From six to ten and beyond: The European Community at the crossroads
The purpose of this paper is to assess the main factors causing the impasse which the EC has reached. The next section examines the lack of consensus of the member states on the aims of the EC and on the means to achieve them. Subsequently, this is related to the EC enlargement. Finally, recommendations will be made on major policy issues in order to provide a new stimulus to the integration process in Western Europe.
Discriminatory Membership and the Redistribution of Enlargement Gains: A Rational Expectations Approach to EU Membership Accession
Conflicts between EU members about enlargement result from its re-distributive effects. EU members are more likely to suffer from enlargement if they profit from EU transfers and if they are relatively close to applicant countries in which unemployment is significantly higher than in member countries. Phasing-in membership rights serves to compensate the opponents of enlargement in order to accomplish EU widening. Using data from all previous enlargement rounds, we demonstrate that EU members are more likely to demand a discrimination of new members if distributional conflicts arise. The existence of these distributional conflicts in turn increases the odds of EU members and the accession candidates actually agreeing on a phase-in period.
Integrated land degradation monitoring and assessment: Horizontal knowledge management at the national and international levels
The need for improved horizontal knowledge management at the national and international levels is essential for monitoring and assessment of land degradation and desertification. At the national level, governments utilise scientific, socio‐economic and technical data and information for strategic planning, priority setting and national environment and development planning. However, challenges including the lack of capacity and lack of collaboration and sharing of information across governments affect responses to and the effectiveness of monitoring and knowledge exchange, along with the ability to effectively implement treaties. At the international level, a number of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) share cross‐sectoral themes related to research and monitoring, information exchange, technology transfer, capacity building and financial resources. The need for increased synergies stems from the similarities between the issues they address. Challenges for improving knowledge management at the international level include insufficient interaction between the scientific bodies of the various MEAs; duplication of reporting, monitoring and assessment efforts; limited knowledge management between the various assessments addressing ecosystems and biological diversity during the past decade; and insufficient collaboration between the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the UN system and the international non‐governmental organisation (NGO) community. This paper examines these challenges and offers recommendations on how monitoring and assessment knowledge can be better managed at the national and international levels. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.