Search results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 30 items for :

  • "Communitarisation" x
  • Refine by access: All content x
Clear All
Fixed price systems for books in the EU
Annabelle Littoz-Monnet

2997 The European Union and culture 26/2/07 09:31 Page 120 6 The Communitarisation of copyright policies The copyright1 sector presents another extremely interesting case of Europeanisation – and subsequently, Communitarisation – in the cultural field. In the 1970s, national level policies in the copyright sector were challenged by international technological developments and European institutions’ policy entrepreneurship. In a similar fashion as in the book and audio-visual sectors, the ECJ and the European Commission intervened in a ‘hierarchical decision

in The European Union and culture
Annabelle Littoz-Monnet

2997 The European Union and culture 26/2/07 09:31 Page 71 4 The Communitarisation of broadcasting regulation: the ‘Television Without Frontiers’ Directive The very nature of broadcasting, as both a commercial activity and a cultural product, created acute rivalries among policy actors desirous of imposing their own concerns on public political agendas. Broadcasting is also a policy sector closely associated with member states’ ‘sovereignty’, thus resulting in unwavering tensions between EU institutions’ propensity to intervene in the audio-visual field and

in The European Union and culture
Between economic regulation and European cultural policy

This book explains how and why the European Union has started to intervene in the cultural policy sector—understood here as the public policies aimed at supporting and regulating the arts and cultural industries. It is a comprehensive account of the Communitarisation process of the cultural policy sector. Before 1992, no legal basis for EU intervention in the field of culture appeared in the Treaties. Member states were, in any case, reluctant to share their competences in a policy sector considered to be an area of national sovereignty. In such circumstances, how was the Communitarisation of the policy sector ever possible? Who were the policy actors that played a role in this process? What were their motives? And why were certain actors more influential than others?

Abstract only
Annabelle Littoz-Monnet

2997 The European Union and culture 26/2/07 09:31 Page 151 7 Conclusion Communitarisation as an interactive process In the three issue areas examined comprehensively in the book, European intervention began with the application of the Rome Treaty principles. In the three cases, the ECJ and the ‘economic’ DGs of the Commission plainly attempted to portray cultural matters from an economic perspective, so that their intervention in new policy areas would become justifiable. Using the liberal image was in fact an efficient way to attack other policy

in The European Union and culture
Annabelle Littoz-Monnet

2997 The European Union and culture 26/2/07 09:31 Page 1 1 Cultural policy as a contested area The trajectory of Communitarisation, the process by which European level policies are developed and the sector’s governance (at least in terms of policy-making) takes place in Brussels, varies significantly across policy sectors. Most EU policies found a basis in the Treaty of Rome. Yet some policy sectors were Communitarised in the absence of a Treaty basis for Community intervention. Community policies were created in the telecommunications and environment fields

in The European Union and culture
Annabelle Littoz-Monnet

EU level, along with the core stakeholders that have come to be involved in the process. When looking at EU-level policy developments in the cultural field, it appears clearly that already much ahead of Treaty reform, numerous resolutions, decisions and legislative instruments related to cultural policy issues had been adopted at the Community level. Accounting for the Communitarisation process of cultural policies is therefore not a straightforward story. Rather, the process that led to a shift from the national towards the EU level of governance was characterised

in The European Union and culture
Towards supranational governance in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice

The European Commission had become one of the more contentious actors during both Irish referenda on the Lisbon Treaty. This book discusses the role of the European Commission and institutions more generally, as well as the policy area of justice and home affairs. It argues that it is important to evaluate the role of EU institutions for the process of European integration. The book suggests a reconceptualisation of the framework of supranational policy entrepreneurs (SPEs), which is often referred to by the academic literature that discusses the role of agency in European integration. It focuses on the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) at the policy and treaty levels; primarily on four grounds: academic literature, SPE behaviour, EU's policymaking, and the interplay between treaty negotiations and policy-making. To analyse the role of the European institutions, the book combines an analysis of the Lisbon Treaty in relation to the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice with an analysis of the policy-making in the same area. The public policy model by John Kingdon with constructivist international relations literature is also outlined. The external dimension of counter-terrorism in the EU; the role of the EU institutions in EU asylum and migration; and the role of he Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is discussed. The book also analyses the role of the EU institutions in the communitarisation of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, and thus subsequently in the Lisbon Treaty.

Christian Kaunert

, which creates a pre-emptive legal effect. Thus, member states can no longer exercise full legal sovereignty in the area from that point onwards. Furthermore, the Lisbon Treaty creates a simplified decision-making procedure (Carrera and Geyer, 2008). Firstly, the pillar structure will be formally abolished, which results in the communitarisation of the areas of criminal justice, policing and

in European internal security
EU policy entrepreneurship?
Christian Kaunert

. Moreover, the communitarisation of asylum matters also implies that decision-making procedures have now changed. Future legislation in the area will include the co-decision procedure between the Council and the European Parliament, which was previously only consulted on the matter. In the Council, the voting procedure is now qualified majority voting (Peers, 8 November 2004). This then removes any blocking

in European internal security
Between international relations and European studies
Ben Tonra and Thomas Christiansen

side, which have been increasingly difficult to ignore. With the latter being made within the first pillar, and involving substantial input from the European Commission, the wish to employ these policies towards the wider foreign policy goals of the Union has also contributed to a greater push for the ‘communitarisation’ of CFSP. The prospect of these first and second pillar policies being drawn together

in Rethinking European Union Foreign Policy