The EU Health Technology Assessment and the Open Method of Coordination: A Relation with Potential in the Context of Network Governance

The open method of coordination (OMC)—a tool which was formalized in the early 2000s—has generated the interest of both the researchers and practitioners in the context of the new EU governance. This article is examining the literature of both network governance and OMC, with the focus particularly on one main question: is OMC a useful instrument in health policies in order to achieve concrete results by outlining norms and legislation where EU exercise limited power? Analyzing a field in which the EU competence is limited—given the budgetary implications of medicines reimbursement—from the results of the existing collaboration within EUnetHTA, we will observe the added value in this particular case of the OMC application, and the possible consequences in shaping the supranational competences. Given that the EU, with some exceptions provided by the Treaties, may only exercise actions to support, coordinate or complement the action of the Member States in the health policy, the OMC proves to be a useful tool, both from the perspective of the Member States but especially of the supranational level.

ASSESSING THE ADEQUACY OF PENSION SYSTEMS IN GEORGIA AND EUROPE

For several decades, pension systems across the world have been undergoing reforms. The main reasons for this are demographic changes and increasing life expectancy. As life expectancy increases and the birth rate decreases, more people retire than are added to the workforce. To make these reforms more effective and ensure that they are based on the best benchmarks, the European Union (EU) has introduced the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) in the field of pensions. Pension system reform is on its way in Georgia since 2019, January. OMC evaluates pensions systems in terms of the three main objectives: adequacy, sustainability, and modernization of pensions. Our methodology is based on multivariate statistical analysis, and employs synthetic indicators for adequacy objectives, in case of Georgia and 27 EU countries, in the years 2010, 2015 and 2018. The article contributes to the existing literature on pension reforms through investigation of the convergence of EU27 and Georgia pension systems in terms of one of the OMC objectives, in order to evaluate the adequacy of the pension systems.

Trends of Modern Education Development in the European Educational Space

The article summarizes that the establishment and development of common language educational space of the EU were caused by an aggregated impact of external factors in the form of social, economic, and political processes within European integration as well as by intra-system factors. Both the institutional and legal base and the open method of coordination in the sphere of language education at the EU level create difficult intra-system and external ties, providing the integrity of the educational space. The creation of a common language educational space is based on conceptual frameworks determining the content of educational policy at European and national levels. Modern trends of higher education have been analysed through the multicultural aspect of society. The assumption about the appropriateness of continuous language training of students as the basis to form skills for intercultural communication has also been made. To check the credibility of results achieved during research and development works methods of mathematical statistics have been used. They included non-parametric methods of results comparison, which according to Kyveryalg are the most appropriate while professional analysis of pedagogical phenomena. It is explained by the fact that there is a limited number of quantity indicators obtained as a result of pedagogical studies (four levels of intercultural communication skills) in the science of pedagogy. The results proved the effectiveness of the developed methodology, which is based on the implementation of context-based learning techniques while learning a foreign language (English) by students.

¿Está en cuestión el modelo social europeo?

Las competencias sociales pertenecen al ámbito delos Estados miembros, sin embargo se puede hablar de un modelosocial europeo que supone una unidad de valores sociales compartidos.El modelo social europeo promueve la ciudadanía social y combinael rendimiento económico, la justicia social y la solidaridad. Lacrisis económica ha erosionado los Estados del Bienestar de los paísesrescatados; se han vulnerado los derechos fundamentales de losciudadanos; y se ha puesto en evidencia a Europa ante su falta derespuesta. Este artículo trata de analizar si es necesario renovar elmodelo social europeo, si las normas de soft law y el método abiertode coordinación (MAC) son acertados y la conveniencia de un nuevoreparto de competencias entre la Unión y los Estados miembros.Asimismo, se hace referencia al nuevo Pilar Europeo de DerechosSociales, anunciado por Juncker en 2015 que se presenta como unaoportunidad para abordar la nueva dimensión social europea. Esfundamental que se garanticen los derechos fundamentales y socialespor los órganos jurisdiccionales en tiempos de crisis económica,de modo que se equilibre lo económico y lo social. Finalmente, sedebe promover la adhesión de la Unión Europea a la Carta SocialEuropea revisada en el marco del nuevo Pilar Europeo de DerechosSociales.The social competences fall within the scope of theMember States, nevertheless we may consider that a European socialmodel implies shared social values. The European social modelpromotes social citizenship and combines economic performance,social justice and solidarity. The economic crisis eroded the welfarestate of rescued countries, infringing citizens fundamental rightsand showing Europe’s lack of response. The present work aims toanalyze the need to reform the European social model, if the softlaw rules and the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) are effectiveand if a new distribution of competences between the EuropeanUnion and Member States is necessary. Furthermore, particularreference is made to the new European Pillar of Social Rights, announcedby Jean-Claude Juncker in 2015, which seems to be an opportunityto address the new European social dimension. In times ofeconomic crisis, it is essential that the jurisdictional organs guaranteethe fundamental and social rights so that a balance between theeconomic and the social areas is found. Finally, the accession of theEuropean Union to the revised European Social Charter should bepromoted within the framework of the new European Pillar of SocialRights.

Open Method of Coordination

The preceding chapters have dealt with various methods of policy delivery in the EU, including centralized administration, shared administration, Comitology, and agencies. These methods differ, but they all are primarily based on traditional forms of EU law—regulations, directives, and decisions. This chapter deals with a rather different method of policy delivery, the Open Method of Coordination.

Social Partners

We saw in the previous chapter that the social partners were afforded a role in the Open Method of Coordination (OMC). This chapter considers the ways in which the social partners are involved in the making of EU policy. The discussion begins with the emergence of the social dialogue. This is followed by analysis of the Treaty articles, with more specific elaboration of the ways in which the social partners can participate in the making of social policy. The focus then turns to the role of the social partners in the making of agreements that can be transformed into formal law, the problems associated with this process, and the justifications offered for this privileged position. The ensuing discussion shifts to consideration of what are now known as autonomous agreements concluded by the social partners, which do not have the formal status of law, but which are important nonetheless. The chapter concludes by looking at less formal texts produced by the social partners through sectoral social committees, and the efforts that have been made to render these more effective than hitherto.

EU Administrative Law

The third edition of EU Administrative Law provides comprehensive coverage of the administrative system in the EU and the principles of judicial review that apply in this area. This revised edition provides important updates on each area covered, including new case law; institutional developments; and EU legislation. These changes are located within the framework of broader developments in the EU. The chapters in the first half of the book deal with all the principal variants of the EU administrative regime. Thus there are chapters dealing with the history and taxonomy of the EU administrative regime; direct administration; shared administration; comitology; agencies; social partners; and the open method of coordination. The coverage throughout focuses on the legal regime that governs the particular form of administration and broader issues of accountability, drawing on literature from political science as well as law. The focus in the second part of the book shifts to judicial review. There are detailed chapters covering all principles of judicial review and the discussion of the law throughout is analytical and contextual. It begins with the principles that have informed the development of EU judicial review. This is followed by a chapter dealing with the judicial system and the way in which reform could impact on the subject matter of the book. There are then chapters dealing with competence; access; transparency; process; law, fact and discretion; rights; equality; legitimate expectations; two chapters on proportionality; the precautionary principle; two chapters on remedies; and the Ombudsman.

The Open Method Of Coordination: Obstinate Or Obsolete?

Policy coordination in one form or another has been a feature of EU governance for the past two decades. Developing initially as a mechanism through which to coordinate national economic policies in the shadow of economic and monetary union (EMU), and extending to the coordination of employment policies through the European Employment Strategy, by the 2000s, policy coordination was being heralded as a new form of governance to be deployed to achieve the aims of the Lisbon Strategy of economic and social reform. Indeed, such was the interest in this new form of EU governance, it even acquired its own distinctive nomenclature—the ‘open method of coordination’ (OMC).

The UNGPs in the European Union: The Open Coordination of Business and Human Rights?

The article examines the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in the European Union via National Action Plans (NAPs). We argue that some of the shortcomings currently observed in the implementation process could effectively be addressed through the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) – a governance instrument already used by the European Union (EU) in other policy domains. The article sketches out the polycentric global governance approach envisaged by the UNGPs and discusses the institutional and policy background of their implementation in the EU. It provides an assessment of EU member states’ NAPs on business and human rights, as benchmarked against international NAP guidance, before relating experiences with the existing NAP process to the policy background and rationale of the OMC and considering the conditions for employing the OMC in the business and human rights domain. Building on a recent opinion of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency, the article concludes with a concrete proposal for developing an OMC on business and human rights in the EU.