives into a comprehensive 2030 framework for climate and energy policies. Taking into account the changing energy dynamics, this paper analyses thus the state of play of these objectives today in order to better understand how the 2030 framework for climate and energy policies should be designed.
Resumo:
After five years of debates, consultations and negotiations, the European institutions reached an agreement in 2013 on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for the 2014-2020 period. The outcome has major implications for the EU’s budget and farmers’ incomes but also for Europe’s environment, its contribution to global climate change and to food security in the EU and in the world. It was decided to spend more than €400 billion during the rest of the decade on the CAP.The official claims are that the new CAP will take better account of society's expectations and lead to far-reaching changes by making subsidies fairer and ‘greener’ and making the CAP more efficient. It is also asserted that the CAP will play a key part in achieving the overall objective of promoting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. However, there is significant scepticism about these claims and disappointment with the outcome of the decision-making, the first in which the European Parliament was involved under the co-decision procedure. In contrast to earlier reforms where more substantive changes were made to the CAP, the factors that induced the policy discussions in 2008-13 and those that influenced the decision-making did not reinforce each other. On the contrary, they sometimes counteracted one another, yielding an ‘imperfect storm’ as it were, resulting in more status quo and fewer changes. This book discusses the outcome of the decision-making and the factors that influenced the policy choices and decisions. It brings together contributions from leading academics from various disciplines and policy-makers, and key participants in the process from the European Commission and the European Parliament.
Resumo:
Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) play a key role in the EU economy.[1] According to the latest “SME performance review” published by the European Commission,[2] in 2014 there were 22 million SMEs active in the non-financial business sectors, generating more than €3.7 trillion in added value and employing approximately 90 million people. SMEs’ contribution to the European economy becomes even more apparent if one considers that 99 out of every 100 enterprises active in the EU non-financial economy are SMEs, and that these firms account for about 67% of the total employment and some 60% of the overall added value produced in Europe. Against this background, enhancing the competitiveness of European SMEs is essential in order to foster the competitiveness of the EU economy as a whole. And since the competitiveness of European SMEs in the global arena largely depends on their ability to innovate,[3] unlocking the innovation potential of SMEs becomes pivotal to fostering growth and jobs in Europe.
Resumo:
No abstract.
