Dataset Information

Forging Unity: European Commission Leadership in the Brexit Negotiations.

ABSTRACT: This article explains why the European Union has remained strikingly cohesive during the Brexit withdrawal negotiations by focussing on the role played by its negotiator: the European Commission''s Task Force 50. The analysis demonstrates that the Task Force 50 set out to forge unity among the EU27 by exercising both subtle instrumental and direct political leadership. The Commission significantly influenced the outcome of the negotiations by shaping the agenda and process, brokering deals, and ultimately achieving a withdrawal agreement that all member states signed up to. Its transparent and consultative behaviour generated trust among member states, which allowed the Commission to play such a prominent role. These findings challenge the prevailing view that the EU has become increasingly intergovernmental at expense of the Commission. Drawing on original interviews, the article substantiates this argument by tracing the Commission's leadership activities in the run-up to and throughout the withdrawal negotiations (2016-20).

SUBMITTER: Schuette LA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8597162 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Forging Unity: European Commission Leadership in the Brexit Negotiations.

Schuette Leonard August LA

Journal of common market studies 20210114 5

This article explains why the European Union has remained strikingly cohesive during the Brexit withdrawal negotiations by focussing on the role played by its negotiator: the European Commission''s Task Force 50. The analysis demonstrates that the Task Force 50 set out to forge unity among the EU27 by exercising both subtle instrumental and direct political leadership. The Commission significantly influenced the outcome of the negotiations by shaping the agenda and process, brokering deals, and ...[more]

PMID: 34819697

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAntibacterial resistant infections are rising continuously, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality worldwide. With no new antibiotic classes entering the market and the possibility of returning to the pre-antibiotic era, the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance (JPIAMR) was established to address this problem. We aimed to quantify the scale and scope of publicly funded antibacterial resistance research across JPIAMR countries and at the European Union (EU) level to identify gaps and future opportunities.MethodsWe did a systematic observational analysis examining antibacterial resistance research funding. Databases of funding organisations across 19 countries and at EU level were systematically searched for publicly funded antibacterial resistance research from Jan 1, 2007, to Dec 31, 2013. We categorised studies on the basis of the JPIAMR strategic research agenda's six priority topics (therapeutics, diagnostics, surveillance, transmission, environment, and interventions) and did an observational analysis. Only research funded by public funding bodies was collected and no private organisations were contacted for their investments. Projects in basic, applied, and clinical research, including epidemiological, public health, and veterinary research and trials were identified using keyword searches by organisations, and inclusion criteria were based on the JPIAMR strategic research agenda's six priority topics, using project titles and abstracts as filters.FindingsWe identified 1243 antibacterial resistance research projects, with a total public investment of €1·3 billion across 19 countries and at EU level, including public investment in the Innovative Medicines Initiative. Of the total amount invested in antibacterial resistance research across the time period, €646·6 million (49·5%) was invested at the national level and €659·2 million (50·5%) at the EU level. When projects were classified under the six priority topics we found that 763 (63%) of 1208 projects funded at national level were within the area of therapeutics, versus 185 (15%) in transmission, 131 (11%) in diagnostics, 53 (4%) in interventions, and only 37 (3%) in environment and 39 (3%) in surveillance.InterpretationThis was the first systematic analysis of research funding of antibacterial resistance of this scale and scope, which relied on the availability and accuracy of data from organisations included. Large variation was seen between countries both in terms of number of projects and associated investment and across the six priority topics. To determine the future direction of JPIAMR countries a clear picture of the funding landscape across Europe and Canada is needed. Countries should work together to increase the effect of research funding by strengthening national and international coordination and collaborations, harmonising research activities, and collectively pooling resources to fund multidisciplinary projects. The JPIAMR have developed a publicly available database to document the antibacterial resistance research collected and can be used as a baseline to analyse funding from 2014 onwards.FundingJPIAMR and the European Commission.

Project description:ObjectivesWe investigated combined hormonal contraceptives (CHC) prescribing patterns (focusing on combined oral contraceptives; COC) in three countries (Netherlands, Denmark, United Kingdom) in a time period preceding and in a time period following the European Commission's decision to update product information, and we estimated changes in incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) between the two periods.Study designWe conducted a drug utilization analysis and a cohort study using routinely collected data. We calculated number, proportion and incidence rate of new users, switchers, and stoppers of COC in both time periods. VTE incidence was calculated in new users of COC and in all women aged 18-49 years.ResultsIn all countries, the largest proportion (> 75%) of new users used COC containing levonorgestrel, norethisterone, or norgestimate, (i.e., indicated by European Medicines Agency (EMA) as the safest preparations) in both time periods. Switching did not demonstrate a clear pattern towards these types of COC and distribution of stoppers was similar in both time periods. While the proportion of new users initiating COC containing levonorgestrel, norethisterone, or norgestimate increased slightly, this did not translate to a decrease in the overall VTE incidence.ConclusionAll three countries had the greatest proportion of women initiating a COC containing levonorgestrel, norethisterone, or norgestimate, and this proportion increased in the period after the European Commission decision albeit the increase was small due to the high percentage of use before the decision. This did not translate into a measureable change in the incidence of VTE.ImplicationsBoth before and after the European Commission's decision, the largest proportion of new users started with combined oral contraceptives containing levonorgestrel, norethisterone, or norgestimate. Earlier studies had already indicated an increased risk of VTE associated with COC containing other progestogens compared with these preparations, so it is possible that physicians were already preferentially prescribing COC containing levonorgestrel, norethisterone, or norgestimate to new users.

Dataset Information

Forging Unity: European Commission Leadership in the Brexit Negotiations.

Publications

Forging Unity: European Commission Leadership in the Brexit Negotiations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets