The Council of Europe: The Institutional Limits of Contemporary European International Society?

Stivachtis, Yannis A.; Habegger, Michael W.

doi:10.4324/9781315094298-4

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, and despite its other consultative bodies, the supporting Secretariat and the court system (the European Court of Human Rights -ECtHR -most notably), the COE decision-making is intergovernmental, i.e. functions between Member State governments (Stivachtis and Habegger, 2011). The COE governs by creating international treaties or conventions to address issues of common concern and recommendations from the CM.…”

Section: Overview Of the European Union And Council Of Europe Governamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This inclusivity in a European cultural outlook must be weighed against the reality that the COE system has far greater limitations, compared to the EU, on its ability to get Member States to comply with these values and norms in the day-to-day governance of cultural heritage. It also raises the question of whether the COE is perceived as a halfway house or preliminary step for EU Membership by many of its members, making it more redundant with each EU enlargement absorbing more COE Members (Stivachtis and Habegger, 2011).…”

Section: Overview Of the European Union And Council Of Europe Governamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The instruments of European heritage 1

Zito¹,

Eckersley²,

Turner³

2019

Dimensions of Heritage and Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Overview Of the European Union And Council Of Europe Governamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Overview Of the European Union And Council Of Europe Governamentioning

confidence: 99%

The instruments of European heritage 1

Zito¹,

Eckersley²,

Turner³

2019

Dimensions of Heritage and Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR, ETS. 005) and its monitoring body, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), laid the foundation for the most advanced international system of human rights (Stivachtis and Habegger 2011;Wouters et al 2019: 308-313). Yet, apart from its main instruments, the CoE has substantial policy output in many other areas, most notably legal instruments, which are voluntary to accept for its members (MacMullen 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional diffusion, EU conditionality and Council of Europe treaty ratification 1949–2016

Reichel

Vink

Grimheden

2019

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates states' commitment to human rights, democracy and rule of law through ratifying Council of Europe treaties. We present a first comprehensive analysis of ratifications of all 221 Council of Europe treaties that opened for ratification since 1949 among the 47 current member states. Applying a multilevel Cox regression, we observe a strong influence of external sources for states' commitment and find evidence for both coercion and emulation mechanisms. First, upcoming EU membership is strongly and positively associated with treaty ratification, corroborating the relevance of accession conditionality in making countries to commit to human rights and democracy. Second, states are much more likely to ratify if a neighbouring country has ratified at the same time, which confirms a strong pattern of regional diffusion of rights acceptance in Europe. However, we find that this pattern of regional diffusion is stronger among states with lower levels of democracy, suggesting that emulation proceeds through mimicry. Finally, our analysis shows that Council of Europe treaty ratification is especially strong during the first years after treaty opening, suggesting that ratification reflects concerted efforts by states involved in the negotiation of regional treaties.

show abstract

“…In Finland, attempts to justify such non‐conforming practices generally refer to the decentralist principles promulgated by the Council of Europe to propagate local democracy (ECLSG, ; Stivachtis & Habegger, ). Fostering the regulation and management of a substantial share of public affairs by municipalities themselves through localism seems to conflict with EU‐wide regulation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pricing joint use of municipal services: Theoretical perspectives and regulatory issues

Valkama

Bailey

2018

Financ Acc Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyses price regulation of inter‐municipal contracts in Finland to demonstrate interpretative problems of regulatory rules specifying full‐cost or market prices and, by so doing, deepen understanding of the theoretical underpinnings for pricing collaborative municipal services. It considers how to price inter‐municipal services taking into account the specific socio‐economic nature of inter‐municipal cooperation, including both financial and non‐financial objectives, through a new joint‐use pricing model of municipal services that challenges the supremacy of full‐cost pricing requirements in cases of inter‐municipal collaborative contracting. Acknowledging limitations and benefits, it concludes European Single Market rules militate against municipal discretion and localism.

show abstract

The Council of Europe: The Institutional Limits of Contemporary European International Society?

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

The instruments of European heritage 1

The instruments of European heritage 1

Regional diffusion, EU conditionality and Council of Europe treaty ratification 1949–2016

Pricing joint use of municipal services: Theoretical perspectives and regulatory issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About