What ‘pillar’ of the EU does not challenge state sovereignty, does not raise conflicting currency issues and does not spark fierce debates regarding public regulations, whilst actively working towards integration? A tough question? This article examines what the European Union has done for education across the continent and why we should not forget about it, particularly at a time of hardship.
The European Union foreign policy is generally harshly criticised. The very fact that the EU might be an actor in international relations is often questioned. Indeed, the EU foreign policy has demonstrated in the years to have several shortcomings, and sometimes to lack the necessary consistency and efficacy. But this is not what this article is about.
Nearly 20 years after the beginning of the removal of border controls, the Schegen area constitutes one of the major achievements of the European integration. It gathers 26 countries among which 4 are not within the EU. It is often cited by Europeans as something they like about the EU. However, it has been put into question after the Arab Spring (spring 2011) and is currently undergoing a reform, which creates a great debate especially between several visions of European integration.
In ten years, mobile phones have become a transgenerational and transclass good, particularly in Europe, where the penetration rate is higher than in Japan or the US. The mobile phone has hence become the most democratized device of the 21st century. The EU has been a decisive actor in promoting cheaper prices and consumer rules.
The European Union’s growth strategy for the period 2010-2020, known as Europe 2020, aims to make the EU ‘smart, sustainable and inclusive’ by improving skills and education, modernising industry, and also, by boosting research and innovation. Its financial instruments, the FP7 (2007-2013) and Horizon 2020 (2014-2020) contribute to this agenda, as does its funding to projects with an international dimension such as the CERN and Project ITER.
Is there a difference in treatment between natural science and humanities at national and European level? If yes, why is it so? What are the obstacles humanities are facing when it comes to funding? What is the EU position from this perspective? To answer these questions and highlight the differences between natural science and humanities research in Europe we interviewed Colm Lennon, Secretary for the Humanities and Social Sciences in the Royal Irish Academy and member of a Working Group on Social Sciences and Humanities of ALLEA (ALL European Academies: European Federation of Sciences and Humanities).
Hot debates about immigration, economic crises or international issues often posit that Eastern Europe is a coherent whole, despite the diversity of countries it denotes. True, their common soviet past and its aftermath easily come to mind when we think about this particular half of Europe. Yet “Eastern Europe” as a political term (and no mere geography) is no longer relevant, argues journalist Anne Applebaum at the London School of Economics (LSE).
The first European Environmental Action Plan (EAP) was launched in 1986 and since then, environmental policy has been considered as one of the most important areas of EU legislation. It is however criticised nowadays for its lack of an appropriate long-term strategy. Two experts in environmental policy gave Nouvelle Europe their opinion on EU's leadership in international environmental policy, green accounting in Europe, and as a candidate country to the EU, Turkey’s environmental policy.
Anil Markandya has worked as an environmental economist for over thirty years. He has held academic positions at the universities of Princeton, Berkeley and Harvard in the USA and at University College London and Bath University in the UK. He has served as an advisor to several governments and international organisations.