To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The emphasis national parties put on European Union (EU) issues in their manifestos varies to a great extent between countries. A systematic explanation of this variation is, however, still lacking. We address this gap by exploring the effect of the temporal proximity between national and European Parliament (EP) elections within the national electoral cycle on national parties’ EU issue emphasis. Multilevel mixed-effects Tobit regressions on a sample of 956 manifestos, produced by 340 parties running for national elections in 27 EU member states between 1979 and 2019, indicate that temporal proximity displays a positive effect on national parties’ EU issue salience: the closer in time EP elections are to national elections within the national electoral cycle, the more parties emphasize EU issues in their national election manifestos. This is particularly the case for non-Eurosceptic parties. These findings have important implications for our understanding of party competition in EU member states.
The chapter focuses on how the European Union (EU) and European powers have struggled to navigate between transatlantic alliance and growing Eurasian connectivity, which is energized recently by China’s rise. When first proposed by the EU in 2016, “strategic autonomy” was about the European search for independent capacity to militarily balance against the Russian power. When applied to Asia, the concept is mainly about Europe’s choice in a region, which is fast becoming the center of the global political economy but is increasingly dominated by US-China competition. With the EU labeling China “a systemic rival,” the multipolarization behind European strategic autonomy has hardly unfolded as envisioned by Beijing. The chapter first examines Europe’s limited presence in Asian security and addresses the unfulfilled transatlantic potential under the US rebalance towards Asia during the Obama administration. Next it analyzes the European search for strategic autonomy amid the emerging great-power competition in the Indo-Pacific. Finally it examines the geoeconomics associated with the Belt and Road Initiative and Europe’s broad relationship with China.
This chapter will explore and provide a background to European integration, from the creation of the ECSC and the European Economic Community (EEC or the ‘Community’) to its evolution into the present-day European Union (EU) and EEA. Klaus Patel describes the EEC as ‘a fragile latecomer in an already densely populated field of international organisations’. It covers, first, patterns of post-war regional cooperation, of which the EEC/EU is just one example; second, the enlargement of the EEC, which saw it grow from six members in 1957 to an EU of twenty-eight member states in 2013; third, the process of Treaty reform and development from the Treaty of Rome in 1957 to the Rome Declaration in 2017 and the Future of Europe conference in 2021; and fourth, Brexit or the British exit from the European Union, taking it to twenty-seven member states.
Large migrant inflows have spurred anti-immigrant sentiment, but can small inflows have a different impact? We exploit the redistribution of migrants after the dismantling of the “Calais Jungle” in France to study the impact of the exposure to few migrants, which we estimate using difference-in-differences and instrumental variables. We find that in the presence of a migrant center (CAO), the growth rate of vote shares for the main far-right party (Front National (FN), our proxy for anti-immigrant sentiment) between 2012 and 2017 is reduced by about 12 percentage points. This effect, which crucially depends on the inflow's size, points toward the contact hypothesis (Allport, 1954).
The regulation of patent enforcement in Europe is characterized by the typical multi-layered EU law system of primary EU law, secondary EU law, i.e. unification and harmonization of member states’ laws by way of regulations and directives, and member states’ laws which in particular implement the EU directives into national law.1 Primary EU law, insofar as it is similar to written constitutional law, establishes the competence and baseline for all EU legal actions. Secondary legislation is based on the competences of the EU established in primary law and unifies certain areas of law (by way of directly applicable unitary regulations) or harmonizes member states’ laws by way of directives that are not directly applicable but addressed to the member states and that typically leave the member states certain leeway for manoeuvre when they implement such directives in their national law systems. Both EU primary and secondary legislation take primacy over national law; this so-called principle of primacy of EU law has been developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in its case law2 and is meanwhile also laid down in a declaration concerning primacy,3 which is part of the Treaty of Lisbon.4
At the time of writing, the United Kingdom remains a member state of the European Union. Accordingly, this chapter is written from that perspective. My thesis is simply stated: European law not merely enables, but requires, the courts of the member states to be flexible when considering whether or not to grant an injunction in a patent case, and to tailor any injunction to the circumstances of the case. An injunction can only be granted when, and to the extent that, it is proportionate and strikes a fair balance between the fundamental rights that are engaged. All that is needed is for the courts of the member states consistently to apply the principles laid down by the legislature and by the Court of Justice of the European Union.
This chapter examines the political economy of democracy aid in Morocco in two sections. In the first, I focus on the context in which political and economic reforms began in Morocco and describe the foundation of authoritarian power in the country. The second section discusses the context in which US democracy aid began in the country. US democracy assistance in Morocco was executed later than similar efforts in Egypt and at significantly different funding levels. I discuss reasons for this variation as well as how that strategy was formulated over time. This section traces the United States’ increasing support in its democracy strategy for economic reforms over political aid for democracy that would mirror the regime’s own priorities and how its conception of democracy in the country changed to support the commercial and security interests of the regime and the United States.
Chapter 7 considers languages that are less translated from and into than other languages. Focusing on institutional translation, it examines the translation regimes of the United Nations, the European Union, selected multilingual states and selected multilingual regions within or without multilingual states, focusing, in the first case, on Spanish with respect to English and French in the UN system; in the second case, on translation in several EU institutions; in the third case, on the asymmetric interpreting regime of the Spanish Senate, in which Spain's minority languages may be translated from but not into, and there is no translation at all between minority languages; and, in the fourth case, on multilingual regions like Catalonia and South Tyrol.
There have been increasing and stronger calls for greater integration of many Asian economies, either within the confines of ASEAN or on a more geo-economically strategic scale that would include major Asian jurisdictions like China, Japan, and Korea. A number of key personalities within the regional legal fraternity have advanced views that such integration ought to occur through the harmonization of legal rules, arguing amongst others that in so doing uncertainty and other transaction costs would be reduced and commercial confidence within the region concomitantly increased. That commercial law has come under the lens as a particularly suitable candidate for harmonization is, in a sense, unsurprising. It is for one ostensibly seen as a technical and relatively uncontroversial area of law, as opposed, for instance, to public law. For another, or probably for that precise reason, this area has been the historical choice for attempts at harmonizing substantive law – think of the CISG, the UCC in the United States or the recently proposed CESL in the European Union. This edited volume brings together eminent and promising scholars and practitioners to investigate what convergence and divergence means in their respective fields and for Asia.
There have been an increasing need for greater integration of many Asian economies, either within the confines of ASEAN or on a more geo-economically strategic scale including major Asian jurisdictions like China, Japan, and Korea. A number of key personalities within the regional legal fraternity have advanced views that such integration ought to occur through the harmonization of legal rules, arguing that in doing so, uncertainty and other transaction costs would be reduced and commercial confidence within the region concomitantly increased. This edited volume brings together eminent and promising scholars and practitioners to investigate what convergence and divergence means in their respective fields and for Asia. Interwoven in the details of each tale of convergence is whether and how convergence ought to take place, and in so choosing, what are the attendant consequences for that choice.
This chapter contributes to understanding the possible impacts of China’s Cyber Security Law once that law is fully implemented, as it concludes that Chinese authorities conduct an ongoing cost–benefit analysis in evaluating data localisation policies and practices, and that this partly explains China’s delay in implementing the data localisation provisions within the law. This is also consistent with the longstanding practice of the Chinese government to create fuzzy logic laws in areas of rapid change in order to allow for flexibility in implementation depending on the milieu. The costs and benefits of data localisation vary over time, requiring continual re-evaluation; hence, the laws can be implemented and reinterpreted in line with fuzzy logic. In particular, what is meant by ‘important data’ can be changed according to the policy considerations outlined in this chapter.
The Romanian German community underwent a transnational reinvention in mainstream Romanian and German society as a minority that (re)built bridges across Europe. For Romanian politicians intent on showing a ‘western face’ during EU accession, Romanian heritage served well as evidence of Europeanness. In Germany, even before the end of the Cold War, Romanian Germans were able to recast older Saxon and Swabian myths of civilising colonists as a new Romanian German European mission. Meanwhile, their increasing absence in Romania in the new millennium opened up spaces for wild fantasies of reconstructing Saxon and Swabian worlds: Romanian German activists attempted to muscle their way back into Romanian life as Romanians celebrated Saxon traces around Sibiu’s role as European Capital of Culture in 2007. All the while, British imaginings of an untouched rural Saxon world gave Romanian Germans a platform in Europe in the twenty-first century.
Economic incentives shape migratory decisions and therefore play an important role in immigration enforcement. Facing limits on the utility of formal border controls or forced removals as ways of combating irregular migration, governments in Europe have sought to ‘de-magnetize’ their economies – rendering life in their countries infeasible or unattractive by making it difficult for irregular migrants to find paid work. Although governments initially focused on penalizing employers who hire migrants lacking legal authorization to work, in recent decades they adopted a wider set of initiatives targeting undeclared work of all kinds. This chapter explores these initiatives, tracing their emergence in a number of Northern European countries and subsequent diffusion across Europe. One theme of the chapter concerns the effect of these measures on the relationship of states to economies. Another theme concerns the impact of these initiatives on irregular migrants who, if they remain within these countries, can be pushed into the shadowy depths of advanced industrialized economies.
The article examines the theoretical concept of interregionalism in the context of the evolving framework between the European Union (EU) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). As the EU’s first free trade agreement (FTA) with an ASEAN country, the EU-Singapore FTA is a pathfinder agreement that signifies a new phase of interregionalism and the EU’s new Asia strategy after the Treaty of Lisbon. The article argues that the innovative designs of the EU-Singapore FTA will shape the normative development of EU-ASEAN relations in the post-pandemic era. It also cautions that a comparative analysis of EU and US agreements reveals deficiencies in the FTA that require remedies. To buttress the contention, key provisions on ASEAN cumulative rules of origin, banking and legal services and non-tariff barriers are analysed in light of contemporary Asian agreements. The research further provides insight into the effectiveness of new-generation rules on geographical indications, competition, and investor-state arbitration and mediation. Hence, the findings contribute to the understanding of interregionalism and the EU’s Asia-Pacific trade and investment agreements from global and interdisciplinary perspectives.
Between 2016 and 2017, inflows along the central Mediterranean peaked, increasing pressures on the southern European border. Coordination with Libya to reduce departures has been possible thanks to the role played by Italy, backed by the Union. The diplomatic effort exhibited mainly through 2017 crafted a framework aimed at simultaneously ensuring Libya's interest in regaining full control of its sovereign prerogatives and addressing the EU's desire to reduce irregular inflows. This new framework is explored in this work through the lens of migration diplomacy with a double aim: to enrich the existing body of research by proposing a triangular analysis of migration diplomacy and to expand the literature on the external dimension of the Union's migration policy, by pointing out the political nature of migration relations and its critical aspects.
Chapter 1 provides the contextual background for the rest of the monograph. It retraces patterns of immigration into Morocco and discusses how processes of bordering securitised the presence and movement of people profiled as ‘sub-Saharan migrants’. I reconstruct the tightening of borders in the Western Mediterranean, highlighting the efforts undertaken by European countries to prevent the irregular movement of people and the border externalisation process which accompanied such a project. I discuss the involvement of Moroccan authorities in the bordering and militarisation of the Western Mediterranean, outlining the main developments that occurred in the domestic migration policy strategy. The end of the chapter provides an overview of the actors involved in the aid industry.
Digital Mental Health holds strategic potential in fulfilling populations’ mental healthcare unmet needs, enabling convenient and equitable access to mental healthcare. However, despite strong evidence of efficacy, uptake by mental healthcare providers remains low and little is known about factors influencing adoption and its interrelationship throughout the Digital Mental Health adoption process.
This study aimed at gaining in-depth understanding of factors influencing adoption and mapping its interrelationship along different stages of the Digital Mental Health adoption process.
This work adopted a qualitative approach consisting of in-depth semi-structured interviews with 13 mental healthcare professionals, including both psychologists and psychiatrists. The interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically, following Braun and Clarke’s method.
In this communication, we will describe how digital technology is currently used by clinicians to deliver mental healthcare. We identify potential factors influencing Digital Mental Health adoption and characterize the different identified stages inherent to this appropriation process: i) Pondering appropriate use; ii) Contractualizing the therapeutic relationship; iii) Performing online psychological assessment; iv) Adapting and/or developing interventions; v) Delivering Digital Mental Health interventions; and vi) Identifying training unmet needs. A discussion on how different factors and its interrelationship impact the adoption process will also be performed.
By characterizing mental healthcare providers journey throughout the Digital Mental Health adoption process, we intend to inform ecosystem stakeholders, such as researchers, policy makers, societies and industry, on key factors influencing adoption, so policies, programs and interventions are developed in compliance with this knowledge and technology is more easily integrated in clinical practice.
Policymakers in the EU have debated whether the digital economy may benefit from the introduction of data ownership and data access rights. The chapter asks whether and how the concepts of data ownership and data access rights may serve the goal of establishing an adequate free flow of data in the digital single market.
It first maps the policy goals contained within the EU’s Digital Single Market Strategy and then analyzes how data ownership – understood as a property right – may serve the implementation of this strategy.
The conclusion is that data ownership is unlikely to further the establishment of an adequate free flow of data. Therefore, the chapter examines whether ownership, understood as control over personal data, is a viable alternative to the property rights approach.
As a final step, the question is examined if, and under what circumstances, access rights to data already exist, or should be introduced, to allow individuals and businesses to use both personal and non-personal data.
Differences in the relative weight accorded to policy goals have resulted in a diversity of domestic rules governing cross-border flows of information, especially when it relates to personal data, and a diversity of approaches to govern the use of AI in both private and public law contexts.
Against this backdrop, the chapter first provides an overview of the state of the art in international trade agreements and negotiations on issues related to AI, and in particular the governance of cross-border data flows.
In doing so it juxtaposes the EU and the US approaches and demonstrates that the key public policy interests behind the dynamics of digital trade negotiations on the EU’s side are privacy and data protection.
Second, building on the divergent EU and US approaches to governing cross-border data flows, and the EU policy priorities in this respect in international trade negotiations, the chapter argues that the set of EU public policy objectives weighted against the benefits of digital trade in international trade negotiations, especially with a view to AI, should be broader than just privacy and data protection.
The systematic protection of persons at sea remains flawed. This problem has become even more acute during the Covid-19 pandemic when port closures have caused an unprecedented humanitarian crisis at sea. This article looks at the impact of port closures on the rights of persons at sea and considers how international law can protect those rights. While persons at sea are afforded significant rights protections in international law, the rights and duties of States often clash, with the result that persons at sea can find themselves in something of a legal vacuum. In order to address this problem, this article argues that the various rights and duties of States must be interpreted and applied in a way that fully recognises the rights of persons at sea.