European Union

EU Arctic policy has evolved significantly in recent years, culminating in the April 2016 Joint Communication from the European Commission and the HRVP for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. The Communication focuses on the environment and climate change, sustainable development, and peaceful international cooperation, with overarching support for scientific research. This coincides with most of the priorities of the EU’s Arctic Member States, Denmark, Finland and Sweden. The Communication does not focus on security issues or on hydrocarbon development. Arctic oil and gas are not the primary keys to EU energy security, but do play a role, and are important for the EU’s two main suppliers, Norway and Russia – sustainable management of these resources is in the EU’s interest. While the region has been a model for cooperation – Arctic collaboration with Russia continues via multiple mechanisms, despite wider tensions. That it will remain so cannot be taken for granted. The EU supports peaceful Arctic cooperation via multiple mechanisms, including the Arctic Council, the Barents-Euro Arctic Council, and via multiple cross-border collaboration platforms. As the EU becomes increasingly engaged in Arctic issues, continued focus on policy coherence, engagement with other Arctic stakeholders, and the priorities of the region’s citizens will be essential.
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

http://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/9cd77866-44e9-11e6-8d6a-bc764e093073_1.17_thumb_169_1467968263_1467968262_129_97shar_c1.jpg

Donald TUSK, President of the European Council and Jean-Claude JUNCKER, President of the European Commission, meet Barack OBAMA, US President  for an EU-US leaders meeting., taking place on 8 July. This meeting provides an opportunity to underline transatlantic unity and discuss common political, economic and international security challenges.

Download this video here.

http://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/maxresdefault_thumb_169_1467822574_1467822516_129_97shar_c1.jpg

On 8-9 July, the NATO summit takes place in Poland. The European Union is represented by Donald TUSK, President of the European Council; Jean-Claude JUNCKER, President of the European Commission; and Federica MOGHERINI, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

Download this video here.

The Paris Agreement opens a whole new chapter in the history of climate change governance, which will also require a paradigm shift in research. What are the main challenges in bringing about this shift?

A remarkable feature of the 2015 Paris Agreement is that it allows countries to draw on a vast array of governance options to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change. And yet, knowledge about these governance options remains scarce. Even more complex is the issue of how to address climate change more effectively. How can well performing policies be diffused more rapidly and effectively? How can their effectiveness in reaching different types of climate-related goals be better assessed? Will citizens accept future costs and/or change their behaviour? Providing answers to these questions challenges researchers to clearly identify and devise potential remedies.

Fifteen early career researchers based at several European universities met in February 2016 to discuss these very issues. The two-day workshop “Understanding data frontiers in climate governance research” was hosted by the Department of Political Science of the University of Zurich. While aspiring to respond to the questions posed earlier goes beyond our scope, in this post, we want to draw on the discussions around them that took place during the workshop.

Workshop participants in discussion

The Paris Agreement represents a paradigm shift for climate policy and challenges regarding its implementation and evaluation have been mentioned elsewhere already. Little attention has however been paid to the data-related obstacles to governing climate change after Paris. This is what we focused on during the workshop and would like to briefly outline here.

Firstly, it is clear that no one policy can address the complex task of mitigating climate change alone. This means that we need to consider policy mixes – the interactions between all policies – and also other governance arrangements, including private ones – that may impact climate-related goals in a specific jurisdiction, even if these policies are not specifically meant to address climate change. But, what are relevant policies and how do we assess them? How can their effects be assessed and weighted against each other? Crucially, what data and information do we need to successfully identify and evaluate these policy mixes? From this, it becomes evident that there is an overwhelming need to employ existing – and built new – indices and databases in innovative ways building on bottom-up contributions coming from state and non-state actors. One needs to keep in mind too that for the first time in history Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) have been prepared by 189 countries (latest being Guyana’s submission on 20th May 2016), so that information will be needed for a much larger set of countries than ever before.

With regards to climate change adaptation, the picture is especially unclear. A topic that has been heatedly debated since the early 2000, many scientific discussions still focus on establishing what adaptation measures really comprise. In a research field where many different ideas and concepts exist but data is scarce and often contested, efforts to track adaptation in a systematic manner are not only welcomed but greatly needed. The fact that nation states are now formally yet not bindingly requested by the UNFCCC to report their strategies and measures for adaptation, is a useful tool for comparative climate change research. However, particularly for the case of adaptation this comes with a range of challenges. Adaptation policies have implications for an array of different sectors and often, policy choices are constrained by decisions taken at the national level while benefits of adaptation measures are predominantly expected at the local level.

Finally, the change of paradigm requires a better understanding of drivers of policy change, because states will be expected to improve their climate-related policies and commitments in five-year cycles. They will thus need to know how to best encourage those policies that work better. This aspect is probably the most political of the ones featured. However, so far we do not have sufficient systematic information about, for example, the positions that political parties have on issues closely related to climate change mitigation or adaptation. Some recent experimental research has provided insights into citizens’ needs and motivations regarding climate policy.

Beyond the traditional role of states in climate governance, the Paris Agreement highlights the role of non-state actors and how they can cooperate with states in a way that catalyses efforts to strengthen mitigation and adaptation action. Also in this area there is substantial room for improvement. Given the myriad of non-state initiatives that seem to emerge, and how they are strongly interlinked, having comprehensive and accurate information regarding their goals, scope, membership and actual implementation is extremely challenging. Many datasets are emerging that seek to address this goal. However, the available information particularly on effects and effectiveness remains very limited.

The workshop proposal has been jointly written by the Early Career Investigators Network of the COST-funded action INOGOV. The participants owe special thanks to Paula Castro and Jonas Schoenefeld, who dedicated a lot of time and effort to organize this event. The workshop would not have happened without the financial support of the Swiss National Science Foundation.

The authors wanted to thank Paula Castro, Sebastian Sewerin and Jonas Schoenefeld for their comments on earlier drafts of this article.

The post Where are the frontiers of climate governance data? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Future Enterprises v EUIPO - McDonald's International Property (MACCOFFEE)
Intellectual and industrial property
According to the General Court, the repute of McDonald’s trade marks makes it possible to prevent the registration, for foods or beverages, of trade marks combining the prefix ‘Mac’ or ‘Mc’ with the name of a foodstuff or beverage

To get the Brussels Briefing into your inbox, sign up here.

“Don’t like it? Then don’t do it” has become a mantra for EU governments in recent months when it comes to rules of which they are not fond.

The latest leader to ascribe to the philosophy is French prime minister Manuel Valls, who is unhappy with the unreformed law on posted workers.

Countries such as France argue that it allows social dumping, with international companies able to depress wages by bringing in expat workers on the cheap, and want the directive changed.

Read more

http://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/774c833e-41dd-11e6-87bc-bc764e093073_101.02_thumb_169_1467633154_1467633152_129_97shar_c1.jpg

Argentina has a long tradition of European immigration which has led to strong economic, social and cultural transatlantic links with the European Union. The Framework Trade and Economic Co-operation Agreement between the EU and Argentina entered into force in 1990. It includes as fundamental principles two recurrent cornerstones of our cooperation policy: the strengthening of democracy and human rights, as well as regional integration.

Download this video here.

http://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/6ddeae76-4282-11e6-9340-bc764e090014_46.54_thumb_169_1467704195_1467704195_129_97shar_c1.jpg

EU HR Mogherini attened the Western Balkans Summit on 4 July 2016 in Paris.

Download this video here.

Like a couple in a strained marriage, the EU’s 27* national leaders will in September head to Bratislava for a day by the Danube to get away from it all and try to remember why they are still together.

“Sometimes member states need to have intensive discussions among themselves,” said Robert Fico, the Slovakian prime minister who will play host/marriage counsellor. The reason for the city break? “Brussels tends to have a rather negative connotation these days,” says Mr Fico.

Read more

The Monthly Highlights publication provides an overview, at a glance, of the on-going work of the policy departments, including a selection of the latest and forthcoming publications, and a list of future events.
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

What have Brexit and England in the 2016 UEFA Euro Cup in common? Defeat for some, happiness for others. What have David Cameron and Roy Hodgson in common? A sad resignation for some, the beginning of a new era for others.

Having a crucial referendum and an important football match within just a few days can have massive impacts on their outcomes. The overall assumption, that if England got kicked out the Euro Cup before the UK’s EU referendum more people would have voted forleave,is thankfully not relevant as it was not the case. There are nevertheless some interesting parallels of the EU referendum and England’s performance in the Euro Cup.

The last couple of days have been very eventful, yet also tempestuous and chaotic. Towards the end of the campaigns around the UK’s EU referendum, which took place on 23 June 2016, tensions between the Remain camp and the Leave side heated up. The tone of campaigning on both sides became as ugly as the behaviour of supporters of the English national football team. Politicians and many others involved in the Brexit/Bremain campaigns made unattainable goals and promises, and triggered a high number of xenophobic comments around the country which have seen significant increase since the announcement of the win for the Brexit camp.

On the other hand, English football fans have done a great job in receiving more attention than their football team. Even before the kick-off, English football fans clashed with the counter-parts on the Russian sides on 11 June in Lille. With the elimination of the English team as well as others who had troubles with their supporters, hopes are high that the upcoming matches will focus rather on football than on clashes among hooligans.

Interestingly, both the EU referendum and England’s participation in the Euro Cup have resulted in what was against the odds, at least if you believe the Evening Standard, Politico and alike.

So, what has been happening since the outcome of the EU referendum and England’s elimination from the Euro Cup? The Prime Minister David Cameron has resigned, hence the UK is in need of a new Prime Minister, both the Conservative Party and the Labour Party have entered a state of internal fragmentation, and the country’s economy and society have stepped into a stage of uncertainty. Similarly, Roy Hodgson has also resigned as manager of the English football team and thus it is looking for a new manager to replace him, England has yet to wait for a victory in a major football competition since it became world champion in 1966, and English football has soon to deal with the consequences of Brexit, i.e., with the future of its numerous players from the European mainland.

A week after the UK’s EU referendum and just a few days after England’s departure from the 2016 Euro Cup, some lessons can be learned. First, being a partial England football supporter watching the Euros has not been much fun, especially thanks to the ‘humiliation’ about which the media is talking about. Now some are putting their hopes on Wales. Second, the contributions in the media about British politics has increasingly become monotonous — actually, this was already the case before the referendum was held. It is now time to focus the attention back to other issues, such as the current migration and refugee crisis, ongoing outbreaks of armed conflicts in Syria and Iraq, as well as the desperate need of people in South Sudan. Third, it is also time for the European Union to rethink its origins and its founding ideas. The UK is not the only country with fragmented perceptions and similar referendums might be expected in the future in any of the other 27 member states. Lastly, a final lesson learned is that referendums of such importance should not be held again during a major sports event — winning and loosing can have impacts on political elections and referendums.

 

By Nele Marianne Ewers-Peters, PhD Candidate, University of Kent, Canterbury

The post Brexit and the Football Euro Cup – Chaos in the Making? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.