Impact assessment in EU lawmaking:
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Abschlussarbeit Buch |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Alphen aan den Rijn [u.a.]
Kluwer Law Internat.
2008
|
| Schriftenreihe: | European monographs
61 |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| Beschreibung: | XX, 301 S. |
| ISBN: | 9789041127204 9041127208 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV023480579 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20140318 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 080807s2008 m||| 00||| eng d | ||
| 020 | |a 9789041127204 |9 978-90-411-2720-4 | ||
| 020 | |a 9041127208 |9 90-411-2720-8 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)440303564 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)HBZHT015466313 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 |a DE-M382 |a DE-634 |a DE-188 | ||
| 080 | |a 3 | ||
| 084 | |a PS 3000 |0 (DE-625)139748: |2 rvk | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Meuwese, Anne C. M. |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Impact assessment in EU lawmaking |c Anne C. M. Meuwese |
| 264 | 1 | |a Alphen aan den Rijn [u.a.] |b Kluwer Law Internat. |c 2008 | |
| 300 | |a XX, 301 S. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a European monographs |v 61 | |
| 502 | |a Vollst. zugl.: Leiden, Univ., Diss., 2008 | ||
| 610 | 2 | 7 | |a Europäische Union |0 (DE-588)5098525-5 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Gesetzgebung |0 (DE-588)4020682-8 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Wirkungsanalyse |0 (DE-588)4224214-9 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 655 | 7 | |0 (DE-588)4113937-9 |a Hochschulschrift |2 gnd-content | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Europäische Union |0 (DE-588)5098525-5 |D b |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Gesetzgebung |0 (DE-588)4020682-8 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Wirkungsanalyse |0 (DE-588)4224214-9 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 830 | 0 | |a European monographs |v 61 |w (DE-604)BV006154863 |9 61 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m SWB Datenaustausch |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016662735&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016662735 | ||
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804137906631081986 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE XV LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS XIX LIST OF TABLES,
BOXES AND FIGURES XXI CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 INTRODUCING EU IMPACT
ASSESSMENT 2 1.2 RESEARCH ON IMPACT ASSESSMENT 4 1.2.1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
RESEARCH ON IA 5 1.2.2 NORMATIVE RESEARCH ON IA 6 1.3 THIS RESEARCH
PROJECT 7 1.3.1 MAIN RESEARCH QUESTION 7 1.3.2 THE AID NOT
SUBSTITUTE CONUNDRUM 8 1.3.3 OBSTACLES 10 1.3.4 A LIMITED
INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH 11 1.3.4.1 INTRODUCING META-REGULATION 13
1.3.5 OUTLINE 15 1.3.6 RESEARCH DESIGN OF THE EMPIRICAL PART 16 1.3.6.1
DOCUMENT ANALYSIS 16 1.3.6.2 CASE STUDY SELECTION AND METHODOLOGY 16
CHAPTER 2 INFORMING THE EU LEGISLATOR THROUGH IA 19 2.1 REGULATORY
REFORM AND LEGITIMACY OF EU LAWMAKING 20 2.1.1 A NEVER-ENDING STORY? 20
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.1.2 BETTER REGULATION AND HOW IT IS DIFFERENT 21
2.1.3 REGULATORY LEGITIMACY 22 2.1.3.1 INPUT LEGITIMACY VERSUS OUTPUT
LEGITIMACY 22 2.1.3.2 ECONOMIC LEGITIMACY VERSUS CONSTITUTIONAL
LEGITIMACY 23 2.1.3.3 ECONOMIC LEGITIMACY. COMPETITIVENESS VERSUS
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 24 2.1.3.4 CONSTITUTIONAL LEGITIMACY I:
PROPORTIONALITY AND SUBSIDIARITY 25 2.1.3.5 CONSTITUTIONAL LEGITIMACY
II: GOVERNANCE 27 2.1.4 CONDITIONS OF EU LAWMAKING 28 2.1.4.1 THE EU
LEGISLATOR 28 2.1.4.2 COMMUNITY METHOD 29 2.1.4.3 THE MULTI-LEVEL
ASPECT 31 2.1.4A CONTESTED OBJECTIVES AND COMPETENCES 32 2.2 MODELS OF
EU LAWMAKING 35 2.2.1 INTERGOVERNMENTAL LAWMAKING 36 2.2.2 PARLIAMENTARY
LAWMAKING 36 2.2.3 REGULATORY LAWMAKING 37 2.2.4 BUREAUCRATIC LAWMAKING
38 2.2.5 PARTICIPATORY LAWMAKING 38 2.2.6 DELIBERATIVE LAWMAKING 38
2.2.7 JUDICIAL LAWMAKING 39 2.3 INFORMING THROUGH IA: A TYPOLOGY 41
2.3.1 SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER 42 2.3.2 REASON-GIVING FOR LEGISLATIVE
DECISIONS 44 2.3.3 PROVIDING A FORUM FOR STAKEHOLDER INPUT 45 2.3.4
HIGHLIGHTING TRADE-OFFS 46 2.3.5 STRUCTURING THE DISCOURSE 48 2.4
CONCLUDING REMARKS 49 CHAPTER 3 IA IN THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION 51 3.1
DEVELOPING IA POLICY IN THE COMMISSION 51 3.1.1 THE 1990S: SPECIALIZED
ASSESSMENTS 51 3.1.2 THE INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT OF COMMISSION IA 52
3.1.2.1 GUARDIAN OF THE TREATIES AND GUARDIAN OF REASON ? 53 3.1.2.2
PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF INITIATIVE 54 3.1.2.3 INTERNAL COHERENCE 54
3.1.2.4 STAKEHOLDERS CONCERNS 55 3.1.3 INCREASING INSTITUTIONALIZATION
55 3.1.3.1 THE IA GUIDELINES 56 3.1.3.2 INCREASING VISIBILITY: SOME
NUMBERS 57 3.2 RULES ON SUBSTANCE 57 3.2.1 PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONATE
ANALYSIS 58 TABLE OF CONTENTS IX 3.2.2 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION 60 3.2.3
DEFINING OBJECTIVES AND IDENTIFICATION OF POLICY OPTIONS 60 3.2.4
IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROPERLY 63 3.2.5 COMPARISON OF OPTIONS: IDENTIFYING
A PREFERRED POLICY OPTION? 64 3.3 RULES ON PROCEDURE 65 3.3.1 SCOPE OF
APPLICATION 65 3.3.2 A TIME TO CONSULT AND A TIME TO PROCEED... 67 3.3.3
IA AS PART OF THE PLANNING CYCLE 68 3.3.4 THE IA DOCUMENT 69 3.4 QUALITY
CONTROL 70 3.4.1 THE DEBATE ON EXTERNAL REVIEW 70 3.4.2 INTERNAL CHECKS
AND BALANCES 71 3.4.2.1 THE SECRETARIAT-GENERAL 72 3.4.2.2 IMPACT
ASSESSMENT BOARD 72 3.4.3 EVALUATION OF THE IA SYSTEM 76 3.4.3.1
SELF-ASSESSMENT 76 3.4.3.2 EXTERNAL EVALUATION 77 3.5 IA IN RELATION TO
OTHER TOOLS AND PROGRAMMES 78 3.5.1 LINKS WITH OTHER BETTER REGULATION
PROJECTS 78 3.5.1.1 IA AND THE SCREENING OF PENDING PROPOSALS 78 3.5.1.2
IA AND SIMPLIFICATION 78 3.5.1.3 IA AND SELF-REGULATION AND
CO-REGULATION 79 3.5.1.4 IA AND THE MEASUREMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE
BURDENS 79 3.5.2 LINKS WITH PRE-LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT TOOLS 81 3.5.2.1 IA
VERSUS EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 81 3.5.2.2 IA VERSUS EX ANTE EVALUATION 82
3.5.2.3 IA VERSUS SPECIALIZED ASSESSMENTS 83 3.5.2.4 IA VERSUS HUMAN
RIGHTS SCREENING 85 3.5.2.5 IA VERSUS THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE 87
3.6 CONCLUDING REMARKS 91 CHAPTER 4 FROM COMMISSION IA TO E U IA 93 4.1
A JOINT RESPONSIBILITY 94 4.1.1 INTER-INSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT ON BETTER
LAWMAKING 94 4.1.1.1 THE STATUS OF AN INTER-INSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT 95
4.1.2 COMMON APPROACH OF THE INSTITUTIONS 98 4.1.2.1 NO COMMON
METHODOLOGY BUT A COMMON APPROACH 99 4.2 IA IN THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT 100 4.2.1 MAIN ISSUES OF IA IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 100
4.2.1.1 WORKING METHOD 102 4.2.2 PARLIAMENTARY DISCOURSE ON IA 103
4.2.2.1 THE EARLY YEARS 103 4.2.2.2 THE DEBATE CONTINUES 105 X 4.3 4.4
TABLE 4.2.2.3 SHARED CRITERIA FOR IA? 4.2.2.4 IN-HOUSE ASSESSMENT BODY
OR INDEPENDENT AGENCY ? 4.2.2.5 SYNTHESIS 4.2.3 DEVELOPING PROCEDURES
FOR IA IN PARLIAMENT 4.2.4 IA PRACTICE IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 4.2.5
SYNTHESIS IA IN THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS 4.3.1 MAIN ISSUES OF IA IN
COUNCIL 4.3.1.1 NEGOTIATION CULTURE 4.3.1.2 THIRD PILLAR IAS? 4.3.2
DISCOURSE ON IA IN COUNCIL 4.3.2.1 COUNCIL FORMATIONS ON BETTER
REGULATION 4.3.2.2 THE GOAL OF IA 4.3.2.3 THE COUNCIL ON COMMISSION IA
4.3.3 PROCEDURES FOR IA IN COUNCIL 4.3.3.1 PRACTICAL ORGANIZATION
4.3.3.2 GUIDANCE FOR WORKING PARTY CHAIRS 4.3.4 IA PRACTICE IN THE
COUNCIL 4.3.4.1 SCRUTINY OF COMMISSION IAS 4.3.4.2 IA ON AMENDMENTS
4.3.4.3 THE BATTERIES EXPERIMENT 4.3.4.4 THE EXPERIMENT EVALUATED
4.3.4.5 OTHER EXAMPLES 4.3.5 SYNTHESIS CONCLUDING REMARKS CHAPTER 5 EU
5.1 5.2 5.3 IA BEYOND CO-DECISION INVOLVING CO-ACTORS NATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS 5.2.1 MEMBER STATE GOVERNMENTS 5.2.1.2 DIRECTORS AND
EXPERTS OF BETTER REGULATION 5.2.1.3 HIGH-LEVEL GROUP OF NATIONAL
EXPERTS ON BETTER REGULATION 5.2.1.4 NATIONAL IAS ON EC LEGISLATION
5.2.1.5 AN ANGLO-SAXON TEMPLATE? 5.2.2 NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS ADVISORY
BODIES 5.3.1 COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 5.3.1.1 ROLE IN THE LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS 5.3.1.2 ROLEINEUIA? 5.3.1.3 STATE OF PLAY 5.3.1.4 SUBSIDIARITY
AND PROPORTIONALITY TESTING AS A SPECIAL ANGLE? OF CONTENTS 106 109 111
111 113 123 125 125 125 126 128 128 128 130 131 131 131 133 134 135 135
136 137 139 139 141 141 141 141 143 144 144 146 147 149 150 150 151 153
154 TABLE OF CONTENTS XI 5.3.2 EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE
155 5.4 REVIEW INSTITUTIONS 156 5.4.1 THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE 156
5.4.1.1 RIA REVIEW IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS 157 5.4.1.2 IN THE SHADOW OF
JUDICIAL REVIEW 157 5.4.1.3 THE ROLE OF EVIDENCE IN LEGALITY REVIEW BY
THE ECJ 158 5.4.1.4 DUTY TO GIVE REASONS 158 5.4.1.5 SUBSIDIARITY 159
5.4.1.6 PROPORTIONALITY 159 5.4.1.7 CASE LAW MENTIONING IA 160 5.4.1.8
THE IATA CASE 160 5.4.1.9 SPAIN V. COUNCIL 160 5.4.1.10 THE RECEPTION OF
THE CASE LAW IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 163 5.4.1.11 WHAT TREND IN
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF IA? 163 5.4.2 EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS 164 5.4.2.1
FOLLOWING THE EXAMPLE OF THE NAO? 164 5.4.2.2 EXAMPLES FROM AN EMERGING
PRACTICE? 166 5.5 REGULATORY BODIES 168 5.5.1 COMMITTEES 168 5.5.1.1
REFORMING COMITOLOGY 168 5.5.1.2 LAMFALUSSY COMMITTEES 172 5.5.2
EUROPEAN AGENCIES 173 5.6 PRIVATE CO-ACTORS 174 5.6.1 CITIZENS 174 5.6.2
LOBBY GROUPS 175 5.6.2.1 INVOLVEMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE IA SYSTEM
176 5.6.2.2 INVOLVEMENT IN INDIVIDUAL IAS 177 5.6.2.3 TOWARDS A
SELF-REGULATORY CODE? 179 5.7 THIRD COUNTRY ACTORS 180 5.7.1 EU-US
REGULATORY COOPERATION ON IA 180 5.7.1.1 STATE OF PLAY 182 5.8
CONCLUDING REMARKS 183 CHAPTER 6 CASE STUDIES I: DIVERGING USES OF IA IN
ENVIRONMENTAL LAWMAKING 185 6.1 REACH: WHEN IA MATURED? 186 6.1.1
BACKGROUND IN BRIEF 186 6.1.2 THE IA PROCESS 188 6.1.2.1 THE RUN-UP TO
THE EXTENDED IA 188 6.1.2.2 THE FLOOD OF IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 189 6.1.2.3
FIRST MEDIATION ATTEMPT: THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 190 XII TABLE
OF CONTENTS 6.1. 2A SECOND MEDIATION ATTEMPT: THE DUTCH PRESIDENCY
WORKSHOP 192 6.1.2.5 US INVOLVEMENT: IA AS NON-PAPER ? 193 6.1.3 THE IA
CONTENT 194 6.1.4 THE USE OF IA 198 6.1.4.1 DELIBERATIVE QUALITIES
CRUCIAL BUT LACKING 198 6.1.4.2 AID TO INTERNAL DECISION-MAKING IN THE
COMMISSION 199 6.1.4.3 INFORMATION OVERKILL IN THE PARLIAMENT 200
6.1.4.4 INTER-INSTITUTIONAL TROUBLE 200 6.1.4.5 AN ITRE-COMMISSIONED
IA 203 6.1.4.6 A REAL IMPACT IN COUNCIL 203 6.1.5 SYNTHESIS 206 6.2
CAFE: THE LEGITIMACY OF SECOND BEST 208 6.2.1 BACKGROUND IN BRIEF 208
6.2.2 THE IA PROCESS 209 6.2.3 THE IA CONTENT 209 6.2.4 THE USE OF IA
210 6.2.4.1 AID TO INTERNAL DECISION-MAKING IN THE COMMISSION 211
6.2.4.2 PARLIAMENT: CONTESTING SECOND BEST 212 6.4.2.3 COUNCIL: BENIGN
INDIFFERENCE 213 6.2.5 SYNTHESIS 215 6.3 THE CASES COMPARED 217 CHAPTER
7 CASE STUDIES II: MAKING THE CASE FOR EU ACTION: MARKET LIBERALIZATION
AND JLS 219 7.1 PACK SIZES: ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL 219 7.1.1
BACKGROUND IN BRIEF 219 7.1.2 THE IA PROCESS 221 7.1.3 THE IA CONTENT
222 7.1.4 THE USE OF IA 225 7.1.4.1 AID TO INTERNAL DECISION-MAKING IN
THE COMMISSION 225 7.1.4.2 A COUNTER-IA FROM THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
225 7.1.4.3 THE COMMISSION AND THE COUNCIL AGREE ON FURTHER
DEREGULATION 234 7.1.4.4 SECOND READING: A COMPROMISE IN THE MAKING
236 7.1.5 SYNTHESIS 238 7.2 DATA RETENTION: WHERE IS IA WHEN IT IS MOST
NEEDED? 239 7.2.1 BACKGROUND IN BRIEF 240 7.2.2 THE IA PROCESS 241 7.2.3
THE IA CONTENT 242 7.2.4 USE OF IA 244 TABLE OF CONTENTS XIII 7.2.4.1
AID TO INTERNAL DECISION-MAKING IN THE COMMISSION 244 7.2.4.2 EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT: MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING 244 7.2.4.3 COUNCIL: NEGOTIATION, NO
INTEGRATION 247 7.2.5 SYNTHESIS 248 7.3 THE CASES COMPARED 249 CHAPTER 8
CONCLUSION: THE CONSTITUTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE OF IA 251 8.1 TRENDS FROM
THE CASE STUDIES 251 8.2 CONSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT 256 8.2.1 IA AS A
CATALYST OF LEGAL PRINCIPLES 256 8.2.2 IA AS A CONSTRAINT ON THE
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS 258 8.2.3 IA AS A SPACE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL DISCOURSE
260 8.3 TWO CONTRASTING CONCEPTUALIZATIONS OF IA 261 8.3.1 IA AS SOFT
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 261 8.3.2 IA AS A PARTIAL META-REGULATORY REGIME 262
8.4 OUTLOOK 263 8.4.1 SCENARIO 1: CONTINUATION OF STATUS QUO 264 8.4.2
SCENARIO 2: INVESTING IN HIGHLIGHTING TRADE-OFFS 265 8.4.3 SCENARIO 3:
A REAL CHANCE FOR DELIBERATION WITH STRUCTURING THE DISCOURSE ? 266
APPENDIX - LIST OF INTERVIEWEES 269 BIBLIOGRAPHY 271 TABLE OF CASES 281
TABLE OF DOCUMENTS 283 TABLE OF EU SECONDARY LEGISLATION 293 INDEX 297
|
| adam_txt |
TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE XV LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS XIX LIST OF TABLES,
BOXES AND FIGURES XXI CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 INTRODUCING EU IMPACT
ASSESSMENT 2 1.2 RESEARCH ON IMPACT ASSESSMENT 4 1.2.1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
RESEARCH ON IA 5 1.2.2 NORMATIVE RESEARCH ON IA 6 1.3 THIS RESEARCH
PROJECT 7 1.3.1 MAIN RESEARCH QUESTION 7 1.3.2 THE'AID NOT
SUBSTITUTE'CONUNDRUM 8 1.3.3 OBSTACLES 10 1.3.4 A LIMITED
INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH 11 1.3.4.1 INTRODUCING META-REGULATION 13
1.3.5 OUTLINE 15 1.3.6 RESEARCH DESIGN OF THE EMPIRICAL PART 16 1.3.6.1
DOCUMENT ANALYSIS 16 1.3.6.2 CASE STUDY SELECTION AND METHODOLOGY 16
CHAPTER 2 INFORMING THE EU LEGISLATOR THROUGH IA 19 2.1 REGULATORY
REFORM AND LEGITIMACY OF EU LAWMAKING 20 2.1.1 A NEVER-ENDING STORY? 20
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.1.2 BETTER REGULATION AND HOW IT IS DIFFERENT 21
2.1.3 REGULATORY LEGITIMACY 22 2.1.3.1 INPUT LEGITIMACY VERSUS OUTPUT
LEGITIMACY 22 2.1.3.2 ECONOMIC LEGITIMACY VERSUS CONSTITUTIONAL
LEGITIMACY 23 2.1.3.3 ECONOMIC LEGITIMACY. COMPETITIVENESS VERSUS
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 24 2.1.3.4 CONSTITUTIONAL LEGITIMACY I:
PROPORTIONALITY AND SUBSIDIARITY 25 2.1.3.5 CONSTITUTIONAL LEGITIMACY
II: GOVERNANCE 27 2.1.4 CONDITIONS OF EU LAWMAKING 28 2.1.4.1 THE'EU
LEGISLATOR' 28 2.1.4.2 COMMUNITY METHOD 29 2.1.4.3 THE MULTI-LEVEL
ASPECT 31 2.1.4A CONTESTED OBJECTIVES AND COMPETENCES 32 2.2 MODELS OF
EU LAWMAKING 35 2.2.1 INTERGOVERNMENTAL LAWMAKING 36 2.2.2 PARLIAMENTARY
LAWMAKING 36 2.2.3 REGULATORY LAWMAKING 37 2.2.4 BUREAUCRATIC LAWMAKING
38 2.2.5 PARTICIPATORY LAWMAKING 38 2.2.6 DELIBERATIVE LAWMAKING 38
2.2.7 JUDICIAL LAWMAKING 39 2.3 'INFORMING' THROUGH IA: A TYPOLOGY 41
2.3.1 'SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER' 42 2.3.2 'REASON-GIVING FOR LEGISLATIVE
DECISIONS' 44 2.3.3 'PROVIDING A FORUM FOR STAKEHOLDER INPUT' 45 2.3.4
'HIGHLIGHTING TRADE-OFFS' 46 2.3.5 'STRUCTURING THE DISCOURSE' 48 2.4
CONCLUDING REMARKS 49 CHAPTER 3 IA IN THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION 51 3.1
DEVELOPING IA POLICY IN THE COMMISSION 51 3.1.1 THE 1990S: SPECIALIZED
ASSESSMENTS 51 3.1.2 THE INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT OF COMMISSION IA 52
3.1.2.1 'GUARDIAN OF THE TREATIES' AND 'GUARDIAN OF REASON'? 53 3.1.2.2
PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF INITIATIVE 54 3.1.2.3 INTERNAL COHERENCE 54
3.1.2.4 STAKEHOLDERS CONCERNS 55 3.1.3 INCREASING INSTITUTIONALIZATION
55 3.1.3.1 THE IA GUIDELINES 56 3.1.3.2 INCREASING VISIBILITY: SOME
NUMBERS 57 3.2 RULES ON SUBSTANCE 57 3.2.1 PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONATE
ANALYSIS 58 TABLE OF CONTENTS IX 3.2.2 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION 60 3.2.3
DEFINING OBJECTIVES AND IDENTIFICATION OF POLICY OPTIONS 60 3.2.4
'IMPACT ASSESSMENT' PROPERLY 63 3.2.5 COMPARISON OF OPTIONS: IDENTIFYING
A PREFERRED POLICY OPTION? 64 3.3 RULES ON PROCEDURE 65 3.3.1 SCOPE OF
APPLICATION 65 3.3.2 A TIME TO CONSULT AND A TIME TO PROCEED. 67 3.3.3
IA AS PART OF THE PLANNING CYCLE 68 3.3.4 THE IA DOCUMENT 69 3.4 QUALITY
CONTROL 70 3.4.1 THE DEBATE ON EXTERNAL REVIEW 70 3.4.2 INTERNAL 'CHECKS
AND BALANCES' 71 3.4.2.1 THE SECRETARIAT-GENERAL 72 3.4.2.2 IMPACT
ASSESSMENT BOARD 72 3.4.3 EVALUATION OF THE IA SYSTEM 76 3.4.3.1
SELF-ASSESSMENT 76 3.4.3.2 EXTERNAL EVALUATION 77 3.5 IA IN RELATION TO
OTHER TOOLS AND PROGRAMMES 78 3.5.1 LINKS WITH OTHER BETTER REGULATION
PROJECTS 78 3.5.1.1 IA AND THE SCREENING OF PENDING PROPOSALS 78 3.5.1.2
IA AND SIMPLIFICATION 78 3.5.1.3 IA AND SELF-REGULATION AND
CO-REGULATION 79 3.5.1.4 IA AND THE MEASUREMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE
BURDENS 79 3.5.2 LINKS WITH PRE-LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT TOOLS 81 3.5.2.1 IA
VERSUS EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 81 3.5.2.2 IA VERSUS EX ANTE EVALUATION 82
3.5.2.3 IA VERSUS SPECIALIZED ASSESSMENTS 83 3.5.2.4 IA VERSUS 'HUMAN
RIGHTS SCREENING' 85 3.5.2.5 IA VERSUS THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE 87
3.6 CONCLUDING REMARKS 91 CHAPTER 4 FROM COMMISSION IA TO E U IA 93 4.1
A JOINT RESPONSIBILITY 94 4.1.1 INTER-INSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT ON BETTER
LAWMAKING 94 4.1.1.1 THE STATUS OF AN INTER-INSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT 95
4.1.2 'COMMON APPROACH'OF THE INSTITUTIONS 98 4.1.2.1 NO 'COMMON
METHODOLOGY' BUT A 'COMMON APPROACH' 99 4.2 IA IN THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT 100 4.2.1 MAIN ISSUES OF IA IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 100
4.2.1.1 WORKING METHOD 102 4.2.2 PARLIAMENTARY DISCOURSE ON IA 103
4.2.2.1 THE EARLY YEARS 103 4.2.2.2 THE DEBATE CONTINUES 105 X 4.3 4.4
TABLE 4.2.2.3 SHARED CRITERIA FOR IA? 4.2.2.4 'IN-HOUSE ASSESSMENT BODY'
OR 'INDEPENDENT AGENCY'? 4.2.2.5 SYNTHESIS 4.2.3 DEVELOPING PROCEDURES
FOR IA IN PARLIAMENT 4.2.4 IA PRACTICE IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 4.2.5
SYNTHESIS IA IN THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS 4.3.1 MAIN ISSUES OF IA IN
COUNCIL 4.3.1.1 NEGOTIATION CULTURE 4.3.1.2 THIRD PILLAR IAS? 4.3.2
DISCOURSE ON IA IN COUNCIL 4.3.2.1 COUNCIL FORMATIONS ON BETTER
REGULATION 4.3.2.2 THE GOAL OF IA 4.3.2.3 THE COUNCIL ON COMMISSION IA
4.3.3 PROCEDURES FOR IA IN COUNCIL 4.3.3.1 PRACTICAL ORGANIZATION
4.3.3.2 GUIDANCE FOR WORKING PARTY CHAIRS 4.3.4 IA PRACTICE IN THE
COUNCIL 4.3.4.1 SCRUTINY OF COMMISSION IAS 4.3.4.2 IA ON AMENDMENTS
4.3.4.3 THE BATTERIES EXPERIMENT 4.3.4.4 THE EXPERIMENT EVALUATED
4.3.4.5 OTHER EXAMPLES 4.3.5 SYNTHESIS CONCLUDING REMARKS CHAPTER 5 EU
5.1 5.2 5.3 IA BEYOND CO-DECISION INVOLVING CO-ACTORS NATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS 5.2.1 MEMBER STATE GOVERNMENTS 5.2.1.2 DIRECTORS AND
EXPERTS OF BETTER REGULATION 5.2.1.3 HIGH-LEVEL GROUP OF NATIONAL
EXPERTS ON BETTER REGULATION 5.2.1.4 NATIONAL IAS ON EC LEGISLATION
5.2.1.5 AN ANGLO-SAXON TEMPLATE? 5.2.2 NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS ADVISORY
BODIES 5.3.1 COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 5.3.1.1 ROLE IN THE LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS 5.3.1.2 ROLEINEUIA? 5.3.1.3 STATE OF PLAY 5.3.1.4 SUBSIDIARITY
AND PROPORTIONALITY TESTING AS A SPECIAL ANGLE? OF CONTENTS 106 109 111
111 113 123 125 125 125 126 128 128 128 130 131 131 131 133 134 135 135
136 137 139 139 141 141 141 141 143 144 144 146 147 149 150 150 151 153
154 TABLE OF CONTENTS XI 5.3.2 EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE
155 5.4 REVIEW INSTITUTIONS 156 5.4.1 THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE 156
5.4.1.1 RIA REVIEW IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS 157 5.4.1.2 IN THE SHADOW OF
JUDICIAL REVIEW 157 5.4.1.3 THE ROLE OF EVIDENCE IN LEGALITY REVIEW BY
THE ECJ 158 5.4.1.4 DUTY TO GIVE REASONS 158 5.4.1.5 SUBSIDIARITY 159
5.4.1.6 PROPORTIONALITY 159 5.4.1.7 CASE LAW MENTIONING IA 160 5.4.1.8
THE IATA CASE 160 5.4.1.9 SPAIN V. COUNCIL 160 5.4.1.10 THE RECEPTION OF
THE CASE LAW IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 163 5.4.1.11 WHAT TREND IN
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF IA? 163 5.4.2 EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS 164 5.4.2.1
FOLLOWING THE EXAMPLE OF THE NAO? 164 5.4.2.2 EXAMPLES FROM AN EMERGING
PRACTICE? 166 5.5 REGULATORY BODIES 168 5.5.1 COMMITTEES 168 5.5.1.1
REFORMING COMITOLOGY 168 5.5.1.2 'LAMFALUSSY' COMMITTEES 172 5.5.2
EUROPEAN AGENCIES 173 5.6 PRIVATE CO-ACTORS 174 5.6.1 CITIZENS 174 5.6.2
LOBBY GROUPS 175 5.6.2.1 INVOLVEMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE IA SYSTEM
176 5.6.2.2 INVOLVEMENT IN INDIVIDUAL IAS 177 5.6.2.3 TOWARDS A
SELF-REGULATORY CODE? 179 5.7 THIRD COUNTRY ACTORS 180 5.7.1 EU-US
REGULATORY COOPERATION ON IA 180 5.7.1.1 STATE OF PLAY 182 5.8
CONCLUDING REMARKS 183 CHAPTER 6 CASE STUDIES I: DIVERGING USES OF IA IN
ENVIRONMENTAL LAWMAKING 185 6.1 REACH: WHEN IA MATURED? 186 6.1.1
BACKGROUND IN BRIEF 186 6.1.2 THE IA PROCESS 188 6.1.2.1 THE RUN-UP TO
THE EXTENDED IA 188 6.1.2.2 THE FLOOD OF IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 189 6.1.2.3
FIRST MEDIATION ATTEMPT: THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 190 XII TABLE
OF CONTENTS 6.1. 2A SECOND MEDIATION ATTEMPT: THE DUTCH PRESIDENCY
WORKSHOP 192 6.1.2.5 US INVOLVEMENT: IA AS 'NON-PAPER'? 193 6.1.3 THE IA
CONTENT 194 6.1.4 THE USE OF IA 198 6.1.4.1 DELIBERATIVE QUALITIES
CRUCIAL BUT LACKING 198 6.1.4.2 AID TO INTERNAL DECISION-MAKING IN THE
COMMISSION 199 6.1.4.3 INFORMATION OVERKILL IN THE PARLIAMENT 200
6.1.4.4 INTER-INSTITUTIONAL TROUBLE 200 6.1.4.5 AN ITRE-COMMISSIONED
'IA' 203 6.1.4.6 A REAL IMPACT IN COUNCIL 203 6.1.5 SYNTHESIS 206 6.2
CAFE: THE LEGITIMACY OF SECOND BEST 208 6.2.1 BACKGROUND IN BRIEF 208
6.2.2 THE IA PROCESS 209 6.2.3 THE IA CONTENT 209 6.2.4 THE USE OF IA
210 6.2.4.1 AID TO INTERNAL DECISION-MAKING IN THE COMMISSION 211
6.2.4.2 PARLIAMENT: CONTESTING SECOND BEST 212 6.4.2.3 COUNCIL: BENIGN
INDIFFERENCE 213 6.2.5 SYNTHESIS 215 6.3 THE CASES COMPARED 217 CHAPTER
7 CASE STUDIES II: MAKING THE CASE FOR EU ACTION: MARKET LIBERALIZATION
AND JLS 219 7.1 PACK SIZES: ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL 219 7.1.1
BACKGROUND IN BRIEF 219 7.1.2 THE IA PROCESS 221 7.1.3 THE IA CONTENT
222 7.1.4 THE USE OF IA 225 7.1.4.1 AID TO INTERNAL DECISION-MAKING IN
THE COMMISSION 225 7.1.4.2 A 'COUNTER-IA' FROM THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
225 7.1.4.3 THE COMMISSION AND THE COUNCIL AGREE ON FURTHER
'DEREGULATION' 234 7.1.4.4 SECOND READING: A COMPROMISE IN THE MAKING
236 7.1.5 SYNTHESIS 238 7.2 DATA RETENTION: WHERE IS IA WHEN IT IS MOST
NEEDED? 239 7.2.1 BACKGROUND IN BRIEF 240 7.2.2 THE IA PROCESS 241 7.2.3
THE IA CONTENT 242 7.2.4 USE OF IA 244 TABLE OF CONTENTS XIII 7.2.4.1
AID TO INTERNAL DECISION-MAKING IN THE COMMISSION 244 7.2.4.2 EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT: MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING 244 7.2.4.3 COUNCIL: NEGOTIATION, NO
INTEGRATION 247 7.2.5 SYNTHESIS 248 7.3 THE CASES COMPARED 249 CHAPTER 8
CONCLUSION: THE CONSTITUTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE OF IA 251 8.1 TRENDS FROM
THE CASE STUDIES 251 8.2 CONSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT 256 8.2.1 IA AS A
CATALYST OF LEGAL PRINCIPLES 256 8.2.2 IA AS A CONSTRAINT ON THE
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS 258 8.2.3 IA AS A SPACE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL DISCOURSE
260 8.3 TWO CONTRASTING CONCEPTUALIZATIONS OF IA 261 8.3.1 IA AS SOFT
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 261 8.3.2 IA AS A PARTIAL META-REGULATORY REGIME 262
8.4 OUTLOOK 263 8.4.1 SCENARIO 1: CONTINUATION OF STATUS QUO 264 8.4.2
SCENARIO 2: INVESTING IN 'HIGHLIGHTING TRADE-OFFS' 265 8.4.3 SCENARIO 3:
A REAL CHANCE FOR DELIBERATION WITH 'STRUCTURING THE DISCOURSE'? 266
APPENDIX - LIST OF INTERVIEWEES 269 BIBLIOGRAPHY 271 TABLE OF CASES 281
TABLE OF DOCUMENTS 283 TABLE OF EU SECONDARY LEGISLATION 293 INDEX 297 |
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| any_adam_object_boolean | 1 |
| author | Meuwese, Anne C. M. |
| author_facet | Meuwese, Anne C. M. |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Meuwese, Anne C. M. |
| author_variant | a c m m acm acmm |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV023480579 |
| classification_rvk | PS 3000 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)440303564 (DE-599)HBZHT015466313 |
| discipline | Rechtswissenschaft |
| discipline_str_mv | Rechtswissenschaft |
| format | Thesis Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01707nam a2200433 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV023480579</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20140318 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">080807s2008 m||| 00||| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789041127204</subfield><subfield code="9">978-90-411-2720-4</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9041127208</subfield><subfield code="9">90-411-2720-8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)440303564</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)HBZHT015466313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-M382</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-634</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="080" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">3</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PS 3000</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)139748:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Meuwese, Anne C. M.</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Impact assessment in EU lawmaking</subfield><subfield code="c">Anne C. M. Meuwese</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Alphen aan den Rijn [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="b">Kluwer Law Internat.</subfield><subfield code="c">2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">XX, 301 S.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">European monographs</subfield><subfield code="v">61</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="502" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Vollst. zugl.: Leiden, Univ., Diss., 2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="610" ind1="2" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Europäische Union</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)5098525-5</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Gesetzgebung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4020682-8</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Wirkungsanalyse</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4224214-9</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="655" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4113937-9</subfield><subfield code="a">Hochschulschrift</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd-content</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Europäische Union</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)5098525-5</subfield><subfield code="D">b</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Gesetzgebung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4020682-8</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Wirkungsanalyse</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4224214-9</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="830" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">European monographs</subfield><subfield code="v">61</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV006154863</subfield><subfield code="9">61</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">SWB Datenaustausch</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016662735&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016662735</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| genre | (DE-588)4113937-9 Hochschulschrift gnd-content |
| genre_facet | Hochschulschrift |
| id | DE-604.BV023480579 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-02T21:37:49Z |
| indexdate | 2024-07-09T21:19:44Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9789041127204 9041127208 |
| language | English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016662735 |
| oclc_num | 440303564 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 DE-M382 DE-634 DE-188 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 DE-M382 DE-634 DE-188 |
| physical | XX, 301 S. |
| publishDate | 2008 |
| publishDateSearch | 2008 |
| publishDateSort | 2008 |
| publisher | Kluwer Law Internat. |
| record_format | marc |
| series | European monographs |
| series2 | European monographs |
| spelling | Meuwese, Anne C. M. Verfasser aut Impact assessment in EU lawmaking Anne C. M. Meuwese Alphen aan den Rijn [u.a.] Kluwer Law Internat. 2008 XX, 301 S. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier European monographs 61 Vollst. zugl.: Leiden, Univ., Diss., 2008 Europäische Union (DE-588)5098525-5 gnd rswk-swf Gesetzgebung (DE-588)4020682-8 gnd rswk-swf Wirkungsanalyse (DE-588)4224214-9 gnd rswk-swf (DE-588)4113937-9 Hochschulschrift gnd-content Europäische Union (DE-588)5098525-5 b Gesetzgebung (DE-588)4020682-8 s Wirkungsanalyse (DE-588)4224214-9 s DE-604 European monographs 61 (DE-604)BV006154863 61 SWB Datenaustausch application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016662735&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| spellingShingle | Meuwese, Anne C. M. Impact assessment in EU lawmaking European monographs Europäische Union (DE-588)5098525-5 gnd Gesetzgebung (DE-588)4020682-8 gnd Wirkungsanalyse (DE-588)4224214-9 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)5098525-5 (DE-588)4020682-8 (DE-588)4224214-9 (DE-588)4113937-9 |
| title | Impact assessment in EU lawmaking |
| title_auth | Impact assessment in EU lawmaking |
| title_exact_search | Impact assessment in EU lawmaking |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Impact assessment in EU lawmaking |
| title_full | Impact assessment in EU lawmaking Anne C. M. Meuwese |
| title_fullStr | Impact assessment in EU lawmaking Anne C. M. Meuwese |
| title_full_unstemmed | Impact assessment in EU lawmaking Anne C. M. Meuwese |
| title_short | Impact assessment in EU lawmaking |
| title_sort | impact assessment in eu lawmaking |
| topic | Europäische Union (DE-588)5098525-5 gnd Gesetzgebung (DE-588)4020682-8 gnd Wirkungsanalyse (DE-588)4224214-9 gnd |
| topic_facet | Europäische Union Gesetzgebung Wirkungsanalyse Hochschulschrift |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016662735&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV006154863 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT meuweseannecm impactassessmentineulawmaking |