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.

Trade in services negotiations: a review of the experience of the United States and the European Union in Latin America

Includes bibliography

The changing politics of preference formation in international trade negotiations: the European Union in the Doha Round

This research seeks to provide an explanation for variations of “politics” of preference formation in international trade negotiations. Building on the ‘policy determines politics’ argument, I hypothesize the existence of a causal relationship between issue-characteristics and their variations with politics dynamics and their variations. More specifically, this study seeks to integrate into a single analytical framework two dimensions along which variations in the “politics of preference formation” can be organized: configurations of power relationships among the relevant actors in the structures within which they interact as well as the logic and the motivations of the actors involved in the policy making process. To do so, I first construct a four-cell typology of ‘politics of preference formation’ and, then, I proceed by specifying that the type of state-society configurations as well as the type of actors’ motivations in the “politics of preference formation” depend, respectively, on the degree to which a policy issue is perceived as politically salient and on the extent to which the distributional implications of such an issue can be calculated by the relevant stakeholders in the policy making process. The empirical yardstick against which the validity of the theoretical argument proposed is tested is drawn from evidence concerning the European Union’s negotiating strategy in four negotiating areas in the context of the so-called WTO’s Doha Development Round of multilateral trade negotiations: agriculture, competition, environment and technical assistance and capacity building.

The special rights other than shares in cross-border mergers of limited liability companies within the European Union. A perspective from the Spanish Law

The present research aims to study the special rights other than shares in Spanish Law and the protection of their holders in cross-border mergers of limited liability companies within the European Union frame. Special rights other than shares are recognised as an independent legal category within legal systems of some EU Member States, such as Germany or Spain, through the implementation of the Third Directive 78/855/CEE concerning mergers of public limited liability companies. The above-cited Directive contains a special regime of protection for the holders of securities, other than shares, to which special rights are attached, consisting of being given rights in the acquiring company, at least equivalent to those they possessed in the company being acquired. This safeguard is to highlight the intimate connection between this type of rights and the company whose extinction determines the existence of those. Pursuant to the Directive 2005/56/CE on cross-border mergers of limited liability companies, each company taking part in these operations shall comply with the safeguards of members and third parties provided in their respective national law to which is subject. In this regard, the protection for holders of special rights other than shares shall be ruled by the domestic M&A regime. As far as Spanish Law are concerned, holders of these special rights are recognized a right of merger information, in the same terms as shareholders, as well as equal rights in the company resulting from the cross-border merger. However, these measures are not enough guarantee for a suitable protection, thus considering those holders of special rights as special creditors, sometimes it will be necessary to go to the general protection regime for creditors. In Spanish Law, it would involve the recognition of right to the merger opposition, whose exercise would prevent the operation was completed until ensuring equal rights.

The use of mechanisms and modes of toxic action in integrated testing strategies: the report and recommendations of a workshop held as part of the European Union OSIRIS Integrated Project

This report on The Potential of Mode of Action (MoA) Information Derived from Non-testing and Screening Methodologies to Support Informed Hazard Assessment, resulted from a workshop organised within OSIRIS (Optimised Strategies for Risk Assessment of Industrial Chemicals through Integration of Non-test and Test Information), a project partly funded by the EU Commission within the Sixth Framework Programme. The workshop was held in Liverpool, UK, on 30 October 2008, with 35 attendees. The goal of the OSIRIS project is to develop integrated testing strategies (ITS) fit for use in the REACH system, that would enable a significant increase in the use of non-testing information for regulatory decision making, and thus minimise the need for animal testing. One way to improve the evaluation of chemicals may be through categorisation by way of mechanisms or modes of toxic action. Defining such groups can enhance read-across possibilities and priority settings for certain toxic modes or chemical structures responsible for these toxic modes. Overall, this may result in a reduction of in vivo testing on organisms, through combining available data on mode of action and a focus on the potentially most-toxic groups. In this report, the possibilities of a mechanistic approach to assist in and guide ITS are explored, and the differences between human health and environmental areas are summarised.

Risk assessment for the design of a risk-based surveillance programme for fish farms in Switzerland (in accordance with Council Directive 2006/88/EC of the European Union).

Swiss aquaculture farms were assessed according to their risk of acquiring or spreading viral haemorrhagic septicaemia (VHS) and infectious haematopoietic necrosis (IHN). Risk factors for the introduction and spread of VHS and IHN were defined and assessed using published data and expert opinions. Among the 357 aquaculture farms identified in Switzerland, 49.3% were categorised as high risk, 49.0% as medium risk and 1.7% as low risk. According to the new Directive 2006/88/EC for aquaculture of the European Union, the frequency of farm inspections must be derived from their risk levels. A sensitivity analysis showed that water supply and fish movements were highly influential on the output of the risk assessment regarding the introduction of VHS and IHN. Fish movements were also highly influential on the risk assessment output regarding the spread of these diseases.

Influencing the European Union from Outside. Switzerland, the European Water Framework Directive, and Micropollution Regulation in the Rhine River Basin

This paper sheds light on an unusual political influence mechanism, i.e. the influence of a non-EU member state on agendas and policies at the level of the EU and EU members states. Borrowing both from the literatures on policy diffusion as well as on the influence of small member states in EU decision-making, we argue that such an influence is fostered by both structural and agency-related factors. We illustrate this potential influence with a case study on the regulation of micropollutants in waterbodies. Adopting a mixed-method approach, we show that the upstream location of Switzerland, its integration into transnational networks as well as joint water basin institutions provides the country with structural opportunities to diffuse policy innovation to the EU’s policy agenda and member states’ policies. In addition, agency-related factors matter as the EU or member states can point to Switzerland as a successful example or pioneer, especially since the Swiss policy is in line with an overall EU strategy on reducing negative impacts of chemicals on humans and the environment.

Effective Surface Water Quality Policies: A Contrast of Policies in the United States and the European Union

The United States and the European Union each have their own policy approach to protect surface water quality. Both policy approaches are similar in many ways. Both rely heavily on command and control. However, there are differences in the application of the details. Both the U.S. and E.U. began current efforts to protect surface water quality in the 1970s, yet quality continues to less than desired in both places. Both have reduced point source pollutants but have had difficulty controlling non-point source pollutants even though policies have been in place for many decades. The successes and failures of the two policies are studied in this project to determine which aspects of both policies will best protect surface water quality in an increasingly complex future.