Dit artikel stelt dat beleidsverandering binnen de Europese Unie (EU) ook voortkomt uit besluitvorming op dagelijks niveau. Om veranderingen aan te kunnen wijzen en te verklaren dient de traditionele rationele keuzetheorie en de oriëntatie op instrumenteel-strategisch handelen te worden aangevuld met een constructivistische zienswijze op discours als bron van verandering. Met de inzichten van constructivisten en communicatiewetenschappers wordt in dit artikel gekeken naar de voorwaarden en het zich voordoen van deliberatie als discursief proces dat beleidsverandering op dagelijks niveau bevordert. In dat verband is onderzoek verricht naar een tweetal besluitvormingsprocessen op het gebied van EU-justitiesamenwerking. De ene betreft een casestudie omtrent de onderhandelingen over de totstandkoming van het Europees Bewijsverkrijgingsbevel van 2008. De ander gaat over de onderhandelingen over een Raadsbesluit betreffende de toegang van politie tot het Visa Informatie Systeem. Uit beide casestudies blijkt dat onder bepaalde omstandigheden deliberatie uitmondend in beleidsverandering zich feitelijk heeft voorgedaan. ABSTRACT This paper argues that, in addition to the practice of strategic bargaining, one may very well find in the day-to-day running of the EU decision-making instances where changes in policy outcome result from occurrences of deliberation. Occurrences have indeed been signalled in both the 'EEW' and 'VIS' cases where negotiating parties engaged in reasoned exchanges of views that resulted in position shifts and even agreements on certain issues. Analysis of both cases demonstrates that in settings where the conditions of 'insulation','intensity' or 'access of non-state actors' were prominently present, deliberation and ensuing progress towards a more reasoned understanding of the issue concerned was more likely to occur. Furthermore, a certain detachment from technical detail, yet sufficient proximity to subject matter, absence of agenda constraints and small-group dynamics made it more likely that discussants were inclined to engage in more open-minded exchanges of views based on reason and argument. On balance, clearly identifiable occurrences of deliberation-promoting progress in decisionmaking have been found in the institutionally quite diversified and multifaceted environment of the EU. They can certainly be regarded as representative of other decision-making processes operating under similar conditions, processes of which the institutionally dense EU is particularly rich. In a way, the occurrences of deliberation identified constitute a path of progressive understanding that is bound to extend beyond the temporal boundaries of a specific decision-making procedure. Reasoned understandings on certain issues achieved in either the EEW or VIS process were likely to provide a fertile basis on which further reasoned discussion can evolve into other, future decision-making processes. As such the deliberative instances found in the EEW and the VIS cases are of all periods, including the post-Lisbon period, and should be examined as alternative sources of policy change in the EU, irrespective of the timeframe.
Abstract (165)European policy makers consider higher education essential for the development of high-level employable professionals but who is responsible for ensuring that Europe has the professionals that it needs. In this article, we examine how policy from three European countries – the Netherlands, Germany and England – position the responsibility for producing professionals in the interplay between higher education, society and the economy. Our findings show substantial differences between the three countries, which highlight possible opportunities and risks for students, within a single European Higher Education Area (EHEA). Differences in who decides, and at which level of detail the design of higher education is defined challenges the rights all European citizens to have similar educational opportunities for employment. Given that the EHEA was created to ensure equality and comparability between European societies, this finding underlines the necessity of not only looking at formal and legislative arrangements but also at the strategic and visionary perspective of European legislation to gain a common understanding of higher education across the EHEA.
LINK
Regional development has often been described in economic terms, using economic indicators such as growth in GDP or demographic indicators such as net migration or employment. Some researchers argued that regional development should be understood broader, by including for example social indicators and living environment indicators . Recently, researchers have shown that policies directed towards regional development have broadened as well , but are also still evaluated within specific narratives or frameworks that often constitute the goals of the policy, for example the Keynesian framework favours increasing demand and favours the evaluation of policies aimed at exactly this. This self-constituting practice of an amalgam of related policies has also been referred to by Hall as a policy paradigm. Because policies are often evaluated within these policy paradigms it becomes difficult to decontextualise them, disentangle them and compare policies with each other.In this paper we propose to use a different, more quantitative and comparative method. By applying the above mentioned work from Andy Pike on numerous data sources from EUROSTAT and OECD, researchers from the PREMIUM_EU project developed a new framework that is measuring Regional Development (dubbed “R”) using economic, social and living environment indicators.MethodBy regarding this “R” (and individual indicators) as an outcome of public policies on the local, regional, national and international level and by analysing regional development policies on different levels from 2010 and onwards we believe it is possible to understand the impact of these policies in a more evidenced based sense, regardless of the above mentioned different types of narratives or frameworks.We started our research with an analysis from the OECD on the different types of regional development policies and the relations between different levels of government within countries. Based on this and literature research, we developed a framework with relevant topics for regional development policies and different levels of government.Based on the work of Moritz Schütz presented during the ERSA 2024 conference, we developed and employed a webcrawler to automatically download and summarise policies from municipalities, regional and national authorities and analyse the results of this exercise.Findings/resultsThe webcrawling and -mining exercise in combination with the new set of indicators will offer a much broader and more comprehensive view of the use and necessity of regional development policies. The findings will be discussed in dedicated policy labs with policymakers and researchers from the respective regions.Discussion/conclusionsBoth the new set of indicators and the analysis of the policies are not only innovative, but will also be viewed as speculative. Although we believe that a direct causal relationship between policies and the regional development will be hard to uncover, we do believe that this research will move the field of policy analysis forward, because it is more focused on evidence-based indicators and is based on larger sets of policies.
MUSE supports the CIVITAS Community to increase its impact on urban mobility policy making and advance it to a higher level of knowledge, exchange, and sustainability.As the current Coordination and Support Action for the CIVITAS Initiative, MUSE primarily engages in support activities to boost the impact of CIVITAS Community activities on sustainable urban mobility policy. Its main objectives are to:- Act as a destination for knowledge developed by the CIVITAS Community over the past twenty years.- Expand and strengthen relationships between cities and stakeholders at all levels.- Support the enrichment of the wider urban mobility community by providing learning opportunities.Through these goals, the CIVITAS Initiative strives to support the mobility and transport goals of the European Commission, and in turn those in the European Green Deal.Breda University of Applied Sciences is the task leader of Task 7.3: Exploitation of the Mobility Educational Network and Task 7.4: Mobility Powered by Youth Facilitation.
The overall purpose of this consultancy was to support the activities under the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Programme of the UN Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) in developing the 7th pan-European environmental assessment, an indicator based and thematic assessment, implemented jointly with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and in support of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The series of environmental assessments of the pan-European region provide up to-date and policy-relevant information on the interactions between the environment and society. This consultancy was to:> Draft the input on drivers and developments to chapter 1.2 of the assessment related to the environmental theme “4.2 Applying principles of circular economy to sustainable tourism”.> Suggest to UNECE and UNEP the most policy relevant indicators from UNECE-environmental, SDG indicators and from other indicator frameworks such as EEA or OECD for the environmental theme for the sub-chapter 4.2.> Assess the current state, trends and recent developments and prepare the substantive part of sub-chapter 4.2 (summary - part I) and an annex (part II) with the detailed analysis and findings.
CIVITAS is a network of cities for cities dedicated to cleaner, better transport in Europe and beyond. Since it was launched by the European Commission in 2002, the CIVITAS Initiative has tested and implemented over 800 measures and urban transport solutions as a part of demonstration projects in more than 80 Living Lab cities across Europe.The ELEVATE project aims to increase the Europe-wide impact of Research and Innovation Actions on urban mobility policy-making, thereby advancing the CIVITAS community to a higher level of knowledge, exchange, impact and sustainability, while guaranteeing essential high-quality support. ELEVATE is committed to achieving the following objectives:1. Developing the CIVITAS knowledge base and transferring new knowledge.2. Enriching the current CIVITAS generation and feeding future EU initiatives.3. Building a European mobility community able to navigate transition.4. Representing CIVITAS on the international stage.Breda University of Applied Sciences is work package leader for a work package on incubation and CIVINETs.Main collaborating partners:Mobiel21 (project coordinator), DTV Consultants, INOVA, TRT, ICLEI
