Search Results

1 - 10 of 322 items :

  • "European Union (EU)" x
Clear All


Debates about the democratic legitimacy of the European Union (EU) have been prevalent amongst scholars since its beginning. Students have analysed the legitimacy of the EU in terms of various normative criteria. But how is the EU legitimated in individual Member States and more so in an economic and sovereignty crisis when loyalties are particularly tested? The current study sheds light on it, scrutinising the conceptions associated with the EU in a country case of Estonia. Discourse analysis is used as a methodological tool to analyse the political discourse in printed media. The results indicate that the legitimation of the EU is derived from its output-oriented strategies, seeing the EU largely in instrumental terms.


For the first time since its creation, the European Union (EU) has been living its probably most significant identity crisis. This crisis has its roots in different critical situations that have hit the EU, have affected its functioning and have fundamentally questioned its legitimacy. The gaps in the EU integration process have been uncovered and the fragmentation of EU policies has become a source of different risks.

On the anniversary of sixty years of the Rome Treaties, this Special Issue aims to reflect on the paradigms for EU law looking beyond their competing accounts of EU integration. The analysis is developed through a series of contributions that challenge the paradigms in different directions. The discussion is articulated on two levels. On the one hand, a group of contributions focuses on the historical and legal analysis of the emergence and transformation of the EU legal order. These contributions delve deeper into the absence of a European identity and go beyond the inherent critique that the EU is a demoi-cracy that struggles with a democratic disconnect or even deficit. On the other hand, other contributions debate paradigms and their implementation in important policy domains. These contributions aim to give a more practical perspective on the constitutional and/or administrative character of the European Union, showing its implications and concrete questions.


The European Union (EU) has become an important global actor in numerous areas. It is an economic giant, a key actor in global trade and trade negotiations. It leads talks on environment and it is the biggest provider of assistance to the developing world. It is the largest contributor to the United Nations budget and its peacekeeping missions are present in all major conflicts.

With such prominent global presence, it would seem that when the EU speaks, the world listens. This paper assesses whether new public communicative spaces are emerging between the European Union and the rest of the world, including Australia. It first argues that supranational developments in the EU have encouraged an important shift in which international political communication is no longer equated with the boundaries of the nation state. It goes on to illustrate how the emergent Euro-polity is developing an important strategy for communication not only with its own Member States and their citizens but also with the world. To test how the new communication environment is received outside the EU, encounters of the Australian media with the European Union are analysed. The results tend to confirm the European Union’s existing fears of being largely unheard.

Multilingual Legislation in the European Union. EU and National Legislative-Language Styles and Terminology

EU law is multilingual and multi-cultural. It is initially drafted in one language, now frequently English, often by non-native speakers and then translated into the other EU languages. Amendments may be proposed that are drafted in a different language. The result is a single multilingual text created in 23 language versions that are authentic within the context of the EU legal order. These circumstances have led EU legal language to develop its own terminology and legislative style as a separate genre.

One question is to identify different national cultural drafting styles and traditions that lie behind the creation of EU legislative texts and terminology. The Member State traditions vary, yet they merge in the EU legislative texts. In order to assist in the understanding of EU legislative texts, it is useful to reflect on how they are constructed and the features and requirements lying behind their creation, interpretation and transposition.

One approach is to consider a specific piece of EU text in a range of languages and consider how the text is reproduced in each language in terms of structure and terminology. Since the original draft is frequently made by non-native speakers and then translated into the other EU languages, which are bound by the structure of the base version, we obtain little information from it about divergent national linguistic and legislative methods. However, if the EU text is a directive which is transposed into national law, we should be able also to look at the national implementing legislation intended to implement the directive. The implementing texts are produced within the national legal context and, one assumes, aim at similar results, as laid down by the directive. Thus it could be expected that they should provide vehicles for study between the national systems and between each national system and the EU legal order. The paper explores these ideas to see where they lead.

The interface between Marx and Brussels. Editorial

The editorial introduces papers mostly presented at the 22nd session of the biennial Permanent European Conference for the Study of the Rural Landscape (PECSRL) in the sub-theme Interface between Marx and Brussels. The title of the Conference was European Rural Future: Landscape as an Interface and it was held from 4th-9th of September 2006 in Berlin and Hubertusstock, Brandenburg, Germany. The place and time were liminal as European Union (EU) accession included eight post-communist states on 1st of May 2004. The papers that make up this twin special issue address the interface between the East/West and the past/future each uniquely.


This paper outlines the importance of the studies of EU external perceptions in the Asia-Pacific region in the times of global multipolar redesign and an ongoing eurozone sovereign debt crisis. It links understanding of the concepts of EU external images and EU international ‘branding’ to the conduct of the EU’s foreign policy. The paper also details the methodology of the transnational comparative research project ‘The EU in the Eyes of Asia Pacific’ which informs all contributions to this Issue. The paper then presents those contributions which explore EU external perceptions in nine Asia-Pacific locations, members of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) process: China, Japan, South Korea, India, Singapore, Thailand, Australia, New Zealand, and Russia.


The paper reviews the achievements to date in legal approximation in the sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) field in Ukraine. Effective regulatory approximation in the SPS field was critical to anchoring the reform process in Ukraine and to fostering further progress in EU’s relations with this Eastern Partnership (EaP) country. This paper highlights three major problems in Ukraine that were hindering reform in the SPS field: inconsistency between Ukrainian and EU food safety legislation, lack of uniformity between animal health law regimes, absence of a single SPS regulator. Legal implementation of approximated legislation still remains as key challenge. The paper offers recommendations to improve the Ukraine’s approach so that the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) is part of the Association Agreement (AA) between the EU and the Republic of Ukraine could fulfill its potential.


European Union is nowadays the most popular term used in Albania. Its integration means development, solidarity, justice, equality. Data of verified polls reveal Albania as the most enthusiastic country, bearing the highest percentage of popularity willing to join EU. Ben Rosamond defines European Union as an “endless, deep, broad process of the politic, economic and security cooperation among nations with the intention to restore peace”1. North Europe has been called Europe by greeks in the VII century B.C, naming it after the name of the Phoenician king’s daughter who was brought in Crete by her absconder Zeus. The integrity process is complex, complicated, multidimensional and deep in reforms of all fields. It is a long process with great responsibility that requires a big invest in fulfilling standards. The psychological factors have their role and impact in all other factors hasting this process.


The European Union and its member-states’ involvement in the economic sphere, manifesting itself in establishing the rules of entrepreneurs’ functioning – their responsibilities and entitlements – requires a precise determination of the addressees of these standards. Proper identification of an entrepreneur is a condition of proper legislation, interpretation, application, control and execution of the law. In this context it is surprising that understanding the term entrepreneur in Polish law and in EU law is not the same, and divergences and differences in identification are fundamental. This fact formed the objective of this article. It is aimed at pointing at key differences in the identification of an entrepreneur between Polish and EU law, explaining the reasons for different concepts, and also the answer to the question: May Poland, as an EU member-state, identify the entrepreneur in a different way than the EU?

Agriculture and landscape in the 21st century Europe: the post-communist transition

The most important recent political development has been the accession to the European Union in 2004 of eight former communist states and their integration to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The CAP as a largely uniform policy trying to cater for the needs of the very varied agricultural industry in 27 states across both Eastern and Western Europe is itself undergoing a radical transformation as politicians attempt to shift the main focus of its activities from production subsidies to a more broadly conceived sustainable rural development strategy. The paper concludes that for these changes to be managed effectively and to support stable and sustainable rural landscapes there must be publicly-led regional strategies in place.