• Other research productsclose
• 2023-2023close
• Restricted close
• Other ORP type close
• Copenhagen University Research Information System close

This briefing explores the motives, narratives, and membership realities of the three states that acceded to the European Communities (EC) in its first enlargement, in 1973: the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Denmark. It argues that, despite the different conditions and context at the time, it is possible to draw lessons from this first enlargement experience on how applicant states can create favourable conditions for their stable long-term integration into the present-day European Union.Governments, political parties and societal groups need to define their expectations of the economic benefits of EU membership realistically. This was the case in Ireland and Denmark, which rightly expected to benefit from the common agricultural policy and – in the case of Ireland – significant fiscal transfers. It was not the case for the UK, however, leading to a negative collective experience of the economic realities of membership during the economic slump following the 1973 oil crisis. Politically, moreover, the UK was ill prepared for cooperative patterns of politics and policy- making in the EC/EU. Large sections of the British elites and citizens saw the world in a binary divide between those ruling and those being ruled. EC membership could easily be portrayed as mediating the UK's transition from a position of ruling to one of being ruled by an allegedly new imperial centre, 'Brussels'. By contrast, EC membership gave the Irish an institutionalised European voice. Sharing formal sovereignty for them enhanced their actual independence from the UK. Denmark, finally, over time developed a pragmatic approach to sharing sovereignty.This briefing also highlights the importance of defending the aim of EU membership with realistic and convincing narratives. The creation of a broad domestic consensus on the desirability of membership, and preparation for its economic and political implications, are crucial for shaping a trajectory towards stable long-term integration into the EU.This briefing follows up a roundtable event organised by EPRS on 26 April 2023, which included contributions by N. Piers Ludlow, London School of Economics, Brigid Laffan, European University Institute, and Morten Rasmussen, Copenhagen University.

https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13817-Delegated-Regulation-on-data-access-provided-for-in-the-Digital-Services-Act/F3423828_en

Direktivet indeholder mange aspekter, der sigter mod at bidrage til at styrke det ophavsretlige system i sin helhed. Denne styrkelse gælder navnlig ikke kun store rettighedshaveres retstilling overfor tech-giganter, men også den enkelte ophavsmands retsstilling overfor dennes medkontrahenter såsom forlag og platforme, vigtige undtagelser såsom tekst- og datamining mv. Der kan imidlertid sættes spørgsmålstegn ved lovforslagets implementering af visse internationale aspekter af direktivet, ligesom nogle af direktivets bestemmelser i retsanvendelsen må fortolkes i overensstemmelse med de bagved liggende mellemfolkelige traktater.

Products traded internationally account for a large share of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions — and thus, the trading system has been widely regarded as a problem with respect to the global response to climate change. Implementing border carbon adjustment mechanisms is widely regarded as a crucial tool to tackle carbon leakage. At present, a number of major emitters, including the European Union, has advanced proposals to introduce a charge at the border based on the levels of GHG emissions embedded in imported products. Such border carbon adjustment measures may be implemented by individual jurisdictions, be negotiated among a selected group of trade partners, or coordinated multilaterally within the framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO). This paper focuses on the latter, discussing the WTO’s role in fostering multilateral cooperation on border carbon adjustment, while examining challenges and opportunities that may arise from addressing border carbon adjustment at the multilateral level.

Social science research demonstrates that dispersal policies and restrictions on the freedom of residence have inhibited refugees’ socio-economic integration. The dominant explanation is that such policies prevent refugees from moving to places where they can employ their skills most fruitfully. However, previous studies of refugees’ actual residential choices in Europe provide little evidence that refugees move to places with good employment prospects. The combination of negative effects of residence restrictions and emerging evidence of disadvantaging secondary migration forms what we call the ‘refugee mobility puzzle’. In this study, we address this puzzle and ask: What attracts refugees to deprived areas, and can their seemingly unfortunate residential choices be understood as moves to labor market opportunity after all? Empirically, we draw on the IAB-BAMF-SOEP Survey of Refugees, track the location of more than 2,500 refugee respondents, and estimate discrete choice models across all German counties and postcodes. Our results confirm the existence of the refugee-mobility puzzle and complicate recent critiques of dispersal policies and restrictions by suggesting that refugees’ need for affordable housing and their desire to be close to (co-ethnic) friends and family may turn into an unintended lock-in factor in the mid- and long-run.