EU Development Policy Research Articles

Introduction: European Union Development Aid Policy—the challenge of implementation

AbstractThis paper provides an introduction to a series of articles that review the EU's engagement with a number of regional groupings of developing countries. It provides the context for the following studies by reviewing the response that the European Commission has made to the demands for increased effectiveness in its administration of the EU's collective aid policy and its evolving role in achieving coordination, complementarity and coherence across EU development policy. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Right to Seek – Revisited. On the UN Human Rights Declaration Article 14 and Access to Asylum Procedures in the EU

AbstractThis article compares the "right to seek and enjoy asylum" enshrined in Art. 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with the current EU policy developments to "externalize" or "extraterritorialise" migration control and refugee protection. Examining the genesis of Art. 14 during the negotiations of the Universal Declaration, it is argued that while Art. 14 clearly falls short of granting a substantive right to be granted asylum, its formulation was intended to maintain a procedural right – the right to an asylum process. While the Universal Declaration is not a legally binding instrument, going back to the fundamental norms expressed herein nonetheless provides an important starting point for evaluating current policies, especially in light of recent critiques against overly expansive interpretation of human rights law. As such, the article concludes that the current EU policies to shift migration control and refugee protection away from Europe in important respects contravenes "the right to seek asylum" as it was conceived exactly 60 years ago.

The Trade and Development Policy of the European Union

This article examines the EU's trade and development policy from the 1950s to the present day. From its origins in France's demand that the EEC join in its colonial enterprise, this policy has grown to embrace all developing countries in a complex patchwork of trade preferences. However, it would be wrong to see this status quo as the natural evolution of an early interest in assist- ing developing countries. Rather, the EU's system of trade preferences represents a compromise between its desire to protect the economic interests of the erstwhile colonies and the demands of non-privileged developing countries for improved access to European markets. From a develop- ment perspective, this produces anomalies. Even today, via more favourable rules of origin, Sudan trades on better terms with the EU than Laos. However, as this article seeks to demonstrate, due largely to enforceable WTO rules, the EU is now coming to adopt principle - the actual needs of developing countries - over history as the basis for its future trade and development policy.

Janus Advances? An Analysis of EC Development Policy and the 2005 Amended Cotonou Partnership Agreement

This article suggests that an inherent duality of poverty-reduction goals and security objectives now typifies EU development policy. The EC is attempting in Janus fashion to incorporate seemingly oppositional dynamics into its development policy, with the result that development policy itself now operates more robustly as official EU foreign policy. Both outcomes may be observed in the 2005 Amended Cotonou Partnership Agreement and the 2006 Development Consensus. While adhering to the original development objective of poverty reduction, the CPA represents an apparent break from poverty-reduction policies established in the 2000 CPA. The rise of politicized and especially securitized principles have had unsettling effects on the objectives of EC development policy while enhancing the impact of EU foreign policy.

The network of European Environment and Sustainable Development Advi- sory Councils (EEAC)

Advisory councils for environmental policy and sustainable development are a special kind of body, established by national and regional governments with the explicit task of giving independent policy advice. A variety of institutional types of councils has evolved over time, some of which have common tasks and some of which are more distinct. The network of European Environment and Sustainable Development Advisory Councils (EEAC) is an own initiative for cooperation, whose objectives are to allow member states' councils to exchange experiences and to collaborate in giving policy advice at EU level where appropriate. EEAC has developed from a rather loose set of discussions into what is now an extensive network with some degree of institutionalisation. It gives selective, joint advice on EU policy development, which can be a distinctive source of influence upon environmental policy and sustainable development.

Introduction: Does Europe Matter? Accession to EU and Social Policy Developments in Recent and New Member States

Introduction: Does Europe Matter? Accession to EU and Social Policy Developments in Recent and New Member States

Accounting, Auditing and Corporate Governance of European Listed Countries: EU Policy Developments Before and After Enron

AbstractThis article provides an overview of EU policy developments in accounting, auditing and corporate governance before and after the collapse of Enron. For EU policy‐makers the article identifies areas for both encouragement and concern. It concludes that considerable progress has been made towards the harmonization of accounting, auditing and corporate governance within the context of the Financial Services Action Plan. However, it can be argued that, to achieve this, the EU has given too much ground to US hegemony, whether by embracing US practice masquerading as international ‘best practice’, or being forced to accept US practice where the US chooses to act unilaterally.

Regulating Genetic Engineering in the United States and the European Union: Policy Development and Policy Resilience

The article offers an explanation of the distinct trajectories of policy development of the American and European Union regulatory regimes for genetically modified foods and crops. The permissive American regulatory regime has been resilient; the rigorous EU regime, much less so. The account of policy development and policy resilience directs attention to the foundational ideas and material legacies of regulatory policies at an early critical juncture of their development, and the distinct mechanisms of reproduction that resulted. It argues that the constitutive ideas of US policies for GM crops and foods, and the material coalitions these ideas induced, created power and functionalist mechanisms of reproduction that have stabilised policies and limited reforms to incremental adaptations. By contrast, the initial critical juncture of EU policy development resulted in core ideational principles that relied on different functional and legitimation logics. Their material (power) base much weaker, early EU regulatory policies for GM foods and crops failed to be resilient when the institutional and normative context shifted.

Recolonisation by stealth: Global market liberalisation and the EU's development policy

Recolonisation by stealth: Global market liberalisation and the EU's development policy

EU Development Policy Integration and the Monterrey Process: A Leading and Benevolent Identity?

EU Development Policy Integration and the Monterrey Process: A Leading and Benevolent Identity?

The Future Role of the European Union in Europe's Development Assistance

This paper reviews the response of the European Commission to a number of critical assessments of its administration of the EU's development assistance programme. Focusing particularly upon the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of developing countries, it considers the recent Cotonou Agreement in the context of this reform agenda. It identifies those issues that remain unresolved, including the difficulties of developing objective criteria for assessing need and performance, the role of the Inter-service Quality Support Group and the relationship between the Directorate Generals for Development and External Relations. It identifies the conflicting objectives for development policy amongst the member states as lying at the heart of the EU's development policy problems and reviews the options that may present themselves should this reform programme fail to satisfy criticism from the member states.

EU開発政策の変貌について

Since 1990s, EU Development policy has changed dynamically and I have mentioned its trends as the changed character of EU Development policy.Article 130u of TITLE XVII, Treaty on European Union is described as follows, “1. Community policy in the sphere of development cooperation, which shall be complementary to the policies pursued by the Member States, shall foster:—the sustainable economic and social development of the developing countries, and more particulary the most disadvantaged among them;—the smooth and gradual integration of the developing countries into the world economy;—the campaign against poverty in the developing countries”It should be noted that the Article 130u had changed the former character of EU Development policy. Attention focused on the following 7 points: (i) Not only ex-colonies but also developing countries in general will be objectives by EU Development policy; (ii) then, EU Development policy for ACP has a dual character that it is targeting both ex-colonies and developing countries in general; (iii) EU Development policy is far from the common Development policy, because Community policy in the sphere of development cooperation shall be complementary to the bilateral policies by the Member States; (iv) the above three development objectives are all related with the so-called poverty problems, there is a possibility that it will be divide the ACP countries into LDCs and non-LDCs; (v) the political conditionality means that EU has get the chance to intervene in the domestic problems of recipient countries; (vi) it stresses that “the gradual integration of the developing countries into the world economy”, the inclusion of EU-ACP trade into WTO system; (vii) the Complementarity, Coherence, Co-ordinance are noted to improve the efficiency of EU Development policy.On 23 June 2000, the Cotonou Agreement has signed. And ACP countries had admitted the agreement and REPAs (Regional Economic Partnership Arrangements) that there are a serious problems and unclear matters regarding to the future trading systems of EU-ACP. The Concrete contents of individual arrangements have been not yet clear, and we can see the scheduled FTA plan and foresee the division of ACP countries at this moment. So, we have to say the Agreement will lead the era from the non-reciprocal system to the reciprocal system of trade. Thus, the conclusion of FTA between EU and developing countries (ACP sub-regional groups) under the Agreement will show us that EU could take a chance to form a new kind of the influence towards developing countries.

The European Union's Balkan development policy

After more than a decade of cooperation between the European Union and the formerly socialist Balkan countries, the latter—in stark contrast to a number of other ex-socialist countries—are characterised by severe transition problems, poor economic conditions, political instability and proneness to military conflict. Against this background, our author evaluates the EU's past and present Balkan development policies, concluding with some suggestions towards a new strategy of cooperation.

The Integration of Environmental Sustainability Considerations into EU Development Policy: A Case Study of the LEADER Initiative in the West of Ireland

In peripheral parts of Europe such as the West of Ireland, where environment-development tensions may be particularly sensitive, environmental sustainability principles need to be integrated into all policy and programme areas, as the Fifth Environmental Action programme requires. This paper examines the small but significant LEADER rural development initiative to assess how much its operation integrates sustainability considerations. While LEADER-supported projects are often environmentally benign, there is little evidence of proactive application in LEADER group strategies of sustainability criteria which are other than weak. Economic imperatives dominate LEADER programmes, and many actors are sanguine about potential environmental problems arising from development.

Towards a common ports policy? EU-proposals and the ports industry's perceptions

This paper discusses the European Union's (EU) proposals to improve the efficiency and infrastructure of European ports, and investigates the extent to which these proposals are welcomed by the ports industry. On the one hand, the analysis of the recent EU policy developments makes apparent that the EU is increasingly impinging upon the port industry's life. On the other hand, the findings of the semi-structured interviews with the industry's representatives suggest that although port authorities and port operators remain in principle against a coherent common EU ports policy, the industry believes that certain EU initiatives can enhance the competitiveness of the maritime transport system.

The European framework for competition in telecommunications: The benefits for peripheral countries

The development of European Union regulatory policy is traced from its recent origins in the 1992-93 review of the telecommunications services sector, supported by the even more recent political impetus provided by the report of the Bangemann Group. The way in which this policy takes account of the special needs and areas of concern of the peripheral countries is then addressed. The paper concludes with a description of the future approach to EU policy development based on notions relating to mobile communications, infrastructure, interconnection and universal service.

European aid or trade for South African development?

In March this year, the European Parliament sent back to the budgets committee a report on a proposed 2-year Ecu 300 million European Investment Bank loan to South Africa because of a difference with the Commission over the legal position. Parliament wished to bring the proposal under EU development policy, but the Commission was unwilling to accept this; the consequence was that the Parliament was obliged to treat the proposal as one concerning an industrialised country.