Academic literature on the topic 'Environmental policy – European Union countries – Decision making'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Environmental policy – European Union countries – Decision making.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Environmental policy – European Union countries – Decision making"
Innocenthia, Adieuva, Yosinta Margaretha, Febri One, Junita Christine, and Agnes Magdalena. "THE EUROPEAN UNION, CHINA AND SOLAR PANEL." Sociae Polites 21, no. 1 (August 8, 2020): 62–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.33541/sp.v21i1.1585.
Full textMontalbán-Domingo, Laura, Madeleine Aguilar-Morocho, Tatiana García-Segura, and Eugenio Pellicer. "Study of Social and Environmental Needs for the Selection of Sustainable Criteria in the Procurement of Public Works." Sustainability 12, no. 18 (September 19, 2020): 7756. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12187756.
Full textPtak, Michał. "Directions of changes in the functioning of economic instruments for environmental policy in Poland." Equilibrium 5, no. 2 (December 31, 2010): 129–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/equil.2010.030.
Full textSerrano, Beatriz Molina, Nicoleta González Cancelas, and Francisco Soler Flores. "Reducing Pollution Levels Generated by Short Sea Shipping. Use of Bayesian Networks to Analyse the Utilization of Liquefied Natural Gas as an Alternative Fuel." Journal of KONES 26, no. 1 (March 1, 2019): 147–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/kones-2019-0018.
Full textJanků, Martin. "The Lisbon Treaty and Changes in the Legal Rules on the Common Commercial Policy." EU agrarian Law 6, no. 1 (June 27, 2017): 10–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/eual-2017-0002.
Full textSheate, W. R., and J. Romanillos Palerm. "Environmental Impact Assessment in the Czech Republic and Romania." European Energy and Environmental Law Review 5, Issue 1 (January 1, 1996): 15–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eelr1996003.
Full textKozłowska, Justyna, Marco Antônio Benvenga, and Irenilza de Alencar Nääs. "Investment Risk and Energy Security Assessment of European Union Countries Using Multicriteria Analysis." Energies 16, no. 1 (December 28, 2022): 330. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en16010330.
Full textPeyravi, Bahman, Kęstutis Peleckis, and Artūras Jakubavičius. "Eco-Innovation Performance of Lithuania in the Context of European Environmental Policy: Eco-Innovation Indicators and Efficiency." Sustainability 15, no. 4 (February 9, 2023): 3139. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su15043139.
Full textJanik, Agnieszka, Adam Ryszko, and Marek Szafraniec. "Determinants of the EU Citizens’ Attitudes towards the European Energy Union Priorities." Energies 14, no. 17 (August 24, 2021): 5237. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en14175237.
Full textJałowiec, Tomasz, and Henryk Wojtaszek. "Analysis of the RES Potential in Accordance with the Energy Policy of the European Union." Energies 14, no. 19 (September 22, 2021): 6030. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en14196030.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Environmental policy – European Union countries – Decision making"
JACHTENFUCHS, Markus. "International policy-making as a learning process : The European Community and the greenhouse effect." Doctoral thesis, 1994. http://hdl.handle.net/1814/5157.
Full textExamining board: Prof. Beate Kohler-Koch (University of Mannheim, supervisor) ; Prof. Klaus Eder (European University Institute, co-supervisor) ; Prof. Giandomenico Majone (European University Institute) ; PD Dr. Wolfgang Wessels (Institut für Europäische Politik, Bonn) ; Dr. Ole Waever (Centre for Peace and Conflict Research, Copenhagen)
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017
BARROS-GARCIA, Xiana. "Explaining EU decision-making on counter-terrorism." Doctoral thesis, 2008. http://hdl.handle.net/1814/11993.
Full textDefence date: 22 December 2008
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses
Prior to 11 September 2001, the counter-terrorist responsibilities overseen by the European Union (EU) were relatively unimportant. Since then, however, member states have decided to engage the EU in a larger number of counter-terrorist issues and, in some cases, empower it to undertake substantial tasks. The EU has thus become an important player in counterterrorism in Europe; notwithstanding the fact that the major actor remains the member states themselves. However, this increase in EU engagement on counter-terrorist issues has varied enormously from one policy area to another. This asymmetric increase lies at the centre of my research question: since 11 September 2001, why have member states conferred important anti-terrorist responsibilities to the EU in some areas - for instance, judicial cooperation in criminal matters - and less significant in others, such as policing? I address this question by investigating the agenda-setting and decision-making processes of two specific EU decisions in each of my two policy area cases (2001-2007). In each case, one decision constitutes a large increase of EU engagement and the other represents a small or zero increase. The two cases are: Judicial Cooperation (European Arrest Warrant and the European Evidence Warrant) and Police Cooperation (EU ‘Prüm Measure’ and failure of the Commission’s proposal on the Principle of Availability). In order to explain the research puzzle, I apply a modified version of John Kingdon’s ‘Three Strands Model.’ This enquiry sheds light on the relative influence on decision-making of the occurrence or non-occurrence of a major terrorist attack (i.e. changes in the addressed problem) and the entrepreneurship of the European Commission or of the member state holding the rotating Presidency of the EU Council. The EU member states are the central actors and their preferences are analysed as a means to understand the role played by the logic of consequentialism and the logic of appropriateness, respectively.
FROIO, Caterina. "The politics of constraints : electoral promises, pending commitments, public concerns and policy agendas in Denmark, France, Spain and the United Kingdom (1980-2008)." Doctoral thesis, 2015. http://hdl.handle.net/1814/34202.
Full textExamining Board: Professor Pepper Culpepper, European University Institute (Supervisor); Professor E. Scott Adler, University of Colorado, Boulder (External Supervisor); Professor Stefano Bartolini, European University Institute; Professor Peter John, University College London.
Who sets lawmakers' priorities? The aim of the thesis is to provide a convincing theoretical argument able to identify what are the policy problems that demand lawmakers' attention, but also to test this empirically for France, Denmark, Spain and the United Kingdom between 1980 and 2008. This research shows how accounting for the way in which lawmakers deal with competing policy problems integrate two major accounts of the way in which governments set their priorities: party mandate approaches and public policy approaches. The thesis does so by suggesting that given their double role of representatives and administrators, lawmakers have to deliver policies consistent both with electoral and non-electoral mandates. In this framework, parties’ promises, administrative commitments, and the priorities of the public originate policy problems that compete for lawmakers' attention to enter the policy agenda. Compared to classic party mandate approaches, this research does not conceive parties as being the key actors of the game or the major agenda-setters. Compared to public policy approaches, the study does not dismiss the role of parties. The theory argues that a problem-solving approach is key to account for lawmakers' priorities and for the way in which lawmakers select policy problems that need to be addressed in the policy agenda. In this framework, different policy problems demand lawmakers' attention and problems-solving scholars have illustrated that the types of issues that need to be addressed are different in "nature". Existing accounts of the composition of policy agendas distinguish between problems ranging from "compulsory" to "discretionary" concerns (Walker 1977; Adler and Wilkerson 2012) where the former derive from "periodically recurring demands " and the latter from "chosen problems" (Walker 1977:425). Building on these contributions, the theoretical model of the dissertation discusses the "nature" of different policy problems by identifying some 'ideal types' that originate from the double functions that lawmakers shall perform in contemporary democracies as "representatives" of voters' interests and as "responsible" administrators (Mair 2009). In this sense, the dissertation contends that different policy problems emerge from the electoral promises of the governing parties, from commitments related to the responsibility of being in office, and from the 'external world', and that the balance between them determines the composition of the policy agenda. 13 There are four propositions of this study to existing knowledge in the field of policy agendas. The first is that the content of the policy agenda is stable across countries with different institutional settings. Lawmakers' priorities are no less stable in institutional systems that are more 'open' to accommodating policy problems brought by the electoral promises of the parties. At the same time stability persists even when elections approach, questioning the long-lasting assumption that lawmakers may manipulate policies to their will in order to assure re-election. The second is that policy problems brought by the electoral promises of the governing parties impact lawmakers’ priorities, but this is only half of an old story. The results show that the policy problems originating from the electoral promises of the opposition influence the content of the policy agenda confirming that the agenda-setting power of parties is not limited to those who are in office. The third proposition is a theoretical effort and empirical contribution to conceptualise and measure "policy commitments". Studies of public policy have stressed the importance of inherited commitments in everyday law making (Rose 1994; Adler and Wilkerson 2012) since some decisions take longer than a legislature to be realised. Classic analyses have emphasised the importance of budgetary constraints on policy agendas, but the thesis suggests that there is also another striking case of policy commitments for European polities: EU integration, since decisions on EU affairs and delegation of powers taken from previous governments are hard (if not impossible) to reverse by their successors. In this sense, EU decisions are inherited by all governments, and they add complexity to the problem-solving capacity of Member States because they produce extra policy problems that require lawmakers' attention. For lawmakers respecting legally binding EU decisions, this is a way to avoid "reckless and illegal decision making" (Mair 2009). The results highlight that when reflecting on the divisions of competences between the Union and its Member States (MSs), policy commitments derived from the EU directives are concentrated on a narrow set of policy areas. The results show that in most fields where commitments are higher, the agenda-setting power of parties’ electoral promises is weakened. Finally, this research suggests that policy problems originating from the agenda of the public (as approximated by media coverage) are another explanatory factor of policy priorities, but in a very narrow set of policy areas. Media effects appear to be limited to policy areas with the special characteristics of newsworthiness and sensationalism (Soroka 2002) that contribute to boost their policy appeal. In addition, the findings highlight that the agenda-setting power of the media is mediated by the interaction with the electoral promises of the opposition, probably as a result of a blame avoidance game to discredit incumbents. 14 Chapter 1 introduces the concepts of policy agenda and policy problem before summarising existing accounts of the content of policy agendas. Two theoretical traditions are identified. The first one is the "partisan account" highlighting the importance of partisan preferences for lawmakers' priorities. The second is made up of the "public policy accounts" proposing incrementalist and agenda-setting approaches to representatives' priorities. Chapter 2 sets up the theoretical framework that will be tested in this research. Drawing upon theories of "representative and responsible" government (Mair 2009) the research provides an encompassing model of how different policy problems compete for attention in order to enter the agendas of lawmakers. The thesis highlights that different agenda-setters have to be considered as creating policy problems: the electoral promises of the governing parties, the demands addressed to lawmakers by the EU agenda, and the issues that are important for the public as reported by the media. Starting from existing typologies of problems that must be addressed in the policy agenda (Walker 1977; Adler and Wilkerson 2012), the research roughly distinguishes between discretionary and compulsory policy problems, discussing how the three agenda-setters considered in this study fit into those ideal types, as well as the incentives for lawmakers to prioritise one over the other. Chapter 3 presents the data, models and methods that are used to test the theoretical framework. The dissertation relies on data from the Comparative Agendas Project modelled in the form of time series cross sectional models. Chapter 4 introduces the empirical investigation of the content of the policy agenda. It focuses on stability and change in lawmakers' priorities, to understand the extent to which priorities change (or remain the same) across elections. Chapter 5 moves a step further and will assess the connection between policy problems brought by parties' electoral promises and the content of the policy agenda. Chapter 6 will account for one of the most debated sources of policy problems among public policy scholars: policy commitments. This chapter will test the agenda-setting power of policy commitments deriving from the content of the EU directives on lawmakers' priorities and proposing an "EU acquiescence index" to shed light on the 'overlaps' between EU and domestic policy agendas. Finally, Chapter 7 aims at analysing the connection between lawmakers' priorities and media coverage (in terms of print and, where appropriate, audio media) and each of the two relevant types of policy problems competing for lawmakers' attention identified in the previous chapters. In sum the thesis offers a theory of the composition of policy agendas grounded in a problem-solving understanding of politics, and an empirical assessment of its validity. In this sense the study is about how policy problems originating from the dual role of lawmakers in 15 contemporary democracies (representation and administration) affect everyday policy making. More precisely the thesis considers the impact of different agenda venues (parties, EU commitments, and the media) on the way in which lawmakers deliver policies.
Books on the topic "Environmental policy – European Union countries – Decision making"
The power of science: Economic research and European decision-making : the case of energy and environment policies. New York, NY: Peter Lang, 2010.
Find full textValdalbero, Domenico Rossetti di. The power of science: Economic research and European decision-making : the case of energy and environment policies. New York, NY: Peter Lang, 2010.
Find full textvan, Keulen Mendeltje, and Stephenson Paul, eds. Analyzing the European Union policy process. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.
Find full textInternational policy-making as a learning process?: The European Union and the greenhouse effect. Aldershot: Avebury, Ashgate Pub., 1996.
Find full textExplaining decisions in the European Union. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Find full textPolicy-making and diversity in Europe: Escaping deadlock. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Find full textNorheim-Martinsen, Per M. The European Union and military force: Government and strategy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
Find full textCsaba, Kiss, Ewing Michael 1951-, Access Initiative Europe, and Környezeti Management és Jog Egyesület., eds. Environmental democracy: An assessment of access to information, participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters in selected European countries. [Hungary]: Access Initiative Europe, 2007.
Find full textHubert, Heinelt, ed. Participatory governance in multi-level context: Concepts and experience. Opladen: Leske + Budrich, 2002.
Find full textThe EU foreign policy analysis: Democratic legitimacy, media, and climate change. New York City: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Environmental policy – European Union countries – Decision making"
Peterson, John, and Elizabeth Bomberg. "Environmental Policy." In Decision-Making in the European Union, 173–99. London: Macmillan Education UK, 1999. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-27507-6_8.
Full textSharp, Robin J. A., Julie A. Ewald, and Robert Kenward. "Central Information Flows and Decision-Making Requirements." In Transactional Environmental Support System Design, 7–32. IGI Global, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-2824-3.ch002.
Full textDe Vries, Catherine E., Sara B. Hobolt, Sven-Oliver Proksch, and Jonathan B. Slapin. "12. Policy Outcomes in Europe." In Foundations of European Politics, 211–32. Oxford University Press, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/hepl/9780198831303.003.0012.
Full textKlymchuk, Iryna. "FEATURES OF THE SCANDINAVIAN MODEL OF PUBLIC DIPLOMACY OF THE KINGDOM OF SWEDEN." In Development of scientific, technological and innovation space in Ukraine and EU countries. Publishing House “Baltija Publishing”, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-151-0-28.
Full textÇalik, Metin. "European Union Short Food Supply Chain Policy and Environmental Management Accounting." In Handbook of Research on Social and Economic Development in the European Union, 276–87. IGI Global, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1188-6.ch017.
Full textUsherwood, Simon, and John Pinder. "3. How the EU is governed." In The European Union: A Very Short Introduction, 34–55. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780198808855.003.0003.
Full textMikos-Sitek, Agnieszka. "Common Foreign, Security, and Defense Policies." In The Policies of the European Union from a Central European Perspective, 197–215. Central European Academic Publishing, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.54171/2022.aojb.poeucep_10.
Full textSharp, Robin J. A., Julie A. Ewald, and Robert Kenward. "Guidelines and Recommendations." In Transactional Environmental Support System Design, 246–57. IGI Global, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-2824-3.ch021.
Full textSlini, Theodora, and Fotini-Niovi Pavlidou. "The Gender Dimension in Urban Air Quality." In Advances in Public Policy and Administration, 97–108. IGI Global, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7661-7.ch009.
Full textSteinberg, Paul F. "Scaling Up." In Who Rules the Earth? Oxford University Press, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199896615.003.0013.
Full textConference papers on the topic "Environmental policy – European Union countries – Decision making"
Aanstoos, Ted A. "Management Challenges in Emerging European Union Eco-Standards." In ASME 2004 Power Conference. ASMEDC, 2004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/power2004-52115.
Full textGeambazu, Serin. ""Yeni Instanbul": the expansion of a global city." In 55th ISOCARP World Planning Congress, Beyond Metropolis, Jakarta-Bogor, Indonesia. ISOCARP, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.47472/mwhr1573.
Full textReports on the topic "Environmental policy – European Union countries – Decision making"
Jones, Emily, Beatriz Kira, Anna Sands, and Danilo B. Garrido Alves. The UK and Digital Trade: Which way forward? Blavatnik School of Government, February 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.35489/bsg-wp-2021/038.
Full text