LISABONOS SUTARTIES IMPLIKACIJOS LIETUVAI: KVALIFIKUOTA DAUGUMA IR EUROPOS SĄJUNGOS DARBOTVARKĖ

Šiame straipsnyje nagrinėjamos galimos Lisabonos sutarties implikacijos Europos Sąjungos sprendimų priėmimo sistemai apskritai ir Lietuvai konkrečiai. Aptarus pagrindines Lisabonos sutarties naujoves teigiama, kad esminė Lisabonos sutarties naujovė yra kvalifikuotos daugumos apibrėžimo pakeitimas. Pateikiama argumentų, kaip ir kodėl šis pakeitimas gali pakeisti ES nusistovėjusį konsensualų sprendimo priėmimo pobūdį ir daryti įtaką toms valstybėms narėms, kurios turi specifinių preferencijų tam tikrose politikos srityse. Kvalifikuotos daugumos balsavimo išplėtimas yra antra svarbiausia naujovė. Teigiama, kad Lietuvai jis gali pasireikšti spaudimu keisti tam tikrų politikos sričių politikos formavimo pobūdį ir net turinį. Kvalifikuotos daugumos apibrėžimo pakeitimas ir tokio balsavimo sričių išplėtimas Lietuvai bus naudingas tada, kai jos darbotvarkė ES bus pozityvi. Straipsnyje pateikiamas atitinkamas Lietuvos ES darbotvarkės įvertinimas

LIETUVOS DEŠIMTMETIS EUROPOS SĄJUNGOJE: DIDELI LŪKESČIAI, MAŽI POKYČIAI?

Straipsnio objektas yra pokyčiai Lietuvoje ir jų vertinimas iš visuomenės ir elito perspektyvos. Todėl pirmojoje dalyje, naudojantis pokyčius ekonomikos, visuomenės ir valdymo srityse fiksuojančiais įvairiais rodikliais ir indeksais, yra apibūdinami pagrindiniai bendrieji pokyčiai Lietuvoje 2004–2014 m. Jie rodo sparčią Lietuvos ekonominę konvergenciją su Europos Sąjunga, didesnę aukštąjį ir vidurinį išsimokslinimą įgijusių Lietuvos gyventojų dalį ir pailgėjusius sveiko gyvenimo metus, tačiau taip pat stagnaciją daugumos struktūrinių ilgalaikę pažangą lemiančių rodiklių atžvilgiu. Straipsnyje taip pat nagrinėjama paskutinio dešimtmečio viešosios politikos kaita ir jos pokyčių šaltiniai. Daroma išvada, jog, nepaisant galimybių po 2004 m. nacionalizuoti viešosios politikos darbotvarkę, joje ir toliau svarbią vietą užima ES klausimai, o pokyčius viešojoje politikoje lyginant su laikotarpiu prieš stojant į ES, jie buvo mažesni. Antroji straipsnio dalis analizuoja, kaip pokyčius Lietuvoje vertina gyventojai ir elitas ir koks šių vertinimų santykis. Lietuvos politinio elito apklausos duomenys parodė, jog elitas didžiausius ir labai teigiamus pokyčius 2004–2014 m. mato esant valstybės tarnybos gebėjimų srityje ir įgyvendinant vienodo teisės aktų taikymo principą. Visuomenė pokyčius vertina pesimistiškiau, egzistuoja visuomenės ir elito vertinimų atotrūkis. Straipsnyje teigiama, kad pesimistines gyventojų nuotaikas lemia dėl ES paramos reikšmingai nepasikeitusi visuomenės nelygybės struktūra ir neišpildyti dideli gyventojų ekonominiai lūkesčiai. Be to, gavus ES struktūrinę paramą padidėjęs Lietuvos biudžetas dar paskatino valstybės užgrobimą ir korupciją, dėl kurių tikrojo ir įsivaizduojamo masto visuomenė yra pesimistiškesnė ir bendrųjų pokyčių atžvilgiu

The Association Agreements as a Dynamic Framework: Between Modernization and Integration

The EU has concluded the Association Agreements (AAs) with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. These are very ambitious, complex and comprehensive legal treaties. The AAs have a dual purpose: to enable political cooperation and economic integration with the EU and promote modernization of the partner countries. The key instrument in achieving these goals is the ‘export of the acquis’: the partner countries have taken on extensive, binding commitments to adopt the vast sways of the acquis. In this paper, however, we argue that the transformative role of the acquis on its own have not been tested and hence should not be overstated ex ante. In our view, for the AAs to achieve their objectives, it is imperative to recognise this underlying challenge and develop strategies to address the fundamental ‘commitment-capacity gap’ in the partner countries. Against this backdrop, we investigate to what extent EU’s strategy focuses on the narrowly defined legal approximation versus broader support for strengthening state capacity. In the empirical part of the paper we examine specific measures adopted to close the ‘commitment-capacity’ gap of the partner country. Our analyses indicate that only in the case of Ukraine have some deliberate, pro-active adaptations taken place. The dramatic events of 2014 and Russia’s punitive measures against Ukraine prompted the EU to provide more tailored and flexible assistance to ensure support for institutional reforms, as a precondition for legal approximation. In Moldova, the EU has confronted the fundamental weakness of the state only as a result of the 2014 banking scandal. In Georgia, it seems that the EU is conducting ‘business as usual’, although there is some early evidence that it has started to take into account the developmental needs of the partner country. The limited appreciation of the challenges and resulting adaptions so far has implications in terms of the implementation of the AA and, more importantly, the actual transformative power of the EU in the Eastern neighbourhood

informal adjustment of association?

In our paper, we look at the conditions for successful transfer of European Union (EU) rules in the areas of transport, environment and energy to the associated Eastern Partnership countries. We assume that in these areas there are fewer indirect external benefits of implementing EU rules than in the areas of trade and visa free regime and therefore the adoption of these rules should depend more on their direct relevance to the governments of associated countries. Our review of law harmonization in all three countries is complemented by three in-depth case studies in all three areas. These offer an analysis of how EU standards and templates travel to this neighbourhood by delving into their adoption and implementation and assessing the degree to which they fit with governmental priorities. The first case study considers transport and focuses on the implementation of the road safety directive (2009/40/EC) in just one country, Georgia, where implementation proved challenging. The second case study concerns Ukraine and Moldova, focusing on the role of environmental impact assessment regulations in discussions between the two countries on the possible construction of hydropower plants on the Dniester River. In the area of energy, the third case study focuses on unbundling in the electricity sector in all three associated countries. Our main finding is that transposition and implementation in these areas is patchy, but better than expected. This is due to the on-going informal adjustment of the Association Agreements, which has reduced the scope of the commitments taken. While this informal adjustment helps to lighten the burden of law harmonization and facilitate transfer of the EU acquis, it does not seem to follow any blueprint, and thus creates uncertainty among the different stakeholders over future regulation

Comparing Belarus and Ukraine

This paper discusses the role of statehood and limited statehood in relation to societal orders in Belarus and Ukraine. We conceptualize state capacity as a crucial factor affecting open and closed access orders and define its key elements. We investigate specifically public service provision by state and nonstate actors, while recognizing that security and control over territory are other important aspects of statehood which are problematic in Ukraine. Our empirical investigation of key public services covers, on the one hand, elements affecting public service provision such as public administration reform and independence, and on the other hand, the actual state of basic services. We find that healthcare, postal services and public transport are better developed in Belarus than in Ukraine. This reliable provision of public services likely contributes to the stability of the limited access order in Belarus. At the same time, politicization of the Belarusian public administration and authoritarian centralization of government institutions affect other public services and continue to represent a threat to the economy in Belarus. Ukraine, in contrast, while struggling to deliver some public goods and services, is taking important steps in public administration reform. This could result in creating a more professional and independent public administration in Ukraine and, in the longterm, an opening of access to public services on a more universal basis

Democracy satisfaction, welfare and public policy: welfare state building perspective in Lithuania

Although the correlation of welfare and democracy is not direct, it is possible to sustain that the problems related with democracy satisfaction could be solved by public policy measures. Lithuanian’s who reflect themselves as the losers of the transition reforms are unsatisfied with their socio-economic status and their anticipation of the prompt life improvement is rather high. If such tendencies start to dominate in the society of Lithuania, the question of political stability arises. Therefore social security, welfare network and infrastructure development as well as the increase of the redistribution amounts look like inevitable reforms in nowadays Lithuania. All appropriate compensatory measures could be related to the development of the welfare state in Lithuania. The liberal model of the welfare state should be the most suitable option for Lithuania at first sight. The Lisbon Strategy is implicitly based on this kind of welfare state model. Lithuania was trying to apply active labour market policy nevertheless the efforts were restrained by the small resources. The structural policy of the EU, mainly the measures financed by the European Social Fund, should increase the amount of funds allocated to the active labour market policy. Considering public policy in Lithuania an exclusive attention should be paid to the reduction of regional inequalities, establishment of the workplaces and social security infrastructure. Due to the Lithuanian budget restrictions it’s necessary to develop a tax base and to improve tax administration. The second important component is partial decentralisation of programming and implementation of the EU funds by means of the EU Cohesion policy reform. The third component is the implementation of horizontal regional policy in Lithuania. Legal and organisational premises for the aforementioned steps are already established

Lithuanian interests in the new institutional structure of the EU: majoritarianism and consensualism

The article explores the issue of the qualified majority voting (QMV). It is the main decision-making reform in the new constitutional treaty. The author claims that the new definition of the QMV may result in a radical change of the decision-making culture of the EU. The latter has been for years dominated by the consensus, which is specific to consensual democracies. It is not surprising given a very segmented nature of the EU, which makes the European political system similar to such segmented political systems as the Netherlands or Switzerland. However, for the sake of efficiency, the new treaty defined qualified majority in terms which are characteristic to majoritarian democracies. In the context of the extension of the QMV to new areas, this can lead to decisions by simple majority leaving a large number of countries isolated. Therefore, there is a risk that decisions in a much more diverse EU could be taken by the decision-making rules characteristic to unitary states.The author argues that efficiency of decision-making in the enlarged EU could be achieved by alternative means. First, a greater emphasis could be given to new methods of regulation known as the method of open co-ordination. The method relies on the definition of common goals or benchmarks and on the monitoring of activities of member states in achieving those goals. Such looser instruments might better reflect growing diversity in the EU. Second option is closer co-operation, which seems inevitable in the bigger EU. While it is not desirable to have a multi-speed Europe, it is a better option than to force majority decisions on the Union with so many divergent interests. The article concludes that a bigger EU needs a better balance of available instruments to tackle increased diversity. Decision-making methods characteristic to majoritarian democracies can be used only in homogeneous societies. They could be a consequence of real convergence in the EU and not an instrument for achieving it. This confusion between the ends and means in the on-going constitutional debate should be corrected to avoid persistent problems of isolation and exclusio